Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Is there anything more macho than the emperor as VIRTVS?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 4563273, member: 110350"]Upon reflection -- and after looking closely at lots of photos and doing quite a bit of additional research -- I've changed my mind, and no longer believe that the figure (apparently Virtus) on the reverse of the Valerian I antoninianus I posted just above is fully clothed, or can be used as evidence that there's such a thing as a depiction of the female personification of Virtus without a bare breast showing. Here are two different closeups of the reverse:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1129674[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1129676[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>As you can see from both of these photos, only Virtus's left shoulder is actually covered, and she's definitely not "fully-clothed." Like most depictions of the female personification of Virtus, the right side of her chiton is off her right shoulder and under her right arm, leaving her right side uncovered. (See the entry for "Chiton" in John Melville Jones's <i>Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins</i> (London, 1990) at p. 52, defining the term as follows: "The Greek name often used instead of the Latin <i>tunica </i>to describe a tunic, with or without sleeves, usually worn by women but sometimes by men also. Amazons, Roma and Virtus may wear a chiton in such a way as to expose one breast.")</p><p><br /></p><p>This seems to be the standard depiction of Virtus's clothing, clearly signaling that she's female. See the numerous photos in the article at <a href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html</a>, and my Caracalla Virtus reverse, showing her with a very distinct bare right breast, and carrying Virtus's typical parazonium at its typically phallic location and angle:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1129680[/ATTACH]</p><p>In any event, looking at the closeups of the Valerian I reverse, either that's a badly-rendered bare right breast or Virtus is wearing a bra -- which I doubt, because I don't think that garment had been invented yet! (The so-called "bikini girls" in the mosaics at the Villa Romana del Casale in Sicily -- see the photos at <a href="https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/roman-girls-bikinis-mosaic-villa-romana-del-casale-sicily/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/roman-girls-bikinis-mosaic-villa-romana-del-casale-sicily/" rel="nofollow">https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/roman-girls-bikinis-mosaic-villa-romana-del-casale-sicily/</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Romana_del_Casale#/media/File:Villa_romana_bikini_girls.JPG" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Romana_del_Casale#/media/File:Villa_romana_bikini_girls.JPG" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Romana_del_Casale#/media/File:Villa_romana_bikini_girls.JPG</a> -- were, I believe, wearing what's called a strophium.)</p><p><br /></p><p>I realize that Virtus's face in the closeups looks almost like the figure has a beard, but I suspect that's just poor artistry. Despite David Sear's continued insistence in the glossary at the front of each volume of the Millennium Edition of <i>Roman Coin Values</i> that Virtus is a male personification, he is in the distinct minority at this point. I have not been able to find a single clearly male depiction of Virtus with a tunic off one shoulder, leaving that side of the chest bare. What would be the point of depicting Virtus's clothing that way, other than to signal that she's female despite the otherwise stereotypically male objects and attributes that she carries and represents? Conversely, now that I've ruled out my Valerian coin, I've been unable to find any depiction of a fully-clothed Virtus that signals femaleness in any other way (as by giving any other indication of breasts), let alone that's unambiguously female.</p><p><br /></p><p>In any event, I've revised my own personal catalogue's description of my Valerian I VIRTVS AVGG coin to reflect my changed opinion, and to add all the references I could find. As you can see, opinions vary as to whom the reverse figure represents, although the more recent reference works favor Virtus. In addition, this particular coin is not in RIC, RSC, or RCV because the obverse legend differs from the coins listed in those works, so I list it as a variation.