Link to publication

Note the high tin content and the similarity in shape to the republican die found near Orange, now in Madrid.

Images of a terracotta painted pig in a Prygian cap with spear and shield was shared on Twitter in hopes of locating its present whereabouts by Chapps. He found it on the UKansas Classics webpage.

This immediately reminded me of this passage of Macrobius about which I posted a very long time ago.

“Titius assailed the times in which he lived because people served a dish called porcus Troianus, so named because it was stuffed with smaller animals as the Trojan horse was stuffed with armed men” (ap. Macrob. Sat. 3.13.13).

This type of dish is also part of Petronius’ Satyricon and appears as part of Trimalchio’s feast (49.1ff).

And it reminded my colleague Karl Steel of M. Grunnius Corocotta (tweet)!

This is a character from a humorous piece of Latin that claims to be the dictation of a piglet’s will, the TESTAMENTUM PORCELLI, for which Terrence Lockyer provided a convenient online translation.

We should also remember that the boar was a legionary standard used by the Romans in the Republic (early post on this).

It also reminds me a great deal of the Aeneas, Anchises, Ascanius as dogs type of humor:

The hats of these warriors remind me of the apex worn by some Roman priests.

I learned about this statue thanks to Jane Sancinito on Twitter. And I decided to use it to start a discussion in my next Myth Class this coming Tuesday. Once I’d written it up on the private LMS for my students, I realized it would also be convenient to have a public url, hence this post.

On May 25 1968 this statue, a plaster cast of the head of Athena from a statue in the Louvre, was standing in a university building, when the city of Bordeaux, was taken over by student protests, that had swept all of France. “The movement which brought the country to a standstill had begun with a series of student occupations in protest against capitalism, consumerism, traditional institutions and the political regime. This then spread to workers across all walks of life who called for better wages, improved working conditions and more empowerment.”  (Source – with longer history of events).  One of the leaders of these protests is today a prominent EU politician.   The piece is still on display in the local museum with a label that describes when it was vandalized, but not why.

If you’re interested in statues and protests, I recommend the recent book, Smashing Statues, by another CUNY professor, Erin Thompson.

Who is carrying Augustus to heaven on the Grand Camee? Aeon as he holds a globe and has a nude parallel on the apotheosis of Pius and Faustina? Or Ascanius since he’s wearing trousers? Strange.

The coin image was so clear I wanted to juxtapose it agains another representation

Look at the Bruna and Ariccia fragments of RRC 8/1. If they were struck we would say their die axes were opposite. But for the mold made objects, I guess, we can speak of orientation. Both show the rounded point of the scabbard on one side. Bruna fragment (see below) shows the point of the sword whereas the Ariccia shows the hilt. They both have about as secure a provenience as we get for these types of objects, so we must I suppose imagine a casting process that would allow for this type of reversal. I would also note that that Bruna has a distinctive “outie” spue, where as Ariccia looks smooth(ed?) with no obvious spue.

The both have sort of decorative rounded tips to the scabbard but they are not rendered in very similar manners and the Ariccia shows some sort of fabric or strapping that is not visible on the Bruna. (unless I squint hard then I can see just about anything!). But… let’s bring Ariminum into the discussion…

I’ve floated the idea in print that the denomination designs of Ariminum’s early cast bronze may be related to the so-called aes signatum (Roman currency bar) designs. In the below images look at the four dot specimens (quadrunx).

It seems to me that these scabbards also have some cloth/straps associated with them.

What does it mean? No idea. Just needed to escape into the coins for a while.

—

Update 23 Sept 2022:

Notice the strap on the scabbard of the sword Mars holds here.

—

And just to make this post even more random. Staring at the Ariminum cast coin started to remind me of the ‘daggers’ on the famous Brutus EID MAR coin (RRC 508/3). That cross handle on the left double edged blade has always made it look v different from other representations of blades on the Roman coin series…. Funny coincidence…

One more random thought… Why our how could that notch have been made in the Bruna fragment above? It seems odd…

LO! Update 10/26/21: Notice the dagger/sword/knife/blade with a cross on top on this trophy on a Quinarius of Caesar:

Berlin specimen “RRC Nr. 452/3 (datiert 48-47 v. Chr.); B. Woytek, Arma et Nummi. Forschungen zur römischen Finanzgeschichte und Münzprägung der Jahre 49 bis 42 v. Chr. (2003) 142-151. 558 (Münzstätte in Illyrien, Apollonia?, spätes Frühjahr bis Mitte 48 v. Chr.).”

