The coinage system of Cleopatra VII and Augustus in Cyprus

Citation preview

1 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS By Matthew Kreuzer

2 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS By Matthew Kreuzer

Second Edition Springfield, Mass. Copyright Matthew Kreuzer 2000-2009.

3 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Contents Summary

5

Historical Background

9

Coins Circulating in Cleopatra’s Cyprus 51-30 BC What Were the Denominations in Cleopatra’s Cyprus? The Tetradrachm The Drachm The Full-Unit The Half-Unit The Quarter-Unit The Eighth-Unit The Tiny Sixteenth-Unit Other Small Late Ptolemaic Bronzes Archeological Context – A Late Ptolemaic Bronze Mint Making Small Change Relationship Between the Denominations Circulating Earlier Ptolemaic and Foreign Coinage Cypriot Bronze of Cleopatra, After Actium

10 12 13 28 29 35 39 41 45 48 50 53 55 56 58

Silver denarii of Marc Antony, 37-30 BC

61

Cypriot Coinage Under Augustus, 30-22 BC Cypriot Bronze of Augustus, CA coinage Non-Export Obols and Quadrans Silver Quinarii and Denarii of Augustus, 28-22 BC

69 70 75 78

Cyprus as a Senatorial Province under Augustus, 22 BC to 14 AD 87 Cypriot Coinage under Tiberius and Later, After 14 AD

92

Table of Suggested Attribution Changes

102

Appendix I - Analysis of Declining Obol Weight Standard

121

Appendix II - Octavia or Cleopatra? Credits and Bibliography

139

4 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

"If the nose of Cleopatra had been a little shorter, the whole face of the world would have been changed." Blaise Pascal

5 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Summary During the late reign of Cleopatra VII a cornucopia of coinage circulated in Cyprus. After her defeat at Actium, coinage on a similar-scale continued with Roman types and denominations for Augustus. Coins played a role in the political and economic control of the island. Previous writings about ancient Cypriot numismatics have focused almost solely on the island’s coins, with little understanding of the dynamic economic relationship between Cyprus and her neighbors, of which coinage is a reflection. This author and Catharine Lorber are writing separate books about Ptolemaic coinage, building on the work of Svoronos. 1 In particular, the relationship between Ptolemaic Cypriot denominations is only now becoming understood. Coin striking is reviewed here as a manufacturing process, with focus on lowest cost and standardization. Several important conclusions are reached here, generally against the prevailing scholarship originated in the late 19th century.

1a) Tetradrachms of this period with Paphos ∏A mintmark are from Paphos, not Alexandria. Cyprus, with access to fuel, was a much larger metal working center than Alexandria, striking most of the coinage for the Ptolemaic Kingdom. 1b) A re-attribution of the portrait on Cleopatra’s base silver tetradrachms is suggested, from Ptolemy I to Ptolemy XIII, XIV and Cleopatra VII herself. 1c) While the surfaces show a nice silver color, the net silver content of the base silver Ptolemaic tetradrachm is about equal to that of a contemporary Roman Republican denarius.

The introduction to Cathy Lorber’s upcoming book on Ptolemaic Numismatics gives a perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the 1904-1908 books of Svoronos. 1

Though it approaches its centenary, Svoronos remains the preferred reference for Ptolemaic coinage. The catalogue offers remarkably comprehensive coverage. The new varieties that I have been able to add amount to no more than 10–15% of the total, and most of these are minor variants or missing denominations from a well-documented series . . . Indeed, Svoronos cast his nets so wide that he caught up some coinages that were Ptolemaic in sentiment, but issued by non-Ptolemaic authorities. Still other entries do not belong at all in a catalogue devoted to the Ptolemies. Of greater concern, Svoronos cannot always be relied upon for the accuracy of his classifications. Mint attributions are frequently wrong, reign attributions sometimes so; and bronzes may be wrongly associated with one another. Svoronos imagined dating systems in the early Ptolemaic coinage of Alexandria where they did not in fact exist... The preceding list of caveats is demanded by conscience, but should not be understood as denigrating Svoronos. His was a monumental achievement that stands to this day, merely broidered round the edges by subsequent scholarship.

The author of this book disagrees, and believes that the core of Svoronos deserves closer analysis and revision.

6 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

2) The Ptolemaic Cypriot bronze coinage produced by the en chapelete method is generally later than previously attributed by Svoronos. These coins were struck during a period of inflation. The declining average weight standard places undated issues between those of known dates, producing a Glossary of Ptolemaic coin re-attributions.

3) The famous but rare Cypriot 28 mm bronze coin of Cleopatra dates after 39 BC. The baby in Cleopatra’s arms, generally taken to be Caesarion, is probably that of her son by Marc Antony, Alexander Helios.

4) A re-attribution of a common, similar 10 mm bronze coin from the portrait of Arsinöe III to Cleopatra VII is proposed.

5) Marc Antony portrait denarii with P. for the supposed artist signature can be read as P. for Paphos Mint. Other portrait denarii of Antony may have also been struck at Paphos.

7 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

6) The entire C.A and AVGVSTVS coinage of Augustus, some of which has been attributed to Asia Minor, was more likely from Cyprus. The brass and bronze coinage was struck for both internal use, and export, while Cyprus was his personal possession, not under the nominal control of the Senate, 30-22 BC. CA stands for Caesar Augustus.

7) The related good-style Augustus portrait denarii and aurei with “Young Bull” reverse are closely related to the C.A and AVGVSTVS coinage. They are also from Cyprus.

8) The Temple of Jupiter Olympus at Salamis (Zeus Salaminios) appears on similar fine style denarii of Augustus. Related silver issues are also from a Cypriot mint. All are related by style to the C.A coinage. 9) Cypriot small bronze coinage of Cleopatra circulated well into Roman times, at values of an obol equals two-thirds of an as. The late Ptolemaic types and denominations are reflected in their Roman Cypriot successors.

8 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

10) The legacy of Ptolemaic denominations and flan manufacturing extended into the first half of the second century, when Cyprus was part of the Roman Province of Syria. “The Coinage System of Cleopatra VII, Marc Antony and Augustus in Cyprus” included several denominations. Each was struck in a political and economic context. Each reflected earlier and contemporary issues of Cyprus and her trade partners.

9 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Historical Background “Cyprus is second to none of the islands of the Mediterranean; It is rich in wine and oil, produces grain in abundance, and possesses extensive copper mines . . . .” Strabo (64 BC - 23? AD) Our word “Copper” may have its root in Cyprus (Kupros), which, along with grain, was a major export of the island throughout ancient times. Cyprus also provided the region with craftsmen and merchants. Cyprus came under the rule of the Ptolemies of Egypt after the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC. It was lost in 305 BC but regained in 294 BC when Ptolemy I Soter bested Demetrios Poliorketes for control of the island. Cyprus remained under the control of the Ptolemies for more than 235 years, until 58 BC when P Clodius Pulcher (brother of Appius Claudius Pulcher) persuaded the Senate to approve the annexation of the island (Lex Clodia de Cypro). The Senate sent the famed orator Cato (M. Porcius Cato) to enforce the annexation. Ptolemy the Cypriot, the Lagid, Ptolemaic Governor of Cyprus, and brother of Ptolemy XII, committed suicide rather than accept the empty honor “High Priest of Aphrodite” that Cato offered him. The loss of Cyprus was a direct cause of riots that drove Ptolemy XII out of Alexandria. He fled to Cyprus and other Roman controlled areas. Cato, appointed the first Roman governor (quaestor pro praetor) of the island, seized the treasury, presumably the real reason for Rome's interest in the island. Plutarch claimed that Cato sold the treasury for 7000 talents of silver, and that he took more treasures to Rome from Cyprus than Pompey the Great brought back from all his wars. Cyprus was caught up in the Roman Civil Wars of the first century BC, with several of its major figures involved in some way in the island's affairs. Pompey was on the island while marshalling his forces for battle against Julius Caesar. After Pompey’s defeat in 48 BC, Julius Caesar restored control of the island to Ptolemaic control, briefly under Cleopatra VII, in joint rule with her sister Arsinöe IV and her brothers Ptolemy XIII and XIV. Ptolemy XIII was drowned in 47 BC in Egypt. Ptolemy XIV was killed in 44 BC. After his death, Cleopatra became the virtual “sole” ruler of Cyprus in association with her baby son by Caesar, Caesarion, who ruled as Ptolemy XV. During the Roman Civil War, the Ptolemaic Fleet left Cyprus without Cleopatra’s orders to fight on the side of Cassius but was held back by poor weather. The return of Cyprus to Cleopatra was re-confirmed by Antony in 34 BC by the “Donations of Alexandria.” After Actium, Octavian visited Cyprus. He declared the island under his personal control, his private estate. In 22 BC Cyprus was proclaimed a Senatorial province to be ruled by a proconsular governor, still under the authority of Augustus. Other emperors followed. Claudius combined Cyprus with Syria, and it was governed from Antioch.

10 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Coins Circulating in Cleopatra’s Cyprus, 51-30 BC During the third century BC and continuing into the time of Cleopatra, the coinage of Cyprus closely paralleled that of Egypt, using the same denominational system of six obols per drachm. Richard Hazzard’s recent work, Ptolemaic Coins, An Introduction for Collectors, has brought considerable clarity to the connection between bronze and silver denominations in the Ptolemaic Kingdom. In particular, his analysis of weight standards is valuable. Tetradrachms were the principal denomination of large-scale trade. Accepted by merchants throughout the Ptolemaic holdings, a tetradrachm was extremely valuable. Hazzard notes that in 250 BC, the daily wage of a laborer was an obol. The tetradrachm would have been 24 days wage for a laborer. Comparing the ancient laborer to a modern one working at $5.20 an hour, the tetradrachm was the equivalent of a modern $1000 bill. While $1000 bills may meet the needs of merchants trading large shipments of goods, individuals trading goods in quantities smaller than a wagonload needed smaller currency –particularly bronze small change. For Ptolemaic issues before the 140’s BC, the weight standard to which coins of all metals were struck is exacting. Hazzard explains that during the reign of Ptolemy II this standard for bronze in Egypt was reduced to about 72 grams per drachm, 12 grams per obol. The weight standard of the bronze obol slowly eroded over time. The term bronze is used here for both copper and copper alloy containing any tin. Cypriot bronzes of Ptolemy V with cult statue of Aphrodite on the reverse have nice round flans, fairly even strikes, and a weight variance of about 10% around the denominations (Svor. 1005 = 18g, 1006 = 12g, 1007 = 6g, 1008 = 3g, and 1009 = 1.5g). While traditionally attributed to Ptolemy III (BMC, Svoronos, Sear), this weight standard was in use 262-200 BC. The smallest denomination was the eighth-obol, or hemitetartermorion. This corresponded to the smallest denomination in silver, struck in Macedon, Greece, Ionia and elsewhere. The bronze Ptolemaic hemitetartermorion was not common.2 During this time, preparation of bronze planchets still included weighing and lathing.

This very round and evenly struck 17.82g trihemiobol (Svor. 1005) of Ptolemy III offers an interesting comparison to the later, more irregular, small bronzes. Later bronzes, during and after the time of Ptolemy VI, were more crudely struck on a declining obol standard which fell over decades to about 8.5 grams, or less, per obol. Flan preparation became rushed. The en chapelete method for casting bronze flans was adopted for smaller bronze denominations. Especially for the smaller denominations, engraving quality of legends and devices declined. Striking was rushed, resulting in more uneven strikes, flan cracks and other striking errors. Consistent weight standard was apparently less important than a generation before. The actual weights of coins of the same denomination vary. The combined effect is that the bronze coinage was less consistent and less attractive. Apparently, they continued to circulate, for coins of this time are often very worn. The exact The smallest Greek silver coins are usually 0.08 gram archaic and early Classical silver fractions. The hemitetartermorion was the smallest regular denomination. 2

11 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

relationship of the bronze denominations to each other and to the declining quality of silver tetradrachm is still debated among experts. The relations of silver to bronze supplied by Hazzard3 for Egypt (and presumably for Cyprus) are accepted here for Cyprus. In 51 BC, at the ascent of Cleopatra VII, the tetradrachm was about 33% silver, about as valuable as the good silver Roman Republican denarius of c. 3.9 grams, the other contemporary trade coin of the region. Bronze coinage was already valued well above its intrinsic metal value, and the weight standard drifted. The bronze denominations of Cleopatra in Egypt were the full-unit, at an average weight of about 17 grams, and the half-unit, at an average weight of 8.5 grams. There were considerable variations of this standard. While examples of the full-unit weigh 10.6 to 22.3 grams, a specimen of the half-unit weighs 11.2 grams, a considerable variation. Types in Egypt had a well-modeled, diademed portrait of the Queen facing right. Her hair is bunched in a large bun behind, the “melon coif” for which she is still famous. The reverse showed the standard Ptolemaic eagle of Zeus standing on a thunderbolt, and facing left. A small double cornucopia (dikeras), a symbol of plenty, is in the field in front of the eagle. Full-units had the mark ∏ behind the eagle, which is Greek for 80 copper drachms. Half-units were marked M, Greek for 40 copper drachms. Both have the Greek legend, “Cleopatra Queen.” Newell considered the portraits on these Egyptian two bronze denominations to be the most realistic.

Bronze portrait coin of Cleopatra from Egypt. Svor. 1872. (8.47g) What was the currency of the common people in Cyprus during the reign of Cleopatra VII? In Ptolemaic Cyprus during this period, in addition to the tetradrachms, there were drachms and five bronze denominations, each half of the previous. No gold is known. Billon tetradrachms were the largest denomination. The bronze coinage did not circulate outside of Cyprus, since it was valued only at bronze value elsewhere. The denominations, in relation to those of Egypt, are better understood through Hazzard’s recent work. Rather surprisingly, the rarest denomination of Cleopatra’s reign has the most visibility in auction listings, while the others, including the second smallest, the most common denomination, are not generally seen in auctions.

12 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

What Were the Denominations in Cleopatra’s Cyprus? In Cyprus, the denominations were the same as the rest of the Greek-speaking world. A tetradrachm contained four drachms. Each drachm had six obols. The obol was sometimes divided into quarters and halves. Infrequently seen foreign and antique gold was worth 12.5 times its weight in pure silver, a ratio that was true from the time of Julius Caesar until the third century AD. The denominations would have been familiar to everyone who handled money. Coins were rarely marked with denominations. Because Ptolemaic bronze denominations are not understood with certainty in relation to the silver tetradrachm in the period after Ptolemy VIII, the bronze denominations are listed here in relation to each other: as full-units, half-units, quarter-units, eighth-units and sixteenth-units. A counting board was useful for this largely base two system. The counting board was refined into the more portable, and faster, abacus. Later in this book, the bronze denominations in relation to the silver tetradrachm are derived from those used in early Roman Egypt, in agreement with Milne, RPC and Hazzard.