</p><p><br /></p><p>Valerian I, Silvered Billon Antoninianus, 257 AD, Mediolanum [Milan] or Viminacium Mint. Obv. Radiate, draped bust right, IMP VALERIANVS P AVG/ Rev. Virtus standing left, chiton off right shoulder (leaving right breast bare), holding Victory with right hand and resting left hand on shield, with reversed spear propped against left arm, VIRTVS AVGG. RIC V-1 267 (p. 58) <i>obv. leg. var.*</i> [RIC identifies reverse figure as a soldier; Wildwinds identifies reverse figure on RIC 267 as Virtus (see <a href="http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/valerian_I/i.html)];" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/valerian_I/i.html)];" rel="nofollow">http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/valerian_I/i.html)];</a> Cohen 258 <i>obv. leg. var.</i> [Cohen identifies figure as Virtus or Roma], RSC IV 258 <i>obv. leg. var.</i> [identifying reverse figure as soldier]; Sear RCV III 9992 <i>obv. leg.var.</i> [identifying reverse figure as Virtus, but characterizing Virtus as male; ascribed to Viminacium Mint] (ill.); Göbl 811d (<i>same obv. leg.</i>) [R. Göbl et al., <i>Moneta Imperii Romani,</i> <i>Band 35: Die Münzprägung des Kaiser Valerianus I / Gallienus / Saloninus / (253/268), Regalianus (260) und Macrianus / Quietus (260/262) </i>(Vienna, 2000)] [identifying reverse figure as Virtus; Viminacium mint]; Cunetio 770 (<i>same obv. leg.</i>) [identifying reverse figure as Virtus] [Besly, E. & R. Bland, <i>The Cunetio Treasure: Roman Coinage of the Third Century AD</i> (London, 1983)]; Adeilson Nogueira, <i>Valeriano, Na Numismatica Romana</i> (Brazil, 2018) at p. 11 (see <a href="https://tinyurl.com/qpb659c" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://tinyurl.com/qpb659c" rel="nofollow">https://tinyurl.com/qpb659c</a>) [identifying reverse figure as Virtus]; Chalfont hoard 328 [R. Bland, ed., <i>The Chalfont Hoard and Other Roman Coin Hoards, Coin Hoards from Roman Britain IX</i> (London, 1992)]; Stevenage hoard 529 [A.M. Burnett & R.F. Bland, eds., <i>Coin Hoards from Roman Britain: The Normanby Hoard and Other Roman Coin Hoards, CHRB VIII</i> (London, 1988) at pp. 43-73]. 22.5 mm., 3.4 g.</p><p><br /></p><p>* RIC, RSC, Cohen, and Sear all identify the obverse legend on this coin type as IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG rather than IMP VALERIANVS P AVG; the coins appear to be otherwise identical to this one. None of them lists a Valerian antoninianus with the IMP VALERIANVS P AVG obverse legend and a reverse with the VIRTVS AVG [RIC V-1 266] or VIRTVS AVGG [RIC V-1 267] legend, and the reverse figure -- however identified -- with spear and shield and holding Victory.</p><p><br /></p><p>So if Virtus is female, and always -- as far as I can tell -- depicted with her tunic off one shoulder and a bare breast on that side, then does that mean that all the fully-clothed male figures on VIRTVS AVG reverses are not actually Virtus, but instead represent the emperor, Mars, a soldier, etc.? In other words, that Virtus is never male, and always female? Even the article at <a href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html</a>, with its many examples of a Virtus with one bare breast, doesn't go quite that far, stating at the outset "Virtus: courage, manliness, power, worth, excellence of character. All the manly and soldierly virtues. And you may read (for example, in David Sear's books) that Virtus is a male personification. This does not appear to be correct, or at least, not always correct. The word "virtus" has the feminine gender, and the personification is often female. This becomes more and more clear as you look at coins that show the personification . . . ."