UPDATE 1-24-23:

Fabatus’ controlmarks (RRC 412/1) help with this iconography too!

Notice three dots on hilt of dagger:

AND strapping system on this sheath:

---

Last bit of randomness (must get back to teaching prep)… The Capo sale weights + the Milani images + Haeberlin weights and images make clear that this was how some of the Bruna aes signatum left Italy for German collections.

This intaglio with a queen wearing a peacock on her head reminds me of the crazy ship prow headdress worn by the Ptolemaic queen in some mosaics.

These are from House 2 at Ephesus and may represent a lintel or part of piece of furniture.

The emperor is clearly Trajan and while the museum labeling and catalogue entry leaves open what campaign it celebrates (Dacian or Parthian), I’m pretty certain this is Dacian. If you search ivory and Ephesus on Flickr there are some other pictures by other people, many with better images than mine, but I wanted a set of all the details for myself. I’m particularly interested in the lower relief which shows a scene that is not military. It gets no real discussion in the catalogue. (Do you know where it has been published? Let me know! My copy of the book published on these houses is back in the US, so I’ve not checked there yet.)

More on this scene after the gallery of images. My initial interpretation is that one panel shows offerings to the gods and the other a more bureaucratic scene perhaps of tribute being inventoried.

—

Figure 1 stands perhaps with an object(s) in his hand (f), perhaps a tray of offerings for figure 2? His attitude, however, is also reminiscent of Hermes/Mercury in some representations. Figure 2 seems to hold a small statue (e) similar to how the palladium is typically represented (side view of archaic figure with round shield spear and helmet). The bare legs rule out Athena/Minerva, but perhaps a personification of Roma or similar? The bench on which figures 5 and 4 sit could accommodate another seated figure (3), whose may rest on a small stool (d) whols legs are just visible. Notice Figure 5 and 4 are in conversation. 4 have longer drapery than 5. They are being made an offering of some sort (c).

Figures 11, 10 and 9 all process towards Figure 8. Figure 8 is heavily draped and may be in 3/4 or full frontal view. Figure 9 may wear trousers and some sort of sash is visible between his legs; his offer ins completely lost. Figure 10 holds up Object b in a manner suggesting it may be lightweight. The drapery of figure 10 is so complete it obscures feet and may cover head. Figure 11 is draped in a different manner and holds a narrow cloth object that drapes over the hand; their arm is held closer to their body. Figure 8 seems likely to be a female deity. I’m not confident about the genders of figures 11 and 10.

Figure 8 and Figure 5 are included here for visual reference. Figure seven is less heavily draped and has ankles and calf visible, hair is chin length, likely male, and approaches a set of doors (of a sanctuary?). On the opposite side of the door is figure 6 with slightly shorter garments (calves visible) approaches and offers object c.

Figure 1 and nearby objects are included for reference. It is not clear to me that this panel was ever actually attached to the preceding one. Notice the distinct break to the right of the door. Perhaps find data influenced this juxtaposition in the display. Figure 12 seems to wear a toga and gesture with right arm towards a large door. His right food seems to be raised perhaps on step before the door? Over his arm is perhaps a case of some sort (l). I’m not certain what is like to have been between Figures 12 and 13. Figure 13 presents a box (k) to the two seated figures (14 and 15). At his feet is a cylindrical case, likely a scroll box (j). Figure 13’s drapery is not as obviously a toga as it covers feet, but perhaps it is a toga after all. The seated figures (14 and 15) seem to be officials or magistrates on a subsellium.

Figure 15 is included for reference. Figure 16 is dressed in a workman’s tunic and bends over to offer a heavy round object (i) to Figure 15 (and 14?). The round object could be a shield, but is perhaps better interpreted as a precious metal plate (e.g. a lanx). Object h appears to be a strong-box shown in partial perspective. The mark on the short end appears to be a keyhole/lock. Figure 17 reaches towards the box and is likely togate.

Figure 17 is include for reference. Object(s) g on the table maybe similar to object i but seen from the side. I think precious metal plate is most likely. The table like the strong-box is shown in poorly rendered 3D. Figure 18 stands behind the the table as is likely to also be wearing a toga. Figures 19-22 descend a ramp or staircase made of ashlar masonry and constructed out of arches. They maybe entering the work area (carrying materials?) in which the other figures are occupied.