1.5 m long marble counting board known as the “Salamis Tablet” found on the Greek Isle of Salamis (not the Cypriot city) in 1846. Dated to c. 300 BC.

13 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Tetradrachm Tetradrachms of the later Ptolemies all have similar types. The obverse features a diademed head facing right, with a strong chin, usually wearing an aegis at the neck. The aegis, eagle and thunderbolt were symbols of Zeus. Reference books do not explicitly state that the use of these symbols assimilates the King of Egypt with Zeus. Use of this iconography moved the King “closer to the Gods” in the eyes of his subjects. Die axis is generally 12:00. The reverse says “Ptolemy, King” in Greek. To the left of the eagle are L for Year, and one or two letters that spell out the date in Greek. For example, L IB is Year 10 + 2 = 12 of the reign of the ruler, dated from the ruler’s ascension to the throne. To the right of the eagle is the mintmark ∏A, for Paphos, today sometimes called Neo- or Nea- Paphos because the Ptolemaic city of Paphos was 10 miles west of the archaic city. Most references consider the obverse of the coinage of the later Ptolemies to show a portrait of Ptolemy I Soter. On the reverse they note a dummy ∏A mintmark was copied in Alexandria from coins struck at Paphos in prior decades. The argument can be made that the portraits on these later coins are not of Ptolemy I Soter, but are contemporary portraits, and that the mintmark actually reflects where the coin was minted. The strength of the chin on the tetradrachm portrait declines markedly. In “Standard Ptolemaic Silver,” Newell notes: With the renewed issues of [Ptolemy VI] Philometor in Cyprus, a new type of head makes its appearance. The hair has become inordinately curly, the nose longer, thinner, sharper, the eye a mere dot and not so deeply sunk as before. Only the projecting chin is still that of [Ptolemy I] Soter and enables us to see, although perhaps with difficulty, that the less able die-cutters of the second century B.C. were still attempting to reproduce the features of the first Ptolemy. Or were they? Perhaps the Cypriot tetradrachm portrait, which Newell tries so hard to tie to Ptolemy I Soter, is simply that of the Ptolemy VI. In Paphos I Morkholm writes of second century tetradrachms: Although it must be borne in mind that the head does not represent the reigning king, but is a free variation over the portrait of Ptolemy I, founder of the dynasty, the change may reflect the change of ruler. The portrait changes noted by Morkholm may actually reflect changes in portraits of the new ruler. Morkolm’s die study of hundreds of tetradrachms found at Paphos I has many obverse die links between years, but none between rulers. Similar portraits attributed to Ptolemy VI appear on hemidrachms attributed to Alexandria (more likely Cypriot) and tetradrachms of Akko (Svor. 1486). Of these, R. R. R. Smith notes, “Most distinctive are the thrusting forward of the lower part of the long face, and the prominent chin, unmistakable on small coins and sculpture.” The chin and eye ridge has led some scholars to suggest that Ptolemy I Soter suffered from acromegaly. It seems logical that the descendants of Ptolemy I Soter would have inherited a portion of his outstanding chin.

14 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The portraits on tetradrachms of Ptolemy VI’s brother, Ptolemy VIII (sic) are similar to those of Ptolemy VI.4 The tetradrachms of Ptolemy VIII’s son/nephew, Ptolemy IX, and those of Ptolemy VIII’s other son/nephew, Ptolemy X are similar to those on coins of Ptolemy VI. With no new genetic material entering the royal bloodline, all of their portraits would be similar.5 However, Ptolemy VIII was quite heavy, indeed he was known as Potbelly. The tetradrachms of Ptolemy VIII do resemble those of Ptolemy VI more than the few certain portrait coins of this ruler. Ancient sculpture and gem cameos are of little aid to attribution of coins, for in general they have been attributed from coin portraits.6 The coins are the most certain portraits of most of these kings. It seems plausible that the portraits following the restoration of Ptolemy XII represent that of the Ptolemy XII himself, the father of Cleopatra. A contemporary crude tetradrachm from Askalon has long been considered to be his portrait. A small issue of drachms of style identical to the “restored Ptolemy XII” tetradrachms (Svoronos 1838) is also sometimes (Newell, R. G. P. C., p.91; Hazzard, p. 12) considered a portrait of the King. A statue considered to be the head of Ptolemy XII on the body of a sphinx was recently discovered in Alexandria’s royal harbor. Ptolemy XII was a middle-aged man, with less of the strong chin that characterized Ptolemy I Soter portraits. Since Ptolemy IV portraits on silver tetradrachms show a ruler whose genetic contribution from big-chinned Ptolemy I Soter was twice that of Ptolemy XII, the comparison of chin strength between Ptolemy IV and Ptolemy XII is similar, while at some distance from the really big chin of Ptolemy I Soter. Indeed the tetradrachms of Ptolemy IX bear a strong resemblance to the known coin portraits of his double-granddaughter Cleopatra, who had nearly the same genetic make-up over generations as her father-uncle.

4

Hazzard notes of Ptolemy VI tetradrachms,

. . . We can distinguish between the two series because of their contrasting styles and fabrics. The Paphian issues, struck from somewhat thick planchets, showed a portrait with inordinately curly locks of hair, a long pointed nose and a two-dimensional dot for an eye; thick coarse feathers covered the eagle on the reverse. The Alexandrine issues, struck from broader and thinner planchets, showed a portrait with long strands of hair, a shorter and wellrounded nose, and a three-dimensional eye with a lower eye lid; somewhat fine feathers covered the eagle on the reverse. Alternatively, are two Paphos mints possible? For an online listing of Ptolemaic ancestry, see: http://www.geocities.com/christopherjbennett/ptolemies/ ptolemies.htm Used by permission of Christopher J. Bennett. 5

Iconographic materials–busts and gemstones with portraits–are routinely identified from the portraits on coins. H. Kykieleis gathered much of the Ptolemaic evidence in Bildnisse der Ptolemoer (Berlin 1975). 6

15 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Tetradrachm of Ptolemy I (14.20g above) shows a massive chin. Portrait tetradrachm of Ptolemy IV shows a chin of more modest proportions. (14.17g)

The chin of Ptolemy VI is similar to that of grandfather / granduncle Ptolemy IV. (166/5 BC, 13.96g)

This first reign tetradrachm of Ptolemy IX (14.04 g center) has facial features far more similar to the bronzes of his double-grandaughter Cleopatra (8.47 g below), than to the portraits of revered ancestor Ptolemy I (14.20 g above).

16 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

After the restoration of Ptolemy XII by the Romans, an unusual revision of the tetradrachm portrait took place. His chief minister was, rather briefly, a Roman creditor named Rabirius Postumus. Hazzard writes, quoting Morkholm, An elaborate hairstyle now gave a certain charm to the head of Ptolemy Soter. The hairstyling, remarked Morkholm, ‘consisted of several sharply separated rows of locks arranged alternately, and placed in tiers, one above the other.’

Dated silver tetradrachm of Ptolemy XII struck after his restoration to the throne of Egypt in 55 BC. Year 27 = 55/54 BC. (13.61 g)

A silver drachm with a portrait attributed as Ptolemy XII is similar to the tetradrachms of the time. (2.73 g) A marble bust in the Louvre. The portrait on base silver tetradrachms of Ptolemy XII, which has been called Ptolemy I Soter, is a bit feminized, with only a slight connection to the portraits of Ptolemy I from c. 290 BC. It bears a much stronger resemblance to that on bronze coins bearing the name of

17 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cleopatra. This style portrait was continued during the reign of Cleopatra, with the date revised for the year of her reign. If the portrait on the tetradrachms is not Ptolemy XII, XIII, XIV and Cleopatra VII, then the coins are the only silver coinage of a significant monarch of their era, without the portrait of the current ruler. The rulers of Bithynia, Pontus, Pergamum, Syria, and Macedonia struck portrait silver prior to their conquest by Rome. The contemporary rulers of Mauritania, Cappadocia, Parthia, and Armenia struck portrait silver while generally maintaining varying levels of independence from Rome. By the time of Cleopatra, even Rome had begun to strike portrait silver coins. The largest silver coinage of this time without portrait of an individual were traditional Melqart tetradrachms from the city-state of Tyre.

The portrait on the obverse of the tetradrachm of Cleopatra (10.95g, lower left) resembles that on her Egyptian bronze (lower right), far more than the silver tetradrachm of Ptolemy I (14.20g, above). BMC (in 1882) and many later works called these tetradrachms Alexandria Mint, with “the immobilized mintmark of Paphos.” There are indeed stylistic and flan variations indicating that two mints may have struck tetradrachms using the Paphos mintmark 100 years earlier. The obverse dies are not shared with those of a second ∏A mint. The c. 97 BC Paphos I hoard contains 2,484 tetradrachms including many from both ∏A mints. Half the coins found were from the second Paphos Mint, called “Alexandria,” by Nicolaou and Morkholm. The Paphos I obverse die study shows that both ∏A mintmark-using mints did not share dies, or die-cutters. Both ∏A mints had an individual style. Scholars subsequent to BMC and Svoronos accepted the immobilized mintmark attribution. Writing in 1941, Newell also accepted that the second mint was Alexandria noting, “Just what the reason for this may have been we cannot be certain.”

18 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Morkholm in 1976 in Paphos I accepts the same logic, noting, “No satisfactory explanation has ever been given of this Alexandrian practice . . .” In his 1995 book Hazzard suggests, “ . . . an engraver at the Alexandrine mint possibly got orders to copy a tetradrachm from Paphos and included its mintmark in his production.” Other recent sources such as Sear have accepted this strained mint attribution: an apparently purposeless, ancient lie told on millions of coins struck over a period of several decades. Why would they lie? While most of these tetradrachms are indeed found in Egypt and Phoenicia, for decades Paphos had produced tetradrachms with the mintmark ∏A, part of a larger Cypriot coinage alongside Salamis (mintmark ∑A) and Kition (mintmark KI, or K). During the second century BC, Kition acted as a branch or overflow mint for Salamis, with similar style, but less frequent issues. Smaller Cypriot mints at Amathos (AMAØ monogram) and Soli (∑Ω) also briefly struck some tetradrachms. Perhaps the Cypriot silver tetradrachms were used for payments in Egypt and Ptolemaic holdings in Phoenicia. The complex late Ptolemaic economy may have allowed coining in a large Royal mint at Paphos and a smaller “official” mint in the same city, using the same mintmark. Moulds for casting bronze denominations have been found at various dig locations in Paphos. The wide stylistic variation in small bronze produced during short periods also supports the existence of more than one Paphos Mint for the silver. During the time of Ptolemy VIII to XII, the mint at Paphos produced many bronze coins, with symbols including lotus flower and cornucopia, of all denominations. The variety and number of bronze types at Paphos vastly exceeds production at the smaller Alexandria Mint, as it had for decades before. Some of the bronze types attributed by Svoronos to Egypt are now considered to be from Cyprus. The Egypt-centered attributions of Svoronos in gold, silver and bronze, away from Cypriot mints are not surprising. He was working almost 100 years ago, with far less information. While the precious metal find-sites are rarely located in Cyprus, there is no sound reason to date to suggest that the Paphos mintmarks mean anything other than “struck at Paphos.” Neither Cyprus nor Egypt had many silver mines. At Paphos, silver was accepted in trade, alloyed with the correct amount of local copper, and struck into tetradrachms. “Cyprus, Copper” notes: Good fluxing materials close to the mines and an ample source of energy from the surrounding forest helped the Cypriot metallurgist to refine the pyrometallurgical treatment and to maximize metal extraction from the ore. Alexandria, by comparison, had little fuel and only minimal smelting and metalworking. Wood was rare in ancient Egypt. Stone weapons were used well after the (late) introduction of iron, c. 600 BC. Many objects were made of faience rather than metal. Egypt was the last civilization on the Mediterranean to produce its own metal coinage (in c. 361 BC). Later, porcelain and lead were used for some Ptolemaic tokens. There is textual evidence that copper, wood and ships were regular imports from Cyprus into Egypt. In order to extract an ounce of copper from sulfide ores, 300 ounces of charcoal would have been needed. Copper smelting requires burning charcoal at 1150 degrees Celsius. However, Egyptian copper ore contains arsenic. Use of this ore was ended by 2000 BC. Instead, copper was imported to Egypt from Cyprus, and the Sinai Desert near Gaza. While Paphos was not the capital of the Ptolemaic Kingdom, its proximity to copper, fuel, trade (and the silver that trade brought in) and its previous minting talent pool may well have meant that almost all Ptolemaic silver tetradrachms were coined there. Striking of precious metal coinage was not always done at an ancient capital city. Centuries earlier, Carthage had struck most of its silver in Sicily, far from the capital, for similar practical reasons. In the time of Tiberius, the Roman gold and silver mint was at Lugdunum (Lyons), although the coins circulated fairly evenly throughout the Empire. A