</p><p><br /></p><p>Perhaps one way of looking at it would be to draw a narrow distinction and to think of the actual personification of "Virtus" <i>per se</i> as being female, while thinking of the many clearly male, fully-clothed figures on VIRTVS AVG reverses as representing the qualities and attributes of "Virtus" -- which, of course, are stereotypically male in the first place; "virtus" is usually translated as "valour" in old numismatic dictionaries and other works -- rather than as <u>being</u> Virtus. As the article at Forum states, "Virtus embodies manly courage and strength of character. There were powerful female figures in Roman culture, but these were generally goddesses like Minerva, not mortals. So, having a female personification of these qualities sometimes presented difficulties to the propagandists. As a result, coins often showed, not Virtus herself, but a soldier or the emperor with a "VIRTVS" legend to indicate that the army, or the emperor, was valorous and manly. In fact, a whole range of characters were brought into play."</p><p><br /></p><p>One example would be the Caracalla reverse (RCV (2002) 6864; RIC IV 95) shown in the cited article; see the photo at <a href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/coins/caracalla_027.html" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/coins/caracalla_027.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/coins/caracalla_027.html</a>, with the reverse described as "Emperor standing right, posed as Virtus, reversed spear in right hand behind, parazonium in left hand resting on thigh, left foot on helmet." As the article explains, the reverse "shows Caracalla posing as Virtus. He is dressed in light military gear but does not wear a helmet like Mars, or carry a trophy like Mars and Romulus. Nor is his breast bared! But he does have the spear and is posing with a parazonium, and he is resting his foot on a helmet." So he represents the qualities of Virtus, and comes as close as he can to actually portraying himself as Virtus -- adopting "Virtus drag," as it were -- without taking the one step that unequivocally signals Virtus's femaleness, i.e., showing her bare breast.</p><p><br /></p><p>I've found only one coin expressly identifying a clearly male figure as actually <u>being</u> Virtus, and it's a coin from the Roman Republic: a denarius from ca. 70 BCE with an obverse depicting the conjoined jugate (and, I believe, unambiguously male) heads of Honos and Virtus right -- expressly identified as such, with "HO" and "VIRT" behind the heads -- representing the two moneyers who issued the coins, Q. Fufius Calenus and P. Mucius Scaevola (Cordus). Crawford 403/1, RSC I Fufia 1, Sear RCV I 338 (ill.) Apparently, there was a temple dedicated to Honos and Virtus together. For an example of this coin, see <a href="https://www.coinarchives.com/91764ba588c3ed6b07918297a6158178/img/davisson/039/image00056.jpg" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.coinarchives.com/91764ba588c3ed6b07918297a6158178/img/davisson/039/image00056.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://www.coinarchives.com/91764ba588c3ed6b07918297a6158178/img/davisson/039/image00056.jpg</a></p><p><br /></p><p>But I've found no Imperial coins expressly depicting Virtus, <i>per se</i>, as male. So I'm going to continue to go with the distinction above, until proven wrong.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="DonnaML, post: 4563273, member: 110350"]Upon reflection -- and after looking closely at lots of photos and doing quite a bit of additional research -- I've changed my mind, and no longer believe that the figure (apparently Virtus) on the reverse of the Valerian I antoninianus I posted just above is fully clothed, or can be used as evidence that there's such a thing as a depiction of the female personification of Virtus without a bare breast showing. Here are two different closeups of the reverse: [ATTACH=full]1129674[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1129676[/ATTACH] As you can see from both of these photos, only Virtus's left shoulder is actually covered, and she's definitely not "fully-clothed." Like most depictions of the female personification of Virtus, the right side of her chiton is off her right shoulder and under her right arm, leaving her right side uncovered. (See the entry for "Chiton" in John Melville Jones's [I]Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins[/I] (London, 1990) at p. 52, defining the term as follows: "The Greek name often used instead of the Latin [I]tunica [/I]to describe a tunic, with or without sleeves, usually worn by women but sometimes by men also. Amazons, Roma and Virtus may wear a chiton in such a way as to expose one breast.") This seems to be the standard depiction of Virtus's clothing, clearly signaling that she's