In a previous post, I asked how Romans would have viewed RRC 308/1. I feel my question has been answered pretty definitively by this type (RRC 494/3):
The reverse is without a doubt modeled on RRC 308/1. And, in this series the moneyer connects each member of the triumvirate with their divine ancestry (Lepidus = Mars, Antony = Hercules). Thus by extension, this design in this context must represent Aeneas and Anchises and be alluding to the young Caesar’s connection to Venus via his adoption.
Does this mean Herennius certainly meant to represent Aeneas, and not one of the Catanaean brothers? No, not certainly. It is, however, another nail in the coffin of that identification. (See earlier post linked above for more “nails”.)
I’m intrigued that Regulus did not used Julius Caesar’s own Aeneas type (RRC 458/1). I’d argue that this rendering may have been chosen because it emphasizes filial piety, over divine piety, and thus is more appropriate for the young Caesar in 42BCE.
Liv Mariah Yarrow 