No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 July 2012
About a century has now elapsed since an important question arose among the most celebrated Antiquaries, concerning a Gold Medal of the Emperor Gallienus in the King of France's Cabinet. It exhibits on one side the head Of the Emperor crowned with ears of corn, with the inscription GALLIENAE AVGVSTAE. The name of a woman over the head of an Emperor conveyed to many persons the idea of a medallic satire. Frederic Spanheim [a], Vaillant [b], Baudelot [c], Banduri [a], and Grainville [e], conceived themselves authorised in adopting this opinion, inasmuch as the Emperor Julian in his Cæsars represents Gallienus coming to the Banquet of the Gods in the habit and with the air of a woman [f]. The legend on the reverse VBIQVE PAX, at a time when war desolated all the provinces of the Empire, tended admirably to confirm the opinion of these learned men.
page 61 note [a] Though, after Bernard author of the Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres, and after the Journal des Sçavans 1698, we place Frederic Spanheim at the head of this list (whom Bernard, Nouvelle Republique des Lettres, Jan. 1700, art. 2. confounded with his father Ezekiel, author of the two volumes (“De “Usu & Præstantia Numismatum Antiquorum”) Spanheim is by no means positive in this opinion. He only considers the medal as a singular one. See his Translation of the Cæsars of Julian, note 294.
page 62 note [b] In ludicrum Gallieno ab uno ex ipsis qui imperatoris titulum contrà eum arripuerit percussum videtur, illum Augustam appellans: ut omnibus denotaret pro fœminâ eum haberi debere, qui res tàm negligenter in bellis undique Romanum imperium prementibus ageret: de quo aït Pollio, ut ejus ne mentio quidem apud exercitum fieret; ità pro laureâ spicas gerit tanquàm abdomini potiùs quàm bello vacaret. Bigas agit, quòd victoriam in circo potiùs quàm de hostibus quæreret. Pro epigraphe, ubique pax, cùm nulla provincia esset quæ bello non impeteretur. (Numism. præst. imperat. T, II. p. 381.)
page 62 note [c] Letter to the Abbé de Vallemont on the explanation which he has given of the gold medal in the King's cabinet, 1698. Answer to M. G[alland], wherein are examined several questions of Antiquity, among others the above translation.
M. Baudelot expresses his surprise that the Abbé de Vallemont should have followed such an historian as Trebellius Pollio, and have taken the liberty of changing the punctuation of the passage, which he cites in support of his opinion, and thereby makes the historian say the contrary of what he really has said, Though Galland agreed with Baudelot, as to this translation and alteration, he was not of the same opinion as to the legend VBIOVE PAX, or the manner of reading the inscription of the obverse. This is the subject of Baudelot's answer, who says, that this is not the only ironical medal to be met with, but that the Roman coinage afford more than one striking example of the kind.
page 62 note [d] Nova et insolita epigraphe, novus ac insolitus typus hujus nummi, quem in ludibrium, atque ad æternum Gallieni dedecus cusum putant viri eruditi. Gallienæ Augustæ inscribitur, ut omnibus notum fieret pro fœminâ eum haberi debere … vel quod Zenobia in eum arma sumpsisset, ejusque ducem Heraclianum vicisset.… (Num. imper. Rom. T. I. pp. 154. et 155. not. 5.)
page 62 note [e] Dissert. sur quelques med. satyriques de Gallien decouvertes depuis peu (Mem. de Trevoux. Juin 1712), voilà bien des medailles, dit il, qu'il est difficile d'envisager de prés sans y appercevoir de la malice … d'autant plus queces me–dailles sont la plûpart très rares et méme uniques, ce qui ne convient point aux medailles qu'on a frappées en l'honneur d'un Prince, qui sont presque toutes trés communes.
page 63 note [f] 
Julian, says Spanheim on the place, introduces him here as an effeminate man, such às he really was. What is said of his robe, which literally approached in softness that of a woman, refers to what Trebellius Pollio says of it, that he wore a man's purple robe, with gold and sleeves, which were not seen on men's robes before the time of Gallienus, who first made use of such—meaning in short, that Gallienus was attired and set off more like a courtezan than an emperor. (note 203. p. 22.)
page 63 note [g] Gallienœ augusta scriptum est pro Galliene Auguste, in vocandi casu: pro usu scilicet temporum illorum quibus littera Æ vel E subindè permutabatur in scribendo ob soni similitudinem … jam corona graminea, quâ caput Gallieni cingitur, magnarum victoriarum index fuit, et inter cætera coronarum bellicarum principem locum tenuit, ut ait Plinius lib. xxii. sect. 4. (Chronol. Specimen Numm. Sæc. Constantini, p. 447.)