19 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemaic mint in Alexandria is akin to a modern American mint in Washington DC or New York City: an expensive location for a factory. Mints need not be at the political capital. The only evidence suggesting that Paphos was not the primary, if not only, mint for the period is the apparent lack of tetradrachms with a clear Cypriot provenance. The Paphos I hoard of tetradrachms breaks this rule, as do two smaller hoards of tetradrachms found on Cyprus noted in ICGH. Ancient precious metal coins sometimes traveled far from their origin. Silver coined at Athens from 460 to 300 BC is found today in Syria and Egypt, almost never near Athens. Silver Pegasi staters coined at Corinth are found primarily in Sicily, rarely near Corinth. The precious metal coinage with mintmark ∏A was produced at Paphos for immediate or ultimate export to other places in the Ptolemaic holdings. Paphos mintmark meant struck at Paphos. At the end of his first reign in 58 BC, weak-minded and much indebted Ptolemy XII was squarely under the control of his Romans allies. Like some modern debtor nations, much of the considerable production of Egypt was taxed for repayment of debt to the Romans, including a large bribe to Julius Caesar, who was then consul. The debt to Julius Caesar was 6000 talents, and Ptolemy XII owed money to many others Romans and to the Roman treasury.7 Like a modern debtor nation, the conspicuous consumption of the ruling family, heavy taxes and other austerity measures supported by the government drove up interest rates and created enormous economic hardship. The Romans boldly seized Cyprus and its treasury. A mob drove Ptolemy XII from Alexandria in 58 BC. He fled to Cyprus, Rhodes and other areas controlled by his allies, the Romans. In his absence, Ptolemy XII left his wife/sister Cleopatra V Tryphaena and their eldest daughter, Berenike IV as co-regents. Cleopatra Tryphaena died about a year later and Berenike IV ruled as sole regent. She was made to marry Seleucus Kybiosaktes, but after a few days she had him strangled. Berenike ruled again as sole regent and was expected to marry again. The second man she chose was Archelaus, high priest of Ma. While Ptolemy XII did not control Egypt, the tetradrachm coinage in his name was continued, apparently from Paphos, while the island was under the “control” of the Romans. Roman rule in Syria during the same period used the name and types of the late Seleukid king, Philip II. The “free city” of Tyre struck the traditional dated silver with the head of Melqart and the eagle on the reverse, even after the “freedom” was removed in 20 BC. Like its sister city Tyre, Sidon issued silver coins as a “free city” for decades after it was no longer free. Aradus, Laodicea, and Seleucia also struck silver coins during this time. In Asia Minor, the city of Pergamum continued issue of cistophoric tetradrachm for eight decades after the city was willed to Rome in 133 BC. While under Roman “control” similar cistophoric tetradrachms were issued by Ephesos and several smaller cities in Asia Minor. Why would the Romans allow the striking of “foreign” silver coins? Roman rule did not mean absolute control over the people she conquered. Part of the military success that the Romans enjoyed, was that their “rule” allowed for the “conquered” people to maintain much of their own culture, religion, and local rule. Indeed the Roman Republic and the Empire prospered with a mix of cultures enabled to trade under local and Roman law. At the same time, the Romans controlled the military and collected taxes. Striking of coinage familiar to Egypt, Cyprus, and Phoenicia was acceptable to the Roman occupiers. The eldest daughter of Ptolemy XII, Berenike IV, ruled Egypt from 58-55, striking no known coinage. Her regnal years 1, 2 and 3 appear on papyrii, but not coins. Why? She did not control the main mint at Paphos, which was under control of the Roman allies of her father. If the mint were at Alexandria, a tetradrachm coinage for Berenike IV might be expected. Instead, the mint at Paphos apparently continued issues of tetradrachms for her exiled father. Tetradrachms which were dated Years 24 and 25 of his rule had been attributed to According to Suetonius, (Julius Caesar 54.3), Ptolemy XII Auletes had promised Caesar about 6000 talents of silver in return for Rome’s recognition of Auletes as a friend of the Roman people in 59 BC. About 17,500,000 denarii of the debt were still outstanding in 48 BC. (Plutarch, Julius Caesar, 7-8). 7

20 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy X by Svoronos, (as Svoronos 1685, 1686, 90-88 BC) based on there being a date for dies marked Paphos at a mint in Alexandria, from which Ptolemy XII had just been expelled. Newell notes of first reign Ptolemy XII tetradrachms, “His issues, while still of fairly good quality of silver, are distinguishable from those of his predecessors by their somewhat smaller diameter and the roughness and poorness of their style.” Specific gravity analysis of a specimen shows 34.0% silver, a value in line with the debased silver of the second reign of Ptolemy XII.89 An examination of obverse dies or specific gravity could help to differentiate the similar issues of Ptolemy X and XII.

Previously attributed to Ptolemy X, this tetradrachm may be dated Year 24 of Ptolemy XII. If so, it was struck after his expulsion from Alexandria, from debased silver measured at 34%. Ptolemy XII was in Roman-controlled areas, perhaps Cyprus at the time of the striking of this coin. (13.60g) For the promise of 10,000 talents of additional money, the Roman military under Aulus Gabinius returned Ptolemy XII to the throne of Egypt in 55 BC. The army of Archelaus lost to the Romans. Ptolemy XII continued to pay old and new debts to the Romans. The Roman creditor Rabirius Postumus served as his chief minister briefly. Rabirius Postumus placed the interests of Roman creditors over those of Egypt by collecting taxes with zeal. The Roman financier was driven out of Egypt in 54 BC. However, Ptolemy XII, aided by Roman military influence, clung to power. He ruled until his death in 51 BC. The tetradrachms after 55 BC have a transverse palm branch of Victory on the reverse, behind the eagle, and the headdress of Isis before. Flans are broader than the squat, earlier issues of Ptolemy XII. An important minting change occurs as well. The post-Restoration tetradrachms were struck on flans cast en chapelete, with the larger weight variation that this implies. BMC Ptolemies, written in 1883, first noted the variation in the weight of the tetradrachms. The coins show few flan cracks, and the rims usually show hints of a casting sprue. In about 58 BC, the tetradrachms of Ptolemy XII underwent a substantial debasement. From a standard of about 90% silver, coins were struck with debased silver, of about 33% silver. Hazzard firmly notes 33%, although RPC suggests 40-45% is the correct value. Hazzard’s figure is from wet (destructive) analysis. The RPC value is taken from the X-ray fluoresce analysis of D. R. Walker, The Metrology of Roman Silver Coinage I (Oxford 1976) p. 142. However, specific gravity analysis confirms that Hazzard’s figure is correct. The King of Egypt kept his main financial accounts in silver, not gold or bronze. In JSSEA XX Hazzard notes: . . . this was true even when the chora depended almost solely on copper for day to day business. Penalty clauses [on legal documents] in the second and first centuries required payment . . . in silver for the Crown. Hazzard, “The Composition of Ptolemaic Silver.” Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities (Canada) 1990, pp. 89-107. Paul Aoki presents similar results in “An Analysis of Eight Ptolemaic Staters, “The Picus” Canada, 1993, pp. 45-57. 8

Confirmation that the alloy contains only copper and silver is required. Lead, the most likely third metal, would raise the apparent silver content. 9

21 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cicero calculated the wealth of Ptolemy XII in silver talents (Strabo XVII.i.13). Royal debts and ongoing obligations such as salaries inside the kingdom were due in tetradrachms. The reduced silver tetradrachms, valued as the earlier ones, were used to pay the ongoing internal expenses of the Ptolemaic Kingdom, yet another austerity measure. Pickling the blanks in warm vinegar would have dissolved some surface copper and left the surfaces enriched with silver. Striking the cast planchets while hot brought more silver, the lower melting point metal, to the surface, making the visible surface appear to be of silver. (Almost three hundred years later, denarii of the Severans appear silver, although struck of a similar, if more silvery about 48% silver metal mix). Coins of Ptolemy XII’s children Ptolemy XIII, Ptolemy XIV and Cleopatra were also struck at this reduced silver standard. Hazzard’s book presents a graph of actual silver content of 141 dated tetradrachms, noting the abrupt debasement of 55 BC, but relying on surface analysis for all but the final four points. This data, at 33%, were collected by Wet (destructive) Analysis by Hazzard himself. Given the surface enrichment of the coins, these four points should be considered the most reliable. Dr. Frank Cochran performed specific gravity analysis of several late Ptolemaic tetradrachms.10 11 12 Specific gravity measurements of several non-porous tetradrachms of Cleopatra VII were performed by displacement in water by Dr. Frank Cochran. The main composition of these coins was assumed to be silver and copper. Any other elements or compounds are believed to be present in insignificant amounts. The weight of each coin was measured on a calibrated Sartorius analytical balance. Then each individual coin was suspended from a copper wire arch with a thread and the weight of this apparatus was recorded. The suspended coin in each case was then immersed in a beaker of distilled water that was supported independently from the balance and the change in weight was recorded. The difference in weight between the suspended coin in air and in water was divided into the weight of the coin to calculate the specific gravity. The specific gravity of a 1941 US half-dollar (90 % silver, 10 % copper) and a 1967 US half-dollar (40 % silver, 60 % copper) was also determined by this procedure to confirm the reliability of the method. Specific gravity of silver = 10.50 g/ml. Specific gravity of copper =8.94 g/ml 10

A = weight of coin ∆ = difference in weight of coin between weighing in air and water Coin A ∆ Measured Sp. Grav. AR % Ptolemy XII, struck “under the Romans,” Year 24 13.6048 g 1.4370 g 9.47 g/ml 4.6 g 34% Ptolemy XII, 2nd reign Year 29 13.0183 g Year 27 13.4319 g

1.4199 g 1.4124 g

9.17 g/ml 9.51 g/ml

1.9 g 15% 5.0 g 37%

Cleopatra VII Year 3 13.7579 g Year 16 14.2418 g Year 12 13.4633 g

1.4515 g 1.5323 g 1.4539 g

9.48 g/ml 9.29 g/ml 9.26 g/ml

4.8 g 35% 3.3 g 23% 2.7 g 20%

1941 USA 50c 12.4425 g 1.2015 g 10.36g/ml 91% (theoretical value = 10.34 g/ml) 1967 Kennedy 50c 11.1357 g 1.1666 g 9.55 g/ml 40% (theoretical value = 9.54 g/ml) The mix of metals was assumed to be simply copper and silver. The silver content of late Ptolemaic tetradrachms was found to approximate that of contemporary Roman silver denarii, though the range of net silver content was considerable, from 15% to 37%, and 2.0 to 5.0 grams. The low silver content strongly suggests that this is a coin of Ptolemy XII, struck after his flight from Egypt to Roman Cyprus, not Ptolemy X, the usual attribution. 11

12

** Either the first, or second Year 3 of Cleopatra VII as co-ruler with Ptolemy XIII or XIV.

22 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy XII died in 51 BC, and in Egypt was succeeded by his daughter Cleopatra, in joint reign with her brother Ptolemy XIII. The famous orator Cicero was appointed governor of Cyprus in 51/50 BC. The financial crisis continued. During his administration, two Romans, at the instigation of Brutus, loaned money to the Salaminians at an exorbitant interest rate of 48% resulting in Cicero's prosecution of Brutus' allies. The Paphos tetradrachms of the time of Cleopatra are dated Year One through Year Four, and Year Seven through Year Twenty-two (Svoronos 1815-35). Hazzard notes that the absence of any tetradrachms dated Year Five or Year Six. In the past, this has been accepted to mean that the coins were issued from 51 to 47 BC, and again from 44 to 30 BC. However, if the tetradrachms were issued continuously, a logical re-dating is in order. “It might well be considered,” wrote E. T. Newell, “that the coins were struck in his name (the co-ruler’s) as they bear the usual inscription . . .” i.e., “Ptolemy, King.” Since Ptolemy XIII, brother of Cleopatra, was co-ruler and his name appeared on the reverse legend, the regnal year, from Spring 51 to January 47, and the portrait may be taken to be his. After his death, the next of Cleopatra’s male consorts supplied the name and dating on the reverse of the tetradrachms. Important history was written during this period. While engaged in a civil war against Caesar, Pompey the Great fell into the hands of young Ptolemy XIII who had him executed. Cleopatra had herself smuggled into Caesar’s presence in a rug, and the great general found her irresistible. Plutarch wrote: So Cleopatra, taking only Apollodorus the Sicilian from among her friends, embarked in a little skiff and landed at the palace when it was already getting dark; and as it was impossible to escape notice otherwise, she stretched herself at full length inside a bed-sack, while Apollodorus tied the bed-sack up with a cord and carried it indoors to Caesar. It was by this device of Cleopatra's, it is said, that Caesar was first captivated, for she showed herself to be a bold coquette..." (XLIX) Caesar intervened in the Egyptian Civil War in favor of Cleopatra. In 47 BC, Caesar returned Cyprus to Egypt, and Ptolemy XIII drowned (or, if one believes Strabo, was executed by Caesar). The production of tetradrachms in his name was stopped at Year Four. To secure her rule with an accepted male ruler, Cleopatra married another brother, Ptolemy XIV. Eusebius wrote: After Ptolemaeus' [XIII] death, Cleopatra's younger brother, who was also called Ptolemaeus, became joint ruler with his sister, as proposed by Caesar. The next year was called the fifth year of Cleopatra and the first year of Ptolemaeus [XIV], and so it continued for the following two years, until he died. He was plotted against and killed by Cleopatra, in his 4th year, which was Cleopatra's 8th year. From then onwards Cleopatra ruled on her own. . . . While Cleopatra was virtual sole ruler, her male consort’s name was invoked when a king’s name was legally needed. While images of Cleopatra in the guise of a male are unusual, “Cleopatra of Egypt” notes a limestone stele with a male pharaoh before Isis and baby Horus naming Cleopatra. The tetradrachms depicting Cleopatra with diadem and aegis were struck

23 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

in the name of Ptolemy, beginning again with Year One, in January of 47. Ptolemy XIV was killed in June 44 BC, during his Year Four. 13 14

Base silver tetradrachms dated year 2 and 3 are of Cleopatra VII with either of her brother / husbands: Ptolemy XIII or XIV. Note the longer noses of the bottom examples. The tetradrachms struck for Ptolemy XIII and XIV are so nearly the same that they are catalogued as the same in reference books. Both have the same design, and the same run of dates, Year One through Year Four. For the same reasons, dated tetradrachms of earlier Ptolemaic kings are not easily distinguished. Svoronos 1816 and 1820, Year One and Four respectively, have a star or comet above the date, and a pellet below the mintmark. These might distinguish the tetradrachms of Ptolemy XIV from those of his older brother. Alternatively, the star may mark the comet of 44 BC. The star symbol had been used on earlier Ptolemaic coin revivals. The silver octadrachm of Ptolemy I was revived under Ptolemy V with star symbols. Morkolm (Paphos I, p. 101) uses die links to show that the 1) star symbol and 2) helmet symbols are the differentiation between 1) Year 3 issues of Ptolemy IX and Ptolemy X two years later). For Year One Svoronos notes 4 examples without star and 6 with star. For Year Four he notes 22 without star and 5 with star.