female. See the numerous photos in the article at [URL]https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html[/URL], and my Caracalla Virtus reverse, showing her with a very distinct bare right breast, and carrying Virtus's typical parazonium at its typically phallic location and angle: [ATTACH=full]1129680[/ATTACH] In any event, looking at the closeups of the Valerian I reverse, either that's a badly-rendered bare right breast or Virtus is wearing a bra -- which I doubt, because I don't think that garment had been invented yet! (The so-called "bikini girls" in the mosaics at the Villa Romana del Casale in Sicily -- see the photos at [URL]https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/roman-girls-bikinis-mosaic-villa-romana-del-casale-sicily/[/URL] and [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Romana_del_Casale#/media/File:Villa_romana_bikini_girls.JPG[/URL] -- were, I believe, wearing what's called a strophium.) I realize that Virtus's face in the closeups looks almost like the figure has a beard, but I suspect that's just poor artistry. Despite David Sear's continued insistence in the glossary at the front of each volume of the Millennium Edition of [I]Roman Coin Values[/I] that Virtus is a male personification, he is in the distinct minority at this point. I have not been able to find a single clearly male depiction of Virtus with a tunic off one shoulder, leaving that side of the chest bare. What would be the point of depicting Virtus's clothing that way, other than to signal that she's female despite the otherwise stereotypically male objects and attributes that she carries and represents? Conversely, now that I've ruled out my Valerian coin, I've been unable to find any depiction of a fully-clothed Virtus that signals femaleness in any other way (as by giving any other indication of breasts), let alone that's unambiguously female. In any event, I've revised my own personal catalogue's description of my Valerian I VIRTVS AVGG coin to reflect my changed opinion, and to add all the references I could find. As you can see, opinions vary as to whom the reverse figure represents, although the more recent reference works favor Virtus. In addition, this particular coin is not in RIC, RSC, or RCV because the obverse legend differs from the coins listed in those works, so I list it as a variation. Valerian I, Silvered Billon Antoninianus, 257 AD, Mediolanum [Milan] or Viminacium Mint. Obv. Radiate, draped bust right, IMP VALERIANVS P AVG/ Rev. Virtus standing left, chiton off right shoulder (leaving right breast bare), holding Victory with right hand and resting left hand on shield, with reversed spear propped against left arm, VIRTVS AVGG. RIC V-1 267 (p. 58) [I]obv. leg. var.*[/I] [RIC identifies reverse figure as a soldier; Wildwinds identifies reverse figure on RIC 267 as Virtus (see [URL]http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/valerian_I/i.html)];[/URL] Cohen 258 [I]obv. leg. var.[/I] [Cohen identifies figure as Virtus or Roma], RSC IV 258 [I]obv. leg. var.[/I] [identifying reverse figure as soldier]; Sear RCV III 9992 [I]obv. leg.var.[/I] [identifying reverse figure as Virtus, but characterizing Virtus as male; ascribed to Viminacium Mint] (ill.); Göbl 811d ([I]same obv. leg.[/I]) [R. Göbl et al., [I]Moneta Imperii Romani,[/I] [I]Band 35: Die Münzprägung des Kaiser Valerianus I / Gallienus / Saloninus / (253/268), Regalianus (260) und Macrianus / Quietus (260/262) [/I](Vienna, 2000)] [identifying reverse figure as Virtus; Viminacium mint]; Cunetio 770 ([I]same obv. leg.[/I]) [identifying reverse figure as Virtus] [Besly, E. & R. Bland, [I]The Cunetio Treasure: Roman Coinage of the Third Century AD[/I] (London, 1983)]; Adeilson Nogueira, [I]Valeriano, Na Numismatica Romana[/I] (Brazil, 2018) at p. 11 (see [URL]https://tinyurl.com/qpb659c[/URL]) [identifying reverse figure as Virtus]; Chalfont hoard 328 [R. Bland, ed., [I]The Chalfont Hoard and Other Roman Coin Hoards, Coin Hoards from Roman Britain IX[/I] (London, 1992)]; Stevenage hoard 529 [A.M. Burnett & R.F. Bland, eds., [I]Coin Hoards from Roman Britain: The Normanby Hoard and Other Roman Coin Hoards, CHRB VIII[/I] (London, 1988) at pp. 43-73]. 