This explanation must appear very simple to such a singular genius as Hardouin. He therefore offers another more refined one. GAI LIENO Augusto Edua AVGusta Vrbis Servatori Triumphalem Arcum Erexit. In like manner he translates the legend on the reverse: Victoria BIsuntina, QVietem Eduæ Peperit, Augusti X decennalibus (ad Plinii Hist. Nat. T. I. p. 370.)
page 63 note [h] Nouvelle explication d' une medaille d'or du cabinet du roi, 1698, 128. The Abbé in the first letter pretends from a passage in Trebellius Pollio that the person here treated of is one Gallienena cousin german to the Emperor, who killed the tyrant Cornelius Celsus seven days after his election, and that Gallienus to shew his gratitude engraved the head of this Princess with the title of AVGVSTA on one of his medals. In the second letter the author defends his opinion against Baudelot and Galland. Notwithstanding the praises given to their letters in the Journals, they contain more learning than reasoning.
page 64 note [i] “Lettre touchant la Nouv. Explic. &c. Caen, 1698,” Galland like Baudelot maintains that Vaillant has misunderstood or mistranslated the passage of Pollio, and that this Galliena had not killed but elected Celsus, who was killed seven days afterwards. He thinks the Æ is put here for E by the fault of the Monetarius, and that all medals of the Roman Emperors have a Serious intention.
page 64 note [k] The weakness of these three interpretations discovers itself. It is not enough to say with P. Hardouin that at that time Æ was put for E from simplicity of found. This can only be an error in speech and not in writing, especially as the diphthong is composed of two single letters, as it is written on medals and inscriptions. Galland's reason has no more weight. Consult on this subject “Frœlich de nummis monetar. veter. culpavitiosis.” As to the Abbé Vallemont, it is sufficient to overset his system to read his second letter, in which he pretends to defend it.
page 64 note [l] Hæc obiter de Gallieni nummo.… cùm in nummis antiquis, saltèm Latinis, nihil planè sit ludicrum, aut scurrile, Romanâ gravitate ac majestate indignum. Neo si nummos quidèm tales audimus quisquàm ferè ex Augustis, aut magis in bello strenuus, aut magis acceptus P.R. Galliisque fuerit quàm Gallienus. (ut suprà, p.443). This is a complete panegyric of Gallienus. It is confirmed in a letter of P. Chamillard on the medals of Gallienus, wherein is shewn that all the historians agree with the medals. This letter truly interesting by the plan of a Roman History after medals and historians, which it contains, may be found in the Mem. de Trevoux, Novembre 1719, p. 95.
page 65 note [m] Primum satyricum nummum Christianissimi Regis manu in Vicarium dei cusum … non antiquiorem inveni. Hist. nummor. contumelios. et satiricor. p. 138, Altemburgi, 1765, 12mo.
page 65 note [n] Lib. xiii. c. 9. Plutarch informs us that those who first erected trophies of brass or stone were not highly esteemed. Quæst. Rom. n. 37.
page 65 note [o] Hæc est in gremium victos quæ sola recepit,
Matris, non dominæ ritu, civesque vocavit
Quos domuit, nexuque pio longinqua revinxt.
Claudian. de laud. Stilic. iii. 150.