A base tetradrachm dated Year One with a star above the date. The star may show the reign of Ptolemy XIV, the second of the brothers of Cleopatra VII to serve as her husband /consort. Alternatively, it may show the famous comet at the ascension of Ptolemy XV, in June of 44 BC. Svor. 1816 (13.70g) A.E. Samuel, Ptolemaic Chronology (Munich, 1962) p. 157 presented papyri – BGU VI 1827-1829, 1832, and 1839 dated in year 30 of Ptolemy XII Auletes and Year 1 of Ptolemy XIII and Cleopatra VII. Samuel observed that BGU VI 1827 included joint dates that imply co-regency among the three monarchs. He argued that the sequence of regnal years was exactly the same for Ptolemy XIV and Cleopatra VII. Their fourth regnal year should have ended in September of 47 BC, if we follow the tables in T.C. Skeat, Reigns of the Ptolemies (Munich 1954). Samuel argued, however, that Ptolemy XIII died before the 15th of January in 47 BC (ibid. p. 169). 13

Caesar (BAI 31) alleged that the boat of Ptolemy XIII had capsized and that the king had drowned accidentally with several of his men. Since Caesar was fighting Ptolemy XIII, Strabo apparently held the general liable for the death. 14

24 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

A die study of the Year 1 to 4 tetradrachms, which should fall into two distinct groups of punches and anvils, is needed. Linkages between dies used for different dates could be paired with information about reverse stars and silver content to understand if individual punch and anvil die combinations were from the Year One to Year Four of Ptolemy XIII’s reign or the same years of Ptolemy XIV’s reign, three years later. An obverse die link between the two star issues would show that they were issued at about the same time. The Egyptian mint officials may have noted the famous comet seen at the June 44 BC funeral games of Julius Caesar. The tetradrachms of Svor. plates LVII & LVI reattributed Year Dates Svor. # # of examples Ptolemy IX, 2nd reign Year 36 Sept 13, 82 to Sept. 11 81 BC 1688 1 Berenike III Year 1 Sept 12, 81 to April 80 BC Ptolemy XI Year 1 April, 80

included with 1659

included with 1659?

Ptolemy XII, 1st reign Year 1 April 80 to Sept 11, 80 BC 1659 4 Year 2 Sept 12, 80 to Sept 11, 79 1660 10 Year 3 Sept 12, 79 to Sept 11, 78 1663 6 Year 4 Sept 12, 78 to Sept 10, 77 1665 11 Year 5 Sept 11, 77 to Sept 10, 76 1666 10 Year 6 Sept 11, 76 to Sept 10, 75 1667 12 Year 7 Sept 11, 75 to Sept 10, 74 1668 11 Year 8 Sept 11, 74 to Sept 9, 73 1669 15 Year 9 Sept 10, 73 to Sept 9, 72 1670 11 Year 10 Sept 10, 72 to Sept 9, 71 1671 11 Year 11 Sept 10, 71 to Sept 9, 70 0 Year 12 Sept 10, 70 to Sept 8, 69 1672 1 Year 13 Sept 9, 69 to Sept 8, 68 1673 1 Year 14 Sept 9, 68 to Sept 8, 67 1674 11 15 Year 15 Sept 9, 67 to Sept 8, 66 1675 5 Year 16 Sept 9, 66 to Sept 7, 65 1676 7 Year 17 Sept 8, 65 to Sept 7, 64 1677 9 Year 18 Sept 8, 64 to Sept 7, 63 1678 13 Year 19 Sept 8, 63 to Sept 7, 62 1679 18 Year 20 Sept 8, 62 to Sept 6, 61 1680 14 Year 21 Sept 7, 61 to Sept 6, 60 1681 18 Year 22 Sept 7, 60 to Sept 6, 59 1682 11 Year 23 Sept 7, 59 to Sept 6, 58 1684 6 Year 24 Sept 7, 58 to Sept 5, 57 1685 9 Year 25 Sept 6, 57 to Sept 5, 56 1686 1 Year 26 Sept 7, 56 to Sept 5, 55 0 Ptolemy XII, 2nd reign 15

* Tetradrachms on Svor. Plate LVII dated Year 14 to 25 include both Ptol. X and XII.

25 / 140

Year Year Year Year

27 28 29 30

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Sept Sept Sept Sept

6, 6, 5, 5,

55 54 53 52

to to to to

Sept 5, 54 Sept 4, 53 Sept 4, 52 Spring 51

1836 20 1837 14 1839 14 1840 15

Ptolemy XIII Year 1 Spring 51 to Sept 4, 50 BC Year 2 Sept 5, 50 to Sept 3, 49 1817 Year 3 Sept 4, 49 to Sept 3, 48 1818 Year 4 Sept 4, 48 to Jan 47 1819

4 14 15 20

Ptolemy XIV Year 1* (?) Jan 47 to Sept 3, 47 1816 6 Year 2 Sept 4, 47 to Sep 3, 46 included with 1817 Year 3 Sept 4, 46 to Sept 2, 45, hair style as Svor. 1821 inc. with 1818 Year 4* Sept 3, 45 to June 44 some 1819, 1820 5 Ptolemy XV Year 1* (?) June 44 to Sept 2, 44 1816 6 Ptolemy XV (dating of Cleopatra VII) Year 7 Sept 4, 46 to Sept 2, 45 1821 4 Year 8 Sept 3, 45 to Sept 2, 44 1822 7 Year 9 pellet above eagle, 9/3, 44 to 9/2, 43 1823 23 Year 10 Sept 3, 43 to Sept 2, 42 1824 17 Year 11 Sept 3, 42 to Sept 1, 41 1825 15 Year 12 Sept 2, 41 to Sept 1, 40 1826 16 Year 13 Sept 2, 40 to Sept 1, 39 1827 15 Year 14 Sept 2, 39 to Sept 1, 38 1828 17 Year 15 Sept 2, 38 to Aug 31, 37 1829 14 Year 16 Sept 1, 37 to Aug 31, 36 1830 32 Year 17 Sept 1, 36 to Aug 31, 35 1831 16 Year 18 Sept 1, 35 to Aug 31, 34 1832 17 Year 19 Sept 1, 34 to Aug 30, 33 1833 19 Year 20 Aug 31, 33 to Aug 30, 32 1834 14 Year 21 Aug 31, 32 to Aug 30, 31 016 Year 22 Aug 31, 31 to Aug 30, 30 1835 22

No tetradrachms of Year 21. The silver and production capacity may have been diverted to the mint for Legionary and other Antony denarii. 16

26 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy XIV is shown on a Roman Alexandrian ivory gaming counter from the Bibliothéque National. The Greek reverse inscription is: XIIII A∆EΛØOC KΛ E∏ATPAC I∆ Brother of Cleopatra, which has been taken to be the later brother. The Latin and Greek number 14 before and after the name refers to the role of the gaming counter, 1 through 15, not the Ptolemy. Cleopatra of Egypt notes that, “The omission of the king’s name suggests that it was politically risky to name the subject at the time the counter was made.” After this, Cleopatra ruled as co-ruler with her son Ptolemy XV, issuing tetradrachms dated to her own Years Seven through Twenty-two, with the usual Greek “Ptolemy, King” legend for the male ruler, her son. The dates of her coins are calculated from her ascent as queen in 51 BC. The later dates (Years 18 to 20 and 22) eliminate the dates as possible for the reign of her son and co-ruler Ptolemy XV, because he was born in 47 BC, made co-ruler in 44 BC, and killed in 30 BC. Similarly, the tetradrachms of Years 26 to 30 are from the 2nd reign of her father, Ptolemy XII. All of these tetradrachms seem to show the features of Ptolemy XII / Ptolemy XIII / Ptolemy XIV / Cleopatra VII. Their faces were probably as similar as their genetics. The rare Year 7 tetradrachms of Cleopatra present a problem. Her Year 7 was from Sept. 4, 46 to Sept 2, 45 BC. Ptolemy XIV was co-ruler with Cleopatra VII, in his penultimate Year: Three. He traveled with her to Rome in 46 BC and left with her after the Ides of March assassination of Julius Caesar. A few months later he died in his Year Four, allegedly of poison. Svoronos’ book and the ANS collection include fewer examples than any other year, suggesting that the absence of tetradrachms dated Years 5 and 6 was continued through most of Year 7. In ANSMN 1975 Otto Morkholm argues that the Year 7 tetradrachms were struck for Ptolemy XV in parallel with the Year 22 tetradrachms of Cleopatra VII. Morkholm notes papyrii with double dates Year 17 and 2 through 22 and 7. He notes two styles hair for tetradrachms and a declining quality of silver through the reign. However, the author’s visual inspection of the ANS Collection tetradrachms of this reign does not show any visible decline in silver quality over time. The two hairstyles noted by Morkholm may show the work of two die cutters. This idea is reinforced by the discovery of Year 3 tetradrachms with the unusual Year 7 hairstyle. The unusual hair-style is from 46-44 BC. The papyrii dates refer to dates of the territories in Phoenicia as supported by the dating of Cleopatra portrait bronzes from Berytus (RPC 4530) and Chalkis (RPC 4771). The Phoenician-dated coins are separated by 15 years while the co-regency of Ptolemy XV began in 44 BC, Year 9 of Cleopatra VII, a difference of 8 years. An alternate and simpler explanation for the Year 7 tetradrachms is that they were issued in the summer of 45 BC when Cleopatra VII showed greater influence than Ptolemy XIV. Ptolemy was in Rome with his sister/wife, quite firmly under her control, through Julius Caesar. Papyrii BG 6.1212, pOxy 14.1629, PSI 1098 and pBon 10 have Cleopatra’s name and Year before the name of Ptolemy XIV, without his Year. All later tetradrachms of this reign have the Year of the reign of Cleopatra VII with name of Ptolemy XV. Like these papyrus documents, the base-silver coins are marked King Ptolemy, the name of the male co-ruler, because a male was needed for legal contracts and the assured value of the coin was a contract signed by a male.

Year 3 tetradrachms of Ptolemy XIV with an unusual hairstyle, otherwise known for Year 7 of Cleopatra VII. Lanz.

27 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

28 cm granite head thought to be either Cleopatra VII or Ptolemy XV (Caesarion). The reverse of a base silver tetradrachm bears Cleopatra’s reginal date Year 16 (37/36 BC), the Paphos mintmark, along with the name and title of her eldest son.

28 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Drachm Two very small issues of base silver Cleopatra portrait drachms of about 3.0 grams were struck in Year Six and Year Eleven of her reign. This means 47/46 and 42/41 BC (Sear 7954; Svor. 1853, 1858 var.). The Greek reverse legend KΛEO∏ATPA∑ BA∑IΛI∑∑H∑ translates to, “Cleopatra Queen.” The mintmark ∏A is to the right of the eagle. The mintmark indicates the activity of the ∏A mint in Year Six, a year not known for tetradrachms. Presumably the mint was busy striking tetradrachms dated Year Two of Ptolemy XIV. RPC notes that the drachm portraits of Cleopatra seem to be younger than that on the bronzes from Alexandria. Only a few are known, and the issue must have been very small, perhaps even ceremonial. From the Paphos mintmark to the right of the eagle, an attribution to Paphos should be made.

Base silver drachm of Cleopatra VII, struck at the Paphos Mint shows similar facial features to the tetradrachms. (2.17g, porous) The Cypriot mints had a long history of striking silver denominations smaller than the tetradrachm, which were used instead of the antique large bronzes. Didrachms, drachms and hemidrachms were struck for Ptolemy V to IX, although with no regularity. Fractional silver below the hemidrachm was rarely struck. Most of this smaller denomination silver coinage has portraits attributed to the reigning monarch, not Ptolemy I. Alexandria struck no fractions of a tetradrachm, although some ∏A mintmark drachms are sometimes attributed to Alexandria. Large bronze drachms and hemidrachms played a larger change-making role in Egypt, than in Cyprus. Of 554 Ptolemaic coins recorded from Paphos II, the largest is a 40 gram bronze double-unit with lotus symbol, attributed to Ptolemy VIII or later. (It is probably Cypriot as noted by Lorber). However, the earlier, larger bronzes are commonly found in Egypt. The very rare base silver Cleopatra portrait drachm, marked with the ∏A Paphos mintmark fits into the structure of denominations on Cyprus.

29 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Full-Unit The largest bronze denomination, circulating in Cyprus during the time of Cleopatra, was a bronze unit. This coinage has the same form as those of her predecessors: the diademed and horned head of Zeus right paired with reverse of two eagles, and a symbol before. The latest style Zeus is laureate, rather than diademed and horned. On one laureate Zeus issue, there is a star before Zeus. The exact relationship between the bronze full-unit and the silver tetradrachm is not known with absolute certainty. However, calculating backward from the time of Egyptian bronze coinage of Augustus as valued by Milne, this was a diobol. Die axis is 12:00. This denomination was struck on broad, thin flans, with beveled edges. The Greek legend is “Ptolemy King.” Most Ptolemaic coins have this legend. The two eagles on the reverse are accepted by some experts as representative of the two rulers on the throne of the Ptolemaic Kingdom. There are two periods of joint rule in the late Ptolemaic Kingdom that saw the production of bronze coins with two eagles: 1) Ptolemy IX and X as co-rulers, and 2) Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XIII to XV as her co-ruler. During the time of Ptolemy IX and X, the half-unit averages 9.6 grams. Early in the reign of Cleopatra, a half-unit weighed an average of 6 grams. The use of a broad, thin flan is consistent with a later date attribution, while a shorter, thicker flan would be typical of the joint reign of Ptolemy IX and X. The ten examples of the full-unit with various symbols found at the dig at Paphos II may be a mix of both dual-reign periods. After 39 BC, a new form of the full-unit was struck. The obverse features a fairly crude, diademed and draped bust of Cleopatra VII as Aphrodite, facing right, scepter behind her shoulder, holding an infant as Eros in her arms. References call the infant Ptolemy XV (Caesarion). (RPC 3901; Sear 7957; BMC 6, page 122, #2-3; Svor. 1874.) The association of Cleopatra with Aphrodite was not particular to these coins. Julius Caesar had placed a gilded bronze statue of Cleopatra in the Forum Julium beside the cult-statue of Venus Genetrix. Plutarch wrote, “Cleopatra herself reclined beneath a canopy of cloth of gold, dressed in the character of Venus, as we see her in paintings . . .” (Antony 25.1-3). Cleopatra’s connection with Aphrodite may be responsible for her reputation as a beautiful woman. From an art-historical perspective, this is a very important obverse. It was the first use of an individual baby on a coin, and the first coin-image of Aphrodite and Eros in this position. The obverse would have been seen as Venus and Cupid to the Romans, Isis and Horus to the Egyptians. The early Christians would later adopt this woman and baby image, as “Madonna and Child,” a theme repeated in Christian art and coinage for centuries. The reverse has a double cornucopia, joined at the base, and bound with a fillet. The monogram KY∏P that stands for Cyprus appears to the right. The legend in Greek is “Cleopatra, Queen.” Collectors have long admired this rare coin. A small number are known, perhaps under twenty. Modest production may account for rarity of this type.