22.5 mm., 3.4 g. * RIC, RSC, Cohen, and Sear all identify the obverse legend on this coin type as IMP P LIC VALERIANO AVG rather than IMP VALERIANVS P AVG; the coins appear to be otherwise identical to this one. None of them lists a Valerian antoninianus with the IMP VALERIANVS P AVG obverse legend and a reverse with the VIRTVS AVG [RIC V-1 266] or VIRTVS AVGG [RIC V-1 267] legend, and the reverse figure -- however identified -- with spear and shield and holding Victory. So if Virtus is female, and always -- as far as I can tell -- depicted with her tunic off one shoulder and a bare breast on that side, then does that mean that all the fully-clothed male figures on VIRTVS AVG reverses are not actually Virtus, but instead represent the emperor, Mars, a soldier, etc.? In other words, that Virtus is never male, and always female? Even the article at [URL]https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/reverse_virtus.html[/URL], with its many examples of a Virtus with one bare breast, doesn't go quite that far, stating at the outset "Virtus: courage, manliness, power, worth, excellence of character. All the manly and soldierly virtues. And you may read (for example, in David Sear's books) that Virtus is a male personification. This does not appear to be correct, or at least, not always correct. The word "virtus" has the feminine gender, and the personification is often female. This becomes more and more clear as you look at coins that show the personification . . . ." Perhaps one way of looking at it would be to draw a narrow distinction and to think of the actual personification of "Virtus" [I]per se[/I] as being female, while thinking of the many clearly male, fully-clothed figures on VIRTVS AVG reverses as representing the qualities and attributes of "Virtus" -- which, of course, are stereotypically male in the first place; "virtus" is usually translated as "valour" in old numismatic dictionaries and other works -- rather than as [U]being[/U] Virtus. As the article at Forum states, "Virtus embodies manly courage and strength of character. There were powerful female figures in Roman culture, but these were generally goddesses like Minerva, not mortals. So, having a female personification of these qualities sometimes presented difficulties to the propagandists. As a result, coins often showed, not Virtus herself, but a soldier or the emperor with a "VIRTVS" legend to indicate that the army, or the emperor, was valorous and manly. In fact, a whole range of characters were brought into play." One example would be the Caracalla reverse (RCV (2002) 6864; RIC IV 95) shown in the cited article; see the photo at [URL]https://www.forumancientcoins.com/moonmoth/coins/caracalla_027.html[/URL], with the reverse described as "Emperor standing right, posed as Virtus, reversed spear in right hand behind, parazonium in left hand resting on thigh, left foot on helmet." As the article explains, the reverse "shows Caracalla posing as Virtus. He is dressed in light military gear but does not wear a helmet like Mars, or carry a trophy like Mars and Romulus. Nor is his breast bared! But he does have the spear and is posing with a parazonium, and he is resting his foot on a helmet." So he represents the qualities of Virtus, and comes as close as he can to actually portraying himself as Virtus -- adopting "Virtus drag," as it were -- without taking the one step that unequivocally signals Virtus's femaleness, i.e., showing her bare breast. I've found only one coin expressly identifying a clearly male figure as actually [U]being[/U] Virtus, and it's a coin from the Roman Republic: a denarius from ca. 70 BCE with an obverse depicting the conjoined jugate (and, I believe, unambiguously male) heads of Honos and Virtus right -- expressly identified as such, with "HO" and "VIRT" behind the heads -- representing the two moneyers who issued the coins, Q. Fufius Calenus and P. Mucius Scaevola (Cordus). Crawford 403/1, RSC I Fufia 1, Sear RCV I 338 (ill.) Apparently, there was a temple dedicated to Honos and Virtus together. For an example of this coin, see [URL]https://www.coinarchives.com/91764ba588c3ed6b07918297a6158178/img/davisson/039/image00056.jpg[/URL] But I've found no Imperial coins expressly depicting Virtus, [I]per se[/I], as male. So I'm going to continue to go with the distinction above, until proven wrong.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Is there anything more macho than the emperor as VIRTVS?
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...