Nunquàm Populus Romanus hostibus domitis victoriam suam exprobravit. Florus Epitom. lib. iii. cap. 2.
page 66 note [p] The Jesuit Pedruzi says the same: “In this representation we observe a contempt shewn of the Jews, in reproach of whom Vespasian ordered the sow to be here exprest.” (Museo Farnes. T. II. tab. xx. n. p. 339.) and elsewhere speaking of Titus, he says, “The reverse shewing a sow with her pigs as in a similar one made by Vespasian in derision of the Jews.” (Ib. tab. xxi. n. 7. p. 354.)
page 66 note [q] L. xiv.
page 67 note [r] The question has been frequently agitated, whether medals were current money. See in the Memoirs de Trevoux, June 1707, p. 1085, a Dissertation on the subject, wherein the author gives reasons on both sides. The 4th proof on the negative side is drawn from injurious medals, among which this of Gallienus is cited, and the 5th proof on the affirmative side is taken also from the want of seriousness in certain medals.
page 68 note [s] Cum Julio II. non eandem amicitiam coluit, quippè eum infestissimum hostem semper expertus, quem gratissimum amicum habere debuit. Quæ odia eo evaserunt ut temere et injuriose Rex à Pontifice proscriptus primò Lugduni synodo præsulum regni convocata ipsum in jus vocaverit.… quin et eo ipso provectus est, ut Spretis multis multorum, quibus alloqui plurimùm tribuebat, Suasionibus, moribundi senis inanes diras contrariâ obnunciatione generosè revicerit, cuso etiam aureo nummo, qui titulos regis Franciæ regnique Neapolitani cùm effigie suà ex unâ parte, et insignia Franciæ ex alterâ referebat, cùm hoc elogio: PERDAM BABILONIS NOMEN. Quales adhuc hodie multi reperiuntur. (Thuan. Histor. lib. i. p. 11. edit. 1626. Genev.)
Varillas pretends that this inscription is to be understood with reference to the manners of the clergy. If so, it would be conceived in a very extraordinary manner. P. Hardouin refers it to the crusade against the Sultan of Egypt, whose capital was Babylon; but this opinion is contradicted by historians. These different opinions have been refuted by Ch. Sigism. Liebe (Prodrom. reformationis pia memoria recolenda five nummi Ludovici xii. regis Gallorurn epigraphe Lips. 1717.) and by Deylingius (Observ. sacræ p. iii. dissert. 50, p. 399).
page 68 note [t] Mem. de Trevoux, June 1712, p. 1092, & seq.
page 69 note [u] Hinc non contintio tamen arguendus amplissimus ordo … qui spes suas & vota monumentis id genus consignabant, imo qui his veluti tabulis quum aliter per illorum temporum immanitatem non licebat principes & eorum conjuges officii sui sub commendationis specie frequenter admonere non dubitaret. (De usu & præst. Numism. ant. T. I. Diss. III. p. 118.)
page 69 note [x] If we examine the medals of that monster of debauchery and cruelty, Commodus, we shall see to what a pitch of meanness not only the senate but the municipal towns and colonies carried their flattery. We shall be shocked to see on the reverse of one of his medals a woman standing before an altar with a paterd in her hand, and this inscription, AVCTOR PIETAT. P. M. TR. XIII. IMP. VIII. COS. VI. P. P. and to read on others, FELICIA TEMPORA IOVI EXSVPER. P. M. TR. P. XIIII. COS. V. PP.— PROVIDENTIAE AVG.—SAL. GEN. HVM. COS. VI. P. P. (See Vaillant num. imp. præst. I. 95 & seq. Numism. imper. a populis Graece loquentibus. p. 66—75.)
Such extraordinary flattery will be thought extraordinary from a body whom Caligula called together on a sudden at midnight to insult them by dancing before them, (Xiphilin, p. 131.) His intention of creating his horse consul is well known (Ib. p. 134), And what would he not have done to gratify the cruel pleasure of insulting a body who had completely incurred his contempt, who trembled at his threats, and who by an authentic act had voted solemn sacrifices to eternize the clemency of the cruellest of men in gratitude to him for not cutting their throats, as he had told them he had it in his power to do. (Ib. 134.)
page 70 note [y] Vaillant Num. imp. præst. n. p. 79.
page 70 note [z] 
. Xiphilin.
page 71 note [a] Vaillant ubi supra, p. 203.
page 71 note [b] Suetonius, Nero, c. 34.
page 72 note [c] Sueton. Jul. c. 49.
page 72 note [d] Suet. Aug. c. 55.
page 72 note [e] Ib. c. 68.
page 72 note [f] Ib. c. 70.
page 73 note [g] Ib. c. 71.
page 73 note [h] Tiber. c. 42.