Rare bronze full-unit of Cleopatra VII, struck at Paphos, shows the queen holding her baby, probably Alexander Helios. (15.62g)

30 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The flan preparation for this c. 27-29 mm issue appears to have been the same as for the Alexandrian coinage of Cleopatra. Blanks were cast in moulds, drilled in a stone or clay matrix. The weight standard calculated by RPC is 16.46 grams average. RPC specimens are noted with weights from 13.95 to 18.50 grams. This closely matches the weight of the bronze full-unit in Egypt. The bronze full-unit in Egypt had similar dimensions but was marked with the denominational sign ∏ that stood for 80 copper drachms. Key elements beyond the reverse legend support the attribution of the portrait to Cleopatra VII. The facial features of Cleopatra are unusual and well known. Judging from her coins, she was not particularly attractive in the classical sense of beauty, although she was portrayed historically as one of the most beautiful woman of her era. 17 In 66 AD, Plutarch (Antony 27.2) noted Cleopatra was less pretty than she was charming: Her own beauty, . . . was in itself not altogether incomparable, nor such as to strike those who saw her. But the charm of her presence was irresistible, and there was an attraction in her person and in her talk together with a peculiar force of character which pervaded her every work and action, and laid all who associated with her under its spell. It was a delight merely to hear the sound of her voice, with which, like an instrument of many strings, she could pass from one language to another . . . Her sharp, hooked nose and heavy mandible are almost masculine family traits. The nose and chin are facial features inherited in part from her ancestor Ptolemy I Soter, whose rather grotesque portraits also show a prominent nose and a very large chin. Over 1500 years after Plutarch, Blaise Pascal would write, "If the nose of Cleopatra had been a little shorter, the whole face of the world would have been changed." The unusual nose of Cleopatra is depicted in several different ways on coins. “Cleopatra of Egypt” notes, . . . coins do not show the same nose in profile. In Alexandria the minters portrayed a straight nose with nostrils that are a little over-prominent, in Askalon the nose is long and pointed while in Antioch it is boney, almost ‘Bourbonic’. How can this be? Let us recall the observations made above: as with pictures, coins transform the model. The squared chin of Cleopatra is perhaps her strongest portrait feature. With the strength of her chin, her mouth is slightly down-turned. Considering Cleopatra’s large nose and chin, the assimilation to Aphrodite, Goddess of Beauty, with the Queen’s features is a rather difficult one, though Plutarch cites the connection from multiple sources. Aphrodite was an important Goddess on Cyprus, with a very important temple at Paphos. Tradition says that the Goddess came ashore for the first time near the city, born of the waves and the seafoam. On the full-units, the Queen’s chin is somewhat reduced, but not eliminated. Playfully, one can say that the rather crude Cypriot bronze portrait of Cleopatra VII is the ugly, Greek Ptolemy I Soter combined with the pretty Goddess of Beauty, Aphrodite! There was exceptionally heavy intermarriage among her Greek-Ptolemaic ancestors, generally with brother marrying sister. These incestuous relationships produced heirs. The only ancestors of Cleopatra outside of the direct dynastic descendants of Ptolemy I Soter were Arsinöe I, Berenike II and Cleopatra I; each of who was each descended from the royal houses of other generals of Alexander. All this meant that Ptolemy I Soter, while eight to ten generations back, was an ancestor of Cleopatra VII in so many branches of her family tree During the second century AD, Galen believed Cleopatra had written a study on cosmetics. He quoted from it in De Compositione Medicamentorum 12. 403-4 “Kuhn.” 17

31 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

that it was as if he were only four generations back. His genetic contribution to the last Greek Queen of Egypt was high, equal to that of a great-great-grandfather.2 Cleopatra’s lips were rather full, leading a small and probably incorrect minority of recent revisionist scholars to suggest that she had some African ancestry in addition to the Greek background. Her well-documented ancestry is almost 100% Macedonian Greek. The last Ptolemaic Queen’s hair is portrayed as long and straight, gathered at a round bun behind the head, a hairstyle of the time. On Roman coins, contemporary Imperial women such as Fulvia, “Octavia,” Julia, and Livia are shown similarly coifed. Livia, wife of Octavian, was considered to be of similar (if longer-lasting) beauty. For style of the Cypriot bronze coinage, just as important as chronological descent from earlier Ptolemaic coinage, is the relation to that of contemporary neighboring states, all of which underwent fundamental changes in c. 38 BC. The important geographical neighbors and trading partners of Cyprus included Syria, the Roman Empire, and Cilicia. Although further in distance, on the basis of trade, Egypt should be included in this list. Portraits on silver, electrum and gold coinage, sometimes in the guise of Gods such as Zeus, and perhaps Hercules, were introduced during late Classical times, perhaps first in Lycia, Caria or Macedon. The use of the portrait of the ruler likened to a Divine Being. Coin portraits lifted that ruler above other mortals. Such portraits were an early argument for “the divine right of kings.” The fragile control of one man over another was more justifiable if the controller was born to rule. Disobeying an agent of the Gods was blasphemy. Ancient writers connected phenomena such as comets, and natural disasters with the death of rulers, further impressing the semi-divine nature of the ruler. Portraits on coins brought the ruler closer to being a God, in the minds of his subjects. Portraits on bronze appeared later than portraits on precious metal. Gods and Goddesses, including deified past rulers such as Alexander the Great, appeared on the obverse of most other Hellenistic bronzes, not the current ruler’s portrait. Only Seleukid Syria (and kingdoms to its East) had long portrayed current rulers on bronze coinage. However in c. 38 BC, abruptly, most rulers of the region began to place their own portraits on their bronze coinage. The Romans began portrait silver coinage showing a portrait of a living person with Julius Caesar (Crawford 480/2a-c) in January 44 BC, and Antony and Octavian both extended the trend to bronze coinage in about 38 BC. Antony’s Fleet coinage (RPC 1453-1470, 4088-4093; was begun in c. 38 BC, with portraits of Antony, one of his wives, and a young man. Ephesos issued portrait bronzes (RPC 2569-2574) for the Second Triumvirate in c. 38 BC. An Italian Mint, and several irregular mints in Italy, Spain, and Gaul, struck many portrait dupondii of Octavian (RPC 620, 621) starting in c. 38 BC. Antony’s general Sosius, governor of Syria, issued portrait coins in Cilicia or Syria (RPC 4082, 4083, 5409, 5410) in c. 38

32 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

BC.18 Tarkondimotus I, from the Kingdom of Cilicia began the practice of portrait bronze coinage in c. 39 BC (RPC 3871), in the mainland physically closest to Cyprus. Kos struck bronze with the portrait of Nikais (RPC 2724-2731) at this time or later. Of important contemporary rulers in the region, only Herod the Great of Judaea struck only non-portrait bronzes. The Jews had a strong religious and cultural bias against portraits of kings on coins. Beginning in about 38 BC, Cleopatra VII struck bronze portrait coins in Cyprus, the Greek naval port of Patrae, and several Syrian cities she controlled: Orothosia; Tripolis, Berytus, Akko-Ptolemais, Dora, Chalkis and Damascus. The Syrian bronzes weigh 6-9 grams, probably serving their respective cities as “local obols,” small change where Antioch or Ptolemaic

18

Brass 20 mm from Cilicia or Syria attributed here to Gaius Sosius. (6.84g) While previously attributed to a Macedonian mint with a portrait of Brutus (Friedlander) or Julius Caesar (Grant), RPC presents a case for a Cilician or Syrian origin, supported by find data, and a portrait of Octavian (?), although the portrait is quite different than those of Octavian from elsewhere. Issues with a similar portrait, likely by the same die-cutter include the PRINCEPS FELIX coinage RPC4082-3 from Cilicia. Both sets of issues portray Sosius, a leading general of Marc Antony. Sosius was quaestor (symbolized on this coinage with a Q and the symbols of the office) in 39 BC. The island of Zacynthus, a fleet station of Antony’s, issued coins in the name of C SOSIVS Q (RPC1290), C SOSIVS IMP (RPC1291), C SOSIVS COS DESIG (RPC1292), and C SOSIVS COS (RPC1293). The first of these issues coincides with dating of this coin. Note that both include the title “Q.” RPC I Supplement #5410 notes an example of this portrait coinage with the same star shaped countermark as non-portrait coins in the name of Sosius from Zacynthus. According to the Treaty of Brundisium, Antony and Octavian agreed that when neither of them was consul, one of their supporters of each would be. Sosius became Consul Designate for 32 BC. He was governor of Syria in 38 BC. Antony supported Herod the Great against his rival Antigonus. Sosius commanded the Roman forces in support of Herod’s claim, as noted by Josephus. Sosius captured the island and town of Aradus in 38 BC and Jerusalem in July of 37 BC, for which he was celebrated Imperator. Josephus notes that he was about to allow the soldiers to loot the fallen city and slaughter its inhabitants, when Herod intervened. Herod asked, if the Romans, by emptying the city of money and men, had a mind to leave him to become king of a desert? Herod paid the troops a donative instead. Officers received a larger gift. Sosius himself received a “most royal bounty.” Sosius called the defeated king the feminine name “Antigona” and imprisoned him for Antony to execute later. In 36 BC Sosius assisted Octavian and Agrippa against Sextus Pompey and afterward probably stayed in Rome, where he celebrated a triumph in Rome in 34 BC and was consul along with Domitianus Ahenobarbus in 32 BC. During his consulship, he rebuilt the Temple of Apollo, which had been constructed in 431 BC. He introduced a measure in the Senate to censure Octavian, (this sounds almost modern) but a tribune vetoed it. With some 300 senators, Sosius fled Octavian and Rome. At Actium in 31 BC, he commanded the left wing of Antony’s naval forces. This wing of heavy ships entered the battle first, but was overwhelmed by the smaller, faster ships of Agrippa, commander of Octavian’s fleet. Meanwhile, Cleopatra, then Antony escaped through the opening created by the movement. Sosius fought on, surrendered and was spared by Octavian. Further exploration of this coinage is underway by other numismatists. The connection of the Q issue with the PRINCEPS FELIX issue is quite strong. Augustus received the title Princeps Senatus (First among the Senate) in 23 BC. However, Augustus did not use the title on coinage, nor did he use the title Questor. Is it possible that Gaius Sosius styled himself Princeps Felix? Given the important positions of Gaius Sosius, the portrait differences from Augustus, the probable Imperatorial date of this coinage, and the geography of finds, the attribution to Gaius Sosius has some basis

33 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

tetradrachms were accepted. Patrae may have struck silver while Corinth may have issued bronzes.19 Askalon struck some small silver and bronze coins.20 Portrait countermarks on slightly earlier bronzes, bearing a resemblance to the famous Queen, are known from: Chalkis, Damascus, Laodikae, Seleukia and just outside (?) Antioch. 21 Cleopatra also appears on bronze coins of Egypt, the first ruler to appear on any Ptolemaic bronze since Ptolemy VI portrait issues in Cyprus. RPC notes that portraits on these bronzes appear older than the silver drachm portraits of Year 11, 42/41 BC. The abrupt shift in c. 38 BC from divine portraits on bronze coins to portraits of the actual people in power illustrates the political, social, and economic influence of Rome on the lands Rome did not rule directly. Other books consider the baby held in the arms of Cleopatra to be Caesarion, who was born in 47 BC. However, presumably the full-unit from Paphos probably was issued in parallel with the same denomination in Alexandria. Use of regal portraits on bronze began in a number of Eastern kingdoms influenced by Rome in about 38 BC. Since c. 38 BC is the date of this issue, this suggests that either of her sons by Marc Antony, Alexander Helios (born 40 BC) or Ptolemy Philadelphus (born 36 BC) may have been intended. In 34 BC, Antony’s “Donations of Alexandria” gave specific lands to each of Cleopatra’s children. Caesarion received the Kingdom of Cyprus. After the death of Cleopatra, Caesarion was executed. Alexander Helios and Ptolemy Philadelphus were spared and sent to Rome to be raised by their stepmother Octavia. Dio 19

9.60g. Corinth bronzes from 34-31 BC may show Cleopatra as Aphrodite.

5.62g.

Corinth issued bronzes dated 34-31 BC by RPC 1127 and 1128. RPC calls the diademed portraits Aphrodite. The two coins have different obverse hair-styles, both with bun behind. One has a diadem. Both have almond-shaped eyes and a hooked-nose with curved nostrils like Cleopatra from Egypt. The upturned mouth is non-Egyptian and the opposite of the usual down-turned mouth of Cleopatra. The neck shows three rolls of fat, commonly referred to as “Venus rings.” These are common on Ptolemaic royal women from the second century BC and later. The Basalt statue of Cleopatra VII in the Rosicrucian Museum has similar “Venus rings” though its nose has been restored. Tripolis bronzes of Cleopatra show this feature, as do silver tetradrachms of Antioch and especially Askalon. RPC assigns #1124 a portrait bronze of Antony to the governor or Corinth before this one. Like the Patrae silver, a connection to Cleopatra can be made by time and location. The upturned mouth is unexpected. Can these two Corinth bronze issues be attributed to Cleopatra as a smiling Aphrodite? The dated coinage of Askalon in Palestine provides a good comparison with the Cypriot coinage. Rare dated (50/49 and 39/38 BC) portrait tetradrachms (BMC 20, S6077) are generally accepted as Cleopatra VII, though RPC notes: “Askalon was not part of her kingdom, not even (later) after Antony’s grant to her of Phoenicia and Palestine. Brett interpreted them as homage to Cleopatra to enlist her support . . .” during troubled times. (Damascus was not mentioned in “The Donations of Alexandria” either). BMC 16 dated Year 74 =- 31/30 BC Æ23 (obol) has Zeus (?) head right on the obverse, like its Cypriot counterpart. The reverse has a similar eagle and palm. Undated silver coins of c. 1.1 grams (BMC 1) show a resemblance to the Cypriot Æ10’s of Cleopatra. If the silver content of the 1.1 g issue is 90%, then it contained as much silver as a 1/4 of a Cypriot-Egyptian tetradrachm, making the small silver coin a drachm. The similar bronze issue (BMC 3 and 9, with and without monogram) has beveled edges and a similar size. BMC and Sear consider the undated issues as pre-104 BC, but is a date of c. 38 BC possible? The small bronzes from Askalon are scarce. 20

Countermarks from territories controlled by Cleopatra seem to show her portrait. These cities include: Chalkis, Antioch (under Romans and Parthians), Seleukia and Laodikea. Coinage of c. 48 to 35 BC, with countermarks of female bust or head right, some attributed to Apollo in RPC. All were presumably for local circulation. 21

34 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cassius 51.15 has been read in two ways: that the brothers were either simply spared in 30 BC for the betrothal of their sister Cleopatra Selene to Juba II, or released into the custody of Cleopatra Selene on their marriage in c. 23 BC. After this mention, the sons of Cleopatra died or disappeared from histories. Because the issue is from c. 38 BC, the baby held by Cleopatra on the full-unit was probably Alexander Helios.

