Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;DonnaML, post: 6709434, member: 110350&quot;][USER=91461]@Ryro[/USER] and [USER=118394]@ByzantiumBabe[/USER], I always believed that a good settlement was a better result than litigating to the nth degree. So let&#039;s find some areas of agreement here. I think both of you would agree that the coin in question doesn&#039;t result from a die cutter&#039;s singular vision. Neither of you has claimed that. We all know that although there are obviously variations among individual die cutters&#039; product, they weren&#039;t the designers of the coin, and certainly weren&#039;t responsible for the theme -- which, in the Roman Republic, came from the moneyers for a particular year, often to honor one or more of their ancestors and/or their <i>gens</i> as a whole. In this case, as set forth in my description, the design honors both the moneyer&#039;s father (hence, the Macedonian shield encircled by a victory wreath), and the moneyer&#039;s Caecilii Metelli family and its pride in capturing Hasdrubal&#039;s elephants (hence, the elephant, which makes an appearance on&nbsp; almost every other Republican coin issued by that family, two of which I own, with this the third). Presumably, the moneyers weren&#039;t artists themselves, and delegated the actual design of the coins to someone employed by the mint. Unfortunately, I don&#039;t think records survive outlining the precise process of design and approval.</p><p><br /></p><p>So I don&#039;t think there&#039;s any dispute between you there.</p><p><br /></p><p>I also think you both agree that it&#039;s not just a pretty design, but has to be placed in a greater historical context. It&#039;s not a coincidence that the Roman Republican moneyers took pride in portraying different Roman victories over the Macedonians -- think of the Lepidus coin showing Perseus and his sons as captives! -- probably as much or more than any other foe with the possible exception of the Carthaginians. They knew who Alexander the Great was; turning Macedon (the greatest empire the world had known) into Macedonia (a mere Roman province) meant a great deal to them.</p><p><br /></p><p>I think the only disagreement between you is over the term &quot;unique.&quot; It seems to me that the coin is not the first Roman coin to show a Macedonian shield, symbolizing Roman triumph over the Macedonians. Nor is it the first Roman coin to show an elephant or elephant head, to symbolize the triumph of Rome (and specifically the Caecilii Metelli) over the Carthaginians. See Crawford 262. (Although, as Mattingly points out, it&#039;s the first time a moneyer honored a <u>living</u> father.) So it&#039;s clearly not unique in either sense.</p><p><br /></p><p>However, it is, as far as I know, the first coin to place an elephant head at the center of a Macedonian shield (the design was repeated later), thereby symbolizing the triumph of Rome over <u>two</u> great empires -- the Carthaginians <u>and</u> the Macedonians. So, perhaps we can all agree that it is unique in that sense, as the first to do that. Were there coins before this one (issued in 127-126 BCE) simultaneously celebrating Roman triumph over two different empires? If there were, I&#039;m not aware of them.</p><p><br /></p><p>Can we all agree to that extent?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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