page 73 note [i] Ib. c. 43.
page 73 note [k] Ibid.
page 73 note [l] “Per noctes celeberrime acclamatum est “Reade Germanicum,” Ib. c. 52.
page 73 note [m] Ib. c. 45.
page 74 note [n] Sueton. Claud. cap. 39.
page 74 note [o] See also Sueton. Ner. c. 39—45. Oth. c. 3.
page 74 note [p] Winkelm. p. 443.
page 74 note [q] Count Caylus had one of these figures. There was a similar one in the Jesuits' library at Rome. The ass appears in the Albani Collection. Caylus iii. 28.
page 75 note [r] Bodin (Method. Histor. c. 4.) Muretus (Orat 17.) Till mont (Hist. des Emper. ii. 488). blame him; while Politian. (Præf. in Suet.) Erasmus (Epist. Dedic. in Sueton) endeavour to excuse him.
In support of the opinion that they were struck by Tiberius, Addison says he found them in the island of Caprea (Rem. on Italy, 1705.) But Suetonius mentions only Sigilla.
page 75 note [s] Patin, Numism. Imp. p, 29.
page 75 note [t] Spanheim de usu & præst. Num. Dissert. xiii. p. 521.
page 75 note [u] 
, Orat. adv. Gentes.
page 75 note [x] Spanheim, 26.
page 75 note [y] Klotzius (Hist. num. contumel. et satyr. p. 41, & seq.) But this opinion is least founded of any.
page 75 note [z] Some imagine these letters, which appear on other medals, denote the Tribunician power (Patin num. imper. p. 29.) others the years of the Emperor's reign (Havercamp. p. 287.) others annex different meanings (Dulodorus in Begér Thesaur. Brandenb. II. 611.)
page 76 note [a] Or rather fell in showers, or, as we say, thick as hail,
Nunc veniunt subitis lasciva numismata nimbis.
Or, as Claudian expresses it,
Quippe velut denso currentia munera nimbo.
Cons. Prob. & Olybr, l. 45.
page 76 note [b] See Thes. Morell. tab. 43. Goltzii numism. Aug. tab. 68. Nonnius comment. ad illa. Spanheim de usu, &c. dis. xiii. p. 521. Essay on Medals, Lond. 1784.)
page 76 note [c] Patin, p. 454. He supposes it the effect of flattery, but only as a conjecture.
page 76 note [d] “Hæc inscriptio in Salonina insolens & obscura Tristano nostro Videtur, sed non inspexerat nummum in Gallieni ludibrium cusum.… unde in dedecus hunc etiam ejus conjugi signatum putamus a quodam tiranno qui similiter eam in pace Augustam appellavit, dum per omne imperium continuum arderet bellum.” Vaillant, Num. præstant. imperat. n. 387.
page 77 note [e] Ibid. p. 388.
page 77 note [f] Patin, p. 265.
page 77 note [g] A chariot drawn by a parrot and driven by a grasshopper, among the Herculanean pictures (Tavola xlvii. n. 6.) is supposed to imply a satire on the famous Locusta, who understood so well the nature and use of poison.
page 77 note [h] Junius Novatus under the name of the younger Agrippina published a very severe letter to Augustus, (M. A. Sabellicus comment. in Sueton Aug. c. 55.)
page 78 note [i] This sort of enigma is not absolutely uncommon. I might cite among others a medal of Nero without legend, and on the reverse 
(See Mem. de Trevoux, June, 1707, p. 1090), one of Justinian explained by P. Hardouin (Ibid. May, 1608, p. 816)
The solutions usually given of these numismatic problems are arbitrary and more probable than certain. As a proof let us take the medal of Faustina, on the reverse of which is Ceres, standing on a globe, holding a torch on each hand, and the word SOVSTI. As this makes no sense, it has been agreed that it was made up of initials, and various readings have been assigned, all of which would have vanished before the conjecture of Klotzius, p. 56, that it was like many other blunders of the mint-master. The S. C. shews it to have been struck by proper authority.
page 79 note [k] Essay on Medals, Lond. 1784.
page 80 note [l] Diction. Historiq. ou Mem. critiq. et litter. fol. 1758, art. Medailles note l. p. 48, & seq.