Cleopatra and her baby shown as Isis and Horus on a Cypriot full-unit from the British Museum. An earlier statue of Isis nursing Horus.

35 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Half-Unit A second bronze denomination from Cyprus in the time of Cleopatra is noted by RPC I and RPC I Supplement. (RPC 3902 and 3903. More varieties noted in RPC Supplement). This coin was a half-unit, equal to the 8.5-gram, bronze half-unit of Alexandria. The obverse features the traditional horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. This obverse type appeared on Ptolemaic bronze for over 200 years. Die axis is generally 12:00. One or two eagles grace the reverse. As noted by RPC I Supplement, other half-unit coins with different symbols are perhaps from this time period as well. It is not initially clear which half-unit issues are certainly Cleopatra’s, for this thin-flan issue, with a variety of symbols, seems to have been issued from the time of Ptolemy VIII onward. Issues from the same mint have a variety of symbols, before the eagle(s). Nicolaou assigns the dumpy Æ19 or so, with two eagles and a cornucopia before the eagles to Ptolemy IX. (Paphos II, 318-356). Those with the same symbol, and a single eagle (Paphos II, 400-405) are assigned to Ptolemy, King of Cyprus, an attribution which is interpreted here as his brother, Ptolemy XII. The cornucopia symbol appears in the exact same place on the bronze coinage of Cleopatra VII in Egypt, but is a very common Ptolemaic symbol. As suggested by collector Richard Pincock, for Ptolemaic bronze coins a single eagle meant a single ruler on the throne. Two eagles meant two rulers. If this rule applies, the slightly lighter half-units with a single eagle should be issues of Ptolemy XII from 80 to 51 BC. The most common of half-units at Paphos II have the headdress of Isis before two eagles (Svoronos 1843, Sear 7950), a symbol that also appears on the reverse of all the tetradrachms issued with ∏A mintmark after 55 BC. Nicolaou notes that the thinner and lighter fabric of the headdress of Isis symbol issues appear later than other half-units, and she assigns the twoeagle examples to the reign of Cleopatra VII. This weight reduction roughly parallels the reduction in tetradrachm silver content of 55 BC and the subsequent debasement near the time of Actium. The coins with a pair of eagles are from a period when two rulers occupied the throne, presumably Cleopatra and a co-ruler. Because inflation was a factor in the economy of late Ptolemaic Cyprus, an analysis of this entire issue, by reverse symbol provides a time-line, framed by issues of known date. Based on un-starred weights given in Svoronos, issues of known dates of Ptolemy V, VI and VIII are 11.8, 11.4, and 11.1 grams per obol. The issues with Aphrodite statue reverse of Ptolemy V had an average obol of 11.8 grams. A Ptolemy VI Æ29 with lotus symbol and EYΛ between the legs of the eagle has the name Ptolemy effaced, apparently from the die. This diobol weighs 23.8 g and is dated to the 168 BC invasion of Antiochus IV. Analysis of the weights provided by Svoronos for 1640 and 1642-1644 suggests that an average obol was still 11.4 grams during the reign of Ptolemy VIII Eueregetes, during his rule as King of Kyrene, c. 150-145 BC. Large bronzes (which were drachms) average near 70 g. These examples were selected because the use of the name Eueregetes in the legend firmly connects them to the reign of Ptolemy VIII Eueregetes, c. 150-145 BC. The double eagles of Svoronos 1694-1697; 1699-1701 identify these large bronzes as from the joint reign of Ptolemy IX and Cleopatra III. Subsequent obols would weigh equal or less because of Gresham’s Law. Ruler

Svor. #

# in Svor. Avg g/obol Reverse

Ptol. V 1005-1009 47 11.8g Aphrodite statue stg. Ptol. VI 1395-1401 23 11.4g EYΛ between legs Ptol. VIII 1640, 42-44, 49 36 11.1g Eueregetes Ptol VIII 1621-1629 31 9.2g Dated Æ24-25 Ptol. IX&C3 1694-7, 1699, 1701 11 9.6g Two eagles

36 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Details are included in the endnotes.13 Some dated half-units, with lotus symbol and dates KC to ΛC and MA (which means Years 26 to 36 and 41) should be assigned to Ptolemy VIII. He was the only ruler of this time to reign over 36 years. Ptolemy VIII died in the 54th year of his reign. The name Eueregetes is omitted. There were no coins in the name of Eueregetes found at Paphos II, because this is a title he used on Kyrene bronze only. The style is cruder than the drachm or obol of Ptolemy VIII Eueregetes. There was parallel inflation in the silver content of the tetradrachm. The bronze half-unit flans are about 25% lighter. The blanks were produced by a faster method. Svoronos notes dates from 26 to 30, 33 to 36 and 41 (Svor. 1621-1631). Undated issues that share the helmet symbol of some dated issues are probably from the same period. Because of inflation, the lighter average weight obol symbols are later than the lotus and date series.

The dated issues with single eagle are from the late reign of Ptolemy VIII. This example is dated Year 34, 136/5 BC. This logic assumes that the symbols were issued in series, rather than in parallel. The thinflan obols, uncovered in the dig at Paphos II are grouped by reverse symbol in the following table. The helmet symbol appears on some dated issues of Ptolemy VIII. The declining sorted average of the weights of examples provides a timeline for the issues of this denomination. Paphos half-units (obols) by symbol, with new attributions Symbol # found at Ruler, est. date Paphos II Avg. mass22 Hercules obverse. / 1 eagle Ptolemy VI or VIII,

0

11.6g23

KY∏P monogram, 2 eagles, scepter 0 9.9g24 Ptolemy VIII and Cleopatra II, joint reign, c. 150 BC No symbol, 2 eagles 0 9.5g25 Ptolemy VIII and Cleo. II, joint reign, c. 150 BC Lotus and date, 1 eagle 9 8.4g Ptolemy VIII, Year 26 to 36, 41 = 144-134, 130/129 BC Average weight includes Paphos II examples noted as corroded or worn, but not any that are chipped or fragmented. Weight averages lower than Svoronos or RPC. 22

23

Svoronos data, median.

24

RPC I 3902, only 2 examples.

25

Private collections.

37 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Helmet, 1 eagle Ptolemy VIII

5

Cornucopia, 1 eagle Ptolemy VIII to IX, c. 130-110 BC

6

7.4g 7.4g

Aphlaston (Stern ornament), 1 eagle 13 Ptolemy IX, 116-106, 88-80 BC T & Star, 1 eagle Ptolemy XII, 1st reign, 80-58 BC

15

6.2g

Delta & Star, 1 eagle 3 Ptolemy XII, late 1st reign, c. 60 BC KY∏P monogram, 1 eagle, palm branch Ptolemy XII, 2nd reign, c. 55-51 BC

6.8g

5.3g

6

5.9g

Headdress of Isis, 2 eagles 36 5.2g Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XIII, XIV or XV, c. 51-33 BC Headdress over downward KY∏P monogram, 2 eagles Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV, 6 4.5g Final Ptolemaic issue, c. 32-31 BC. On some half-units, the KY∏P Cyprus monogram, as on the full-unit, appears at the left. RPC 3903. This was monogram for Cyprus. It was first used on gold reduced staters of Ptolemy I (Svoronos 102 (attributed to Kyrene) and used into Byzantine times (Sear Byzantine 849). On this issue, a transverse palm branch of Victory appears behind the eagle. The symbols and monogram connect the issue to the tetradrachms of Ptolemy XII to XV and Cleopatra discussed above, which show a similar transverse palm branch and the headdress of Isis. The legend reads “Ptolemy, King” and should be connected to Ptolemy XII because of the single eagle. Rare heavier double eagle examples, noted as RPC 3902 may have a transverse scepter instead of the palm. The heavy weight of the two examples known to RPC suggests that these are Ptolemy VIII half-units. A single eagle, star symbol without date, delta or T is known. This symbol appears on dated obols of Ptolemy VIII, Year 28. At 9.1 g a date of c. 142 BC is likely.

Bronze half-unit of Ptolemy XII with KY∏P monogram struck at Paphos. The single eagle indicates a single monarch. Monogram is for Cyprus. Weight standard and palm branch connect the issue to the second reign of Ptolemy XII. (9.05g, a heavy example)

38 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Half-units of Cleopatra and Ptolemy XV struck on a typical thin planchet. (7.15g, 6.29g) On the second example, the headdress of Isis is over a downward KY∏P monogram. The low average weight of this issue suggests it is the final issue, c. 31 BC. The thinnest and lightest of this issue has two eagles. To the left is the headdress of Isis symbol. Below the headdress is a monogram. Cox and Nicolaou note this monogram is a downward KY∏P monogram. Large and small monogram varieties exist. The small monograms are on flans of average 15% lower weight. Because the issue with two eagles, headdress and monogram is lightest, it is presumably the last in the series of half-units. The diameter of this coinage, at 25 mm, is nearly that of the full-unit, although the weight is half. Flan preparation for the half-unit was similar, although the casting matrix must have been much shallower. Several moulds and mould fragments from this denomination were found at the House of Dionysos.26 Casting broad, thin flans of consistent weight was very difficult, resulting in high weight variance. Many of these thin coins have casting voids, striking cracks and edge splits. Examples of the half-unit are noted from 3.01 grams to 8.85 grams, but a worn example at Paphos II with two eagles and the Isis headdress symbol, weighs 2.31 grams, perhaps on a flan intended for a quarter-unit. The dates given here are later than those by Svoronos. The vast bronze coinage produced by the en chapelete method is generally of later date than previously attributed by Svoronos and others.

En chapelete coinage, struck on cast flans from late in the reign of Ptolemy VIII to that of Cleopatra VII, c. 150 – 30 BC. Coin types can be dated by their average weight per obol.

Paphos II, p. 131 footnotes notes that nine additional moulds were found at excavations at the excavations of the Polish mission at Nea Paphos; two more at the Byzantine Castle of Sranda Kolones, and three fragments at the House of Orpheus. 26

39 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Quarter-Unit A third bronze denomination was a quarter-unit. Under previous reigns this denomination paired the head of Zeus-Ammon with one eagle on the reverse, some with a lotus bud or other symbol before the eagle (Svoronos 1638-1639). The Greek reverse legend reads, “Ptolemy, King.” The weight of worn examples of this denomination averages about four grams, declining by issue over time. The bronze coinage produced by the en chapelete method is generally later than previously attributed by Svoronos and others. The single eagle on these excludes striking during the reign of Cleopatra, who always ruled with a male coruler.

Bronze quarter-unit of Cleopatra VII struck at Paphos. (3.13g) Remains of the statue of Zeus Salamis. In 38 BC during the reign of Cleopatra new types of this denomination were issued. The obverse of this type featured the laureate, not diademed nor horned, head of Zeus right. This was a stylistic departure from previous diademed and horned Zeus-Ammon heads. Die axis is generally 12:00. The reverse has Zeus standing head to left, holding ears of grain on a single stalk (?) in his left hand and a scepter in his right hand, and a star above his head. The unusual pose for Zeus was apparently taken from a statue of the God. The statue of Zeus Salaminios appears in this pose on the coins of Augustus and later Roman rulers. On the Roman issues, Zeus holds a patera, and the scepter is eagle-tipped. This statue stood in a temple on the Acropolis of Salamis, which was re-built by Augustus in c. 22 BC, although the statue may have been older, after the Zeus of Pheidias. The reverse of the coin is far less likely the Zeus Plienus of Paphos (Zeus the Protector, of Paphos). Oddly, there is no reverse legend, unique among Ptolemaic coins, which otherwise all name a ruler. (BMC Ptolemies -; Svor. 1842; SNG Cop. -; RPC -; RPC Supplement mentions Paphos II; Cox, Excavations at Curium, 128; Lichochka, Un type de Zeus sur les monnaies hellenistiques de Nea paphos, 5-6 (dated to mid-1st century BC); Museum of the History of Cypriot Coinage, Coin catalogue, Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, Nicosia 1996 Ch.11, coin #35 (as Cleopatra VII); Nicolaou, Paphos II, #469-509, pp. 114-116 (late reign of Cleopatra VII); American Expedition to Idalion Cyprus 1973-1980 (probably time of Cleopatra VII). While scarce overall, the coin is common on Cyprus and is noted in BMC Cyprus and several Cypriot numismatic publications, dated there to the time of Cleopatra VII. This type was the second most common found in the excavations recorded in Idalion, Paphos II20 and Curium. The diameter is about 17 mm. The average weight of less worn examples is about 3.7 grams, with weights varying from 4.3 grams to 1.5 grams. The examples weighing 1.5 grams were perhaps struck on flans prepared for the eighth-unit, although the dies are smaller. Flan preparation is similar to that of the full-unit. Like the half-unit, the issue is struck on flans without a centering mark. The edges are sometimes untrimmed leaving casting sprues and mould overflow.

40 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

There are a variety of styles for this issue. The most common style has a large Zeus head. One of the most attractive has a very compact head of Zeus of attractive style, with a large bushy beard. Others are struck from crude dies.

Another example, of a crude style. (2.83g) A fourth variety was struck on very small flans. It has hair engraved more delicately, in a style very similar to the laurel leaves in the crown. This obverse is often paired with a smaller Zeus standing reverse die. The dotting of the border is widely spaced. The small module shows the latest date in the series, perhaps reflecting an inflationary spike after the battle of Actium.

Another example of finer late style on a typical light flan. (1.52g)

41 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Eighth-Unit The smallest common denomination of Cleopatra VII’s rule in Cyprus was the bronze eighth-unit. Under previous reigns, this denomination paired the head of Zeus-Ammon with one eagle on the reverse. The Greek reverse legend reads, “Ptolemy, King.” A symbol before the eagle indicates the time period, but perhaps not the reign. Several symbols mirror those on half-unit coins. Weight of this denomination averages about 2 grams. Some of this type may have been struck during the first years of the reign of Cleopatra. In about 38 BC, new types of this denomination were issued. Types are similar to that of the full-unit. The obverse features the diademed and draped bust of Cleopatra VII as Aphrodite right. Die axis is generally 12:00. The reverse shows a double, or rarely (if ever) a single, cornucopia, bound at the base with a fillet. The Greek legend reads, “Ptolemy, King.” (S7850; Svor. 1160 (double cornucopia); Svor. 1161 (one cornucopia); SNG Cop. 648 (flan with squared edges); SNG Cop. 649 (flan with beveled edges) BMC 3. All these references list the coin as issued by Ptolemy IV, with the portrait of Arsinöe III, his sister and wife, whose portrait appears on some rare gold octadrachms. This small denomination is the most common of the eight denominations struck under Cleopatra VII in Cyprus. Paphos II notes that 13% of all the Ptolemaic Cyprus coins found are this type, making it the most plentiful ancient coin in the region of the capital. The Idalion dig reported 28% of the 25 Ptolemaic coins recorded. At Curium, Cox recorded 10%, also the most common type found. It seems far more likely that this was an issue of Cleopatra VII, not Arsinöe III.

Bronze eighth-unit of Cleopatra VII struck at Paphos. (1.35g) The diameter of this type is about 10 mm. The average weight of unworn examples is 1.7 grams, with weights varying from 0.6 grams to 2.6 grams. Over 90% of the flans are of typical Ptolemaic fabric, with beveled edges, struck on flans cast in a matrix drilled in stone. A small percentage of the issue was struck on flans apparently cut from a rod, not cast. SNG Cop. 648 notes “flan with squared edges” while SNG Cop. 649 is “flan with beveled edges.” Nicolaou suggests that instead, “these may have been cast from moulds with deeper depressions.” The rod-cut minting technique does suggest Syrian influence, and the possibility of an auxiliary mint. Where is this “Syrian flan style” mint? Salamis, on the coast near Syria is a possibility. Under Tiberius, both Paphos and Salamis produced coins, with Paphos producing the larger share. Cox notes that about one third of this type found at Curium was cut from a rod. If correct, this much higher figure indicates that mint for the rod-cut examples was nearby to Curium.

42 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

A bronze eighth-unit struck on a flan cut from a rod. SNG Cop. 648. (2.09g) The link between the quarter-unit and the eighth-unit is strong, and has been noted by both Cox and Nicolaou. Both types were struck on similarly cast flans. Neither has a centering dimple. Both often appear on ragged flans, with sprues. The weight standard of the quarter is double that of the eighth. The variation in weight is similar. The sprues and weight variation eliminates the former attributed date of c. 205 BC, because coins of this period have little weight variation. The regular flans of the Ptolemy V Cypriot issue with a cult statue of Aphrodite on the reverse make an interesting comparison. The number known for the quarter-unit and eighth-unit issues suggests a large issue at the time. 110 and 41 of the two respective types were found at the excavations at Neo Paphos (Paphos II), making them the two most plentiful issues found. The third most common (36) is the half-unit with two eagles and the headdress of Isis. The very large numbers found also connect these issues. The excavations at Curium (Cox) give similar data, with the same three Ptolemaic coins as the most common. (32, 21 and 18 examples) “The American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus” reported 7, 3 and 1 specimens. All earlier Ptolemaic Cyprus bronzes are, by comparison, scarce. Recall that according to Plutarch, Cato took more treasures to Rome from Cyprus than Pompey brought back from all his wars. A few years earlier, Ptolemy X had left his fortune to Rome. Similar smaller transfers from Egypt to more powerful Rome took place on a regular basis. The need for mark-up on bronze coinage in the time of Cleopatra would be great. As with post-World War I Germany, the outflow of goods from Egypt and her possessions was rapid, producing inflation. Striking coins with high seigniorage (mark-up over the cost of the metal) was one way for the government to collect goods and services from their people to pay foreign debts. Of a similar scale (13 mm long) oval blue glass intaglio from the British Museum “Cleopatra of Egypt” writes: The portrait features are relatively clear and show a full face, with straight nose and a strong chin with a downturned mouth. It is, however, the hairstyle and broad diadem in particular that indicate that this representation is of Cleopatra VII. Portrait features are often distorted when produced on such a small scale. There are a variety of portrait styles for the issue, which was produced from a large variety of both obverse and reverse dies. On many examples, Cleopatra’s portrait is similar to that on the full-unit. On others, it resembles that on Egyptian full-units and half-units. The portraits that look like the Egyptian issues are either compact or broad. Other portraits are pretty, almost Barbie-like, more in the style of Arsinöe III gold. Perhaps it is from this style portrait, that previous attributions to the time of Ptolemy IV were made.

43 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Another eighth-unit with a “pretty style” portrait. (2.32g)

Small shallow-relief portrait on a flan “cut from a bar.” (1.99g) Another portrait style is crude, on small, thick flans, with similarities to the bronze portraits of Cleopatra from Chalkis and Damascus. Yet another style is even cruder, and also struck on small, thick flans.

Another bronze eighth-unit, of cruder style on a dumpy flan. (2.23g) The variety of the tiny Cypriot bronze Cleopatra VII portraits is startling. “Cleopatra of Egypt” notes: Cleopatra’s portrait was clearly manipulated by the queen herself, most likely also by Antony, and evidently by her worshippers, her admirers and especially her detractors. Sadly for those who seek the secret of her personal allure, the more we study Cleopatra’s surviving images, the less certain we may be of her looks.

44 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The flans of Cypriot bronze issues of Ptolemy IX and later are ragged, of variable weight and lack the indented centering marks of earlier issues. A lathing process made the centering dimples of early Ptolemaic bronzes. These factors argue for a date after Ptolemy IX, although flan characteristics do not date the issue precisely. A raised central bump should not be confused with an indentation. The indentation on early Ptolemaic flans is an artifact of the lathing process. The raised central bump on late Ptolemaic flans is a result of the production of the casting mould. Both the central indent and the central bump occur at the center but are made by different methods. Rather than assigning this coinage to Cleopatra VII or Ptolemy IV, it could be argued that they belong to Ptolemy IX or X. This was also a time of significant bronze coinage in Cyprus. Half-units and quarter-units with eagle reverses date to this period. The Cypriot denominations of Ptolemy IX and X are similar to those of Ptolemy XII and Cleopatra VII. The quarter-units with Zeus / Zeus have no reverse legend, a unique feature in the Ptolemaic series. Lack of the typical reverse legend, “Ptolemy King” suggests that the issue may have been struck under an authority not named Ptolemy. Perhaps some of these were coined under the Romans (58-48 BC), with the types continued under Cleopatra VII. It would be a surprising indeed if there was almost no bronze coinage on the island of Cyprus between 58 and 27 BC, and an attribution of these two connected types to Ptolemy XII means the gap would be this large. Further, the distinctive portrait of Cleopatra VII, with the strong links to portraits from Egypt and Syria dates the eighth-units to her reign (51 to 30 BC). The exact hairstyle of the eighth-units is not used for Cleopatra on any coinage except the full-unit noted above, which is also from Paphos at this time. Likewise the diadem and occasional scepter connect the two denominations. The lack of prettiness in the portrait challenges an alternative attribution to simply “bust of Aphrodite.” This issue would have to be Aphrodite me to megalo sagoni, “Aphrodite of the big chin” or Aphrodite me te megale mete, “Aphrodite of the big nose.” No earring is visible. The diadem and scepter are unusual for Aphrodite. There are no portraits of Aphrodite on previous Ptolemaic coins, with the exception of a Cypriot issue under Ptolemy I Soter as Satrap, while there are portraits of several women rulers, sometimes in the guise of the goddess Isis. Powerful third century BC Queens Arsinöe II and Berenike II each appear on many coins as queen in their own right, not assimilated to any goddess. Arsinöe III as Queen is known for some rare gold octadrachms. A unique Paphos Mint Cleopatra I portrait gold octadrachm is (Leu, April 1978, #180) now in the British Museum. Cleopatra II and III are shows as Isis on bronze coins. No other Ptolemaic female ruler was of enough significance to appear on coinage during the reigns of Ptolemy VIII, IX, X and XII, a period of one hundred years. After the death of Cleopatra VII, the broad political changes in Ptolemaic possessions preclude the ongoing issue of Ptolemaic coins. Of course, dating a coin on the basis of portraiture alone, without confirming inscription, can never be absolute. The old Svoronos attribution accepted by the later references of #1160-1162 to Arsinöe III 160 years prior to Cleopatra VII was made on far less supporting evidence. A number of other late Hellenistic and early Roman Provincial portrait coins are similarly attributed, solely on the basis of mint, time period and portrait.

45 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Tiny Sixteenth-Unit A fifth Cypriot bronze denomination during this time was the tiny sixteenth-unit. Two varieties were issued during the late reign of Cleopatra, c. 38-30 BC. The diameter of these tiny coins is about 8 mm. They weigh about 0.8 grams, with weights known from 0.4 to 1.5 grams. The flans have a fabric similar to the quarter-unit and eighth-unit flans. Most are cast though some appear to be “cut from a bar.” The first variety has a portrait similar to the eighth-unit, though on a smaller scale. The reverse has an eagle standing right. The type is recorded as Svor. 1162. While Nicolaou writes of these, “it differs in type and fabric from the Cypriot Arsinöe III type and may not be Cypriot” she is probably mistaken. Cox calls them Cypriot. The type is found only on Cyprus. The flan and style is similar to Svor. 1160.

Bronze sixteenth-unit of Cleopatra VII struck at Paphos. (0.92g) The second type is unconventional for any Ptolemaic coinage, except the late coinage of the time of Cleopatra VII. The stylistic link with the eighth-unit is strong. The obverse of this tiny coin features a winged thunderbolt, with five rays on each side. The reverse has an eagle standing left, with the usual partial Greek legend, “Ptolemy, King” (Svoronos 1246 as Ptolemy V). An earlier attribution would require that this scarce issue be very common, for several of these tiny bronzes would have been required to make the smallest denomination in common use during other times.27

Tiny bronze sixteenth-unit of Cleopatra VII, the smallest coin of the Ptolemies. (0.73g)

A numismatic equivalent of this smallest of Ptolemaic denominations may be seen in American coinage before 1857. Half cents were minted and circulated in small numbers, as change when required. More recently, another similar situation occurred with the farthing, half penny, and the 1/2 p. in Great Britain of 1965. It has been suggested that the extremely common American cent may soon be eliminated from production and circulation. 27

46 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Find evidence for the second variety shows a link with the eighth-unit. Three examples of this tiny coinage were found at the House of Dionysos, the Ptolemaic bronze coin mint discussed in Paphos II. One was found in room LXXXIII, along with sixty-two eighth-units.28 A second was found in Well 11, along with fifteen more eighth-units,21 presumably a “donative hoard.” A third was a single find, near a late Roman coin. An unusual specimen found

28

Contents of room LXXXIII, 0.5 to 5 m 21 Ptolemaic coins were unidentifiable. From the sizes, several are probably quarter and eighth-unit bronzes. The coins found in Room LXXXIII can be broken into two or three find strata. A. Deep, below a layer of ash, some early coins were found. 2 Cleopatra VII Æ 1/4 obols 3 other Ptolemaic Æ, 2.0g and under 8 other Ptolemaic Æ, over 2.0g 2 Foreign, 3.3g, 6.3g 9 larger Ptolemaic, 7 obols, plus 2 larger: 19.6g, 24g B. Layer of ash, between 2.2 and 2.3 m contained a narrower sampling of coinage, almost all small. 37 Cleopatra 1/4 obols 24 Other Ptolemaic 2.0g and under 1 Foreign coins under 2.0g 12 Other Ptolemaic 2.0-4.0g 2 Other Ptolemaic 4.0g + 2 obols (8.1, 7.3) C. Not in ash, 1.5 to 2.30 m, mostly 2.0-2.2 m A layer of similar depth has many more small coins 25 Cleopatra 1/4 obols, plus one 1/8 obol 32 Other Ptolemaic 2.0g and under 3 Foreign coins 2.0-2.3g 25 Other Ptolemaic 2.0-4.0g, only 2 Zeus standing 10 Other Ptolemaic 4.0g + 9 obols, 1 19.5g D. Two coins were found at 0.5 to 1.0 m 1 Completely worn Ptolemaic Æ21, obol, 5.8g 1 Augustus, Victory standing, obol

47 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

elsewhere on Cyprus adheres to an eighth-unit, reverse to obverse. This was the tiniest coin issued by the Ptolemaic Kingdom, and among the last.29

Perhaps, this smallest of denominations was used in ancient vending machines. Heron, a Greek mathematician, teacher and inventor, who lived from c. 10 - 70 AD in Alexandria, designed vending machines for use in temples. His design survived but not the machine itself, nor records of any actual use. A drawing by Heron appears in Ancient Inventions, by Peter James and Nick Thorpe. The machine accepted coins and dispensed holy water. At the end of the day, the machine would be emptied and the priests would have put away the day's sales. A slot at the top regulated what would and would not fit into the machine. James and Thorpe write: 29

The ancient slot machine worked as follows: The coin fell into a small pan hung from one end of a delicately balanced beam. Its weight depressed one end of the beam, thus raising the other end, which opened a valve and allowed the holy water to flow out. As the pan fell, the coins would slide off; the beam end with the pan then swung up and the other end down, closing the valve and shutting off the flow of water." Water was used to wash the face and hands before entering the temple. The coins accepted the "five-drachma bronze coin.” What coin is this? The eighth-unit, which would have been equal to the half-chalkus / eighth obol marked “E” for 5 (RPC 5251), which was the smallest denomination in circulation in Egypt. They would have been five copper drachmas. The sixteenth-unit was a rare denomination. Could the sixteenth-unit have been intended for use in Heron’s machine? Perhaps. Or does “five-drachma bronze coin” refer to the weight of the coin itself? A billon tetradrachm of Nero weighed about 13 grams, so a “fivedrachma bronze coin” may have referred to the 16 gram bronze diobol of Cleopatra or Augustus; or perhaps a 16g hemidrachm of Nero (RPC 5276; 5319). Considerable speculation is required to say which coin Heron noted.

Modern drawing of an Egyptian vending machine from the time of Nero.

48 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Other Small Late Ptolemaic Bronzes Several rare to unique types support the chronological connection between quarter, eighth and sixteenth-units. 1) A 13 mm bronze of 3-4 grams has the horned, not laureate Zeus obverse paired with reverse headdress of Isis (SNG Cop. 685var. (as late 2nd to 1st century BC); BMC (Ptolemy X) 48-56 (Kyrene?). The headdress of Isis may connect to the second reign of Ptolemy XII, a quarter unit. The attribution to Cyprus is not certain. 2) Another rare type combines an obverse of the usual Zeus type, with the reverse of the eighth-unit. The head of Zeus-Ammon is horned, not laureate. This feature differentiates the issue from the Laureate Zeus / Zeus standing issue of Cleopatra. The range of weights suggest dates from the time of Ptolemy VIII to early in the reign of Cleopatra VII, though Ptolemy IX is the likely reign of origin.

Rare bronze quarter-unit(?) with reverse of the eighth-unit. Note the small thick flan. (2.05g)

A smaller flan example. (1.54g) 3) Another rare types feature obverse quarter-unit (SNG Cop. 666) and eighth or sixteenthunit paired with an eagle standing left (as Svor. 1162). The reverse die of the latter is smaller than the obverse, conceivably from the half denomination (Svor. 1246). 4, 5, 6) Three rare types are struck at the 3.7 or less gram weight standard of the quarterunit, on a typical beveled flan of about 17 mm. Known from only a few specimens, the obverse features the Temple Aphrodite of Paphos, with its distinctive conical black stone at the center. The reverse has an eagle, a type used at Paphos on Classical era bronzes, as well as on most Ptolemaic coinage. There is no legend. Another has the head of Zeus paired with a

49 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

similar Temple. A unique Æ15 of 2.3 grams found at Paphos II has Victory paired with Temple reverse. These three “politically neuter” issues may have been struck in 30 BC, immediately after the defeat of Cleopatra.

Extremely rare quarter-unit with obverse temple of Paphos and reverse eagle. 7) A fourth Actium-era type has the usual Zeus Salaminios standing, but with the Ptolemaic grain ears exchanged for a Roman patera. On Roman issues with this reverse, similar types are noted. “Cleopatra of Egypt” notes, “. . . at least three, possibly four, portraits of Augustus from Egypt that have been re-cut from images of Ptolemies.” The statues were “Romanized.” While the reverse type is similar to the early issues of Augustus, at least one example shows a trace of the Greek letters for Ptolemy (surely Ptolemy XV).

The usual reverse of the quarter-unit shows the statue of Zeus Salaminios holding grain-ears. At right is the reverse of a very rare issue with Zeus holding a Roman patera. (2.73 g, 1.88 g) Remnant of the statue today. This rare issue appears to be post-Actium, just before or early during the Administration of Octavian. All of these puzzling issues are rare.

50 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Archeological Context – A Late Ptolemaic Bronze Mint The published archeological data from “Paphos II” supports many of the assertions made here. This important dig uncovered the remains of a late Ptolemaic mint in 1964. The second century AD House of Dionysos was built upon the site of previous buildings. Paphos II notes, “ . . . A workshop for casting metal was found. This was in Room LII (-LI) at the north-west corner of the House . . . Among other objects recovered from within the ashes scattered about in this and the adjoining Room LI were iron and copper slag, bronze coin-flans as well as struck bronze coins and fragments of coin moulds in limestone.” The single example of the Cleopatra VII full-unit found at the site was in this workshop. It is a coin important enough that it was placed on the cover of the “Paphos II” book. Coins found in rooms with coinmoulds are listed in the endnotes.3031 32

A variety of tiny coins, mostly from the time of Cleopatra were found in this well. Well 11 30

Ptol I Ptol II Ptol III Ptol IV Ptol V Ptol VI Ptol VIII Ptol IX Ptol X Ptol XII Cleopatra VII

1 (Æ26, 12.4g) - (- “Arsinöe III” Æ9 reattributed from here to Cleopatra VII ) - (- Thunderbolt / Eagle Æ7 reattributed to Cleopatra VII) 1 (Æ17, 1.7g) 14

The 14 Cleopatra VII Æ included the following denominations: unit 1/2 u. 1/4 u. 1/8 u. 13 1/16 u 1 1 corroded Æ16 2.8g Ptolemaic coin was unidentifiable. A variety of coins from the time of Cleopatra VII were found together with some early foreign and cut coins, in this well. Well 17, 1.5-2.0 m 596 Marathus, Æ13, 1.3g, Zeus / Galley, 2nd c. BC 16 Demetrios Poliorketes, Æ13 2g 136 Cleopatra Æ14 2.2g 1/4 obol 457 Cleopatra, Æ25 5.2g, obol 458 Cleopatra Æ25 5.7g, obol 582 Seleukid, Antiochus VIII, Æ20 6g 122 Cleopatra Æ12 0.5g, 1/4 obol 187 Ptolemy VI Æ15 2.3g, 1/4 obol 461 Cleopatra Æ25 5.3g, broken flan, obol 831? Æ23, 3.3g cut fragment, (hemiobol?) 832? Æ20 4.9g, hemiobol 31 Ptolemy I, Æ20, 3.4g cut fragment (hemiobol?) 459 Cleopatra Æ25 5.1g, headdress of Isis obol 507 Cleopatra Æ17 2.4g Zeus stg. hemiobol 178 Ptolemy IX and X Æ38 36.6g triobol 31

Sealed deposits found below mosaics in adjoining rooms XXXVIII and XVI, as well as between the rooms. Two half-obols and two obols were found under each mosaic. More coins were found in the mosaic and wall in between the two rooms. These deposits show the side-by-side circulation of the types involved, as well as the dates of the second century mosaics. 32

51 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

While most bronzes were found individually, some specific finds seem to have narrow dates around the time of Cleopatra and Augustus. Deposits below later mosaics provide a glimpse of the coinage in circulation during the late Ptolemaic and Augustan times.33 34 Two of the several wells containing coins provide a similar snapshot in time, although with more of the smaller denominations. The largest finds of eighth and quarter-units are in rooms containing sixty-two and ten examples respectively. Each of these finds is listed in the endnotes.35 A chart of the Ptolemaic coins found on page 124 of “Paphos II” modified by the assertions in this book is below. Total Ptolemaic Coins struck in Cyprus found at Paphos II, The House of Dionysos36 Ptol I Ptol II Ptol III Ptol IV Ptol V Ptol VI-VIII Ptol IX Ptol IX to X Ptolemy XII Cleopatra VII

3 8 2 0 1 17 111 190 37 193

(110 “Arsinöe III” Æ9 reattributed from here to Cleopatra VII) (3 Thunderbolt / Eagle Æ7 reattributed to Cleopatra VII) (Most examples included with later kings) (same) (same) (aphlaston, T & Star, KY∏P obols given to Ptolemy XII)

33

Bust of Winter from House of Dionysos, Four Seasons mosaic. Room XVI, Four Seasons Mosaic, (sealed deposit) 0.2-0.4 m below the mosaic floor 526 Augustus, Æ18, Plautius, 1/2 AD, 4.6g, hemiobol 429 Cleopatra, Æ25, 6.1g, obol, 2 eagles, Isis headdress 430 -, Æ24, 4.7g, same 472 -, Æ15, 1.7g, hemiobol A coin of Arcadius was found above the mosaic, on the surface. 34

Narcissus mosaic from the House of Dionysos. Room XXXVIII, Mosaic of Narcissus, (sealed deposit) 0.2-0.4 m below the mosaic floor 469 Cleopatra, Æ17, 2.5g, hemiobol 358 Ptolemy XII, Æ25, 7.2g, obol, T* 329 Ptolemy XII, Æ23, 5.2g obol, cornucopia 473 Cleopatra, Æ16, 2.3g, hemiobol 2 bronzes of Augustus were found in Room XXXVIII, at the same depth: 1) Victory standing obol. 2) CA quadrans. 8 additional coins were found at depths from 1.8 to 3.5 meters. A single room contained 62 1/4 obols of Cleopatra, mostly found at 2.0 to 2.3 m deep. Ptolemaic Coins struck in Cyprus found at Paphos II, The House of Dionysos, Room LXXXIII, 0.5-5 m. 35

*Excludes non-Ptolemaic and Alexandria Mint issues. Total 517 coins, 61.6 % of all found. Others are Roman, Byzantine, etc. 65 Ptolemaic coins were unidentifiable. 36

52 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Denominations of the 193 Cleopatra VII coins found at Paphos II The dating of the House of Dionysos is changed by the re-attribution of the date of the eighth and sixteenth-units. Paphos II p. 124 presents a graph that shows large spikes at Ptolemy IV and Cleopatra VII. These changes make the mint become a building whose operation ceased abruptly after heavy use at the end of the reign of Cleopatra VII. The data from “Coins From the Excavations at Curium” and “The American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus, 1973-1980” is similar 3738 Use in coins, of copper mined on Cyprus could be confirmed by an analysis of trace lead isotopes. A similar analysis was used to confirm the North Western Cyprus origin of copper found in some Bronze Age “oxhide ingots.” 39

“The American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus, 1973-1980” data is similar. Of 25 Ptolemaic AE found, 7 are small AE with bust of Cleopatra VII as Aphrodite / Cornucopia ; 3 are Laureate Zeus / Zeus standing and 1 is Zeus Ammon / Headdress of Isis before two eagles. In addition there were several late obols. 37

“Coins from the New York University Excavations on Geronisos (Cyprus) 1990-1997 reports 13 medium-sized bronzes: A dated obol of Ptolemy VIII (as Svor. 1638), Two obols with a single eagle and cornucopia symbol (Svor. 1814, Ptolemy IX, 2nd reign or Ptolemy XII); Eight obols with two eagles and headdress of Isis (Svor. 1843 and two hemiobols with Zeus / Zeus standing. Ten of the thirteen coins are attributed to Cleopatra VII. 38

Stos-Gale, Z.A., Maliotis, G., Gale, N.H., and. Annetts, N. 1997, Lead Isotope Characteristics of the Cyprus Copper Ore Deposits Applied to Provenance Studies of Copper Oxhide Ingots. Archaeometry 39(1) 83-123. 39

53 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Making Small Change Examples of the casting matrix from this period, used to make small coins were found in the House of Dionysos in Paphos in 1964. Unstruck flans exist intended for the quarter-unit and eighth-unit.

Unstruck quarter-unit and eighth-unit flans. (2.41g, 1.63g) Hazzard writes about such small denominations during this time: The moneyer, who had first to prepare the flans or coin blanks, turned a block of wood on a lathe and sanded the punch end smooth. Next he pushed the punch-end, slightly oiled, into a platter of soft clay several times and connected the imprints with runners or channels to make a . . . chain-like formation for the smaller coins. Because he had slanted the edge of the punch end, he could easily remove it from the clay and use the punch time after time. The workman, having placed a smooth slab of terracotta on top of the soft layer, now waited for the lower layer to harden, so then he could drill a vertical hole in the upper layer to connect this hole or gate the internal cavity. He next fired the mould, and pouring the liquid bronze into the gate, he cast the coin blanks or flans en chapelete. After the mould had cooled, he separated the two halves, and turning the bottom layer over, he let the coin blanks and runners fall out as a single piece. (With care, the workman could use the same mould several times). He separated the flans from the runners for the larger coins, but kept the flans and runners attached for the smaller coins. Some of these have survived. Both sizes of flans were reheated and struck with dies aligned on a vertical axis. He then separated the smaller coins from their runners . . . The casting of flans en chapelete implies that the monarch allowed a fairly wide margin of error for the weights of his bronze coins.” These quick if rather sloppy production methods produced a variety of defective flans that, from their wear, seem to have been accepted in circulation. An odd example shows two obverse strikes at opposite ends of the coin, paired with a clear reverse strike. The coin is not bent; as might be expected from a double striking from the same obverse die, and double struck examples have not been noted. Similar twice-struck coins are known for the leptons of Alexander Jannaeus, known as widow’s mites. Perhaps some of both these mass-produced issues were made using multiple-headed dies. The coin slipped with the reverse die, against two obverse dies. The use of multiple-headed dies would allow a single hammer blow to be transferred to more than one coin. When the coins had small surface areas, this method would save production time, occasionally producing this

54 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

specific error coin. With this method, off-center coins are common because the worker had to track more than one blank. Multiple bronze mints may have supplied the network of small change in the time of Cleopatra. A group of eight fragmentary moulds was found at the House of Dionysos, which certainly functioned as a mint. Another was found at the nearby Odeion. Three fragmentary moulds were found at the House of Orpheus. Excavations of the Polish Mission at Nea Paphos found nine more moulds. Other mints may still be found in the Ptolemaic Capital and beyond, perhaps even in other Cypriot cities. The extensive variety of flan shapes, sizes, and styles may be related to the several groups of craftsmen and laborers producing small value coinage at this time, perhaps including counterfeiters. Whether official, semi-official or contemporary counterfeits, the Cypriot bronze coinage of the time of Cleopatra VII is quite common on Cyprus, in comparison to previous Ptolemaic issues. The numerous variations in style and production method may be the result of the varying standards of the several small mints.40 41 Given the scattered mould finds recorded in Paphos II, a similar situation may have existed in Cyprus, during the latter years of the reign of Cleopatra. Small change was struck locally.

The vast quantities of late Ptolemaic small change may be the result of overproduction, a situation similar to what would occur in early 17th century England, when striking of the farthing was “contracted out” to private mints which produced large quantities of many varieties of high-seigniorage small change. The finding of limestone moulds for casting flans in several locations in Paphos, and the vast output of stylistically varied coinage, suggests multiple local mints. 40

M: quadrans struck after 90 BC is called “clearly unofficial” by Crawford. This issue met the need for small change in Rome in similar conditions to the tiny 1/4 obols of Cleopatra in Cyprus. (2.79g) A similar situation occurred in Rome a generation before. The official minting of bronze apparently did not take place from 82 to 38 BC. Janiform issues of Pompey from Spain and Sicily are the exception. A variety of “unofficial” bronze filled the gap. Crawford writes, “ . . . the very common quadrantes with M: and N: (as Milan 351) are clearly unofficial,” but is it possible that the unofficial style is a result of multiple mints or hurried production? Cleopatra’s loose governmental granting of monopolies to powerful oligarchs is supported by the recent discovery of a “signature” of the Queen, the Greek phrase ginesthoi “Make it so” on a document granting special wine-exporting rights to Publius Canidias, one of Antony’s generals. M.I. Rostovtzeff presents a somewhat dismal picture of her rule in “Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World III (Oxford, 1941) p. 1551. Alternatively, the moulds are signs of less official mints, counterfeiters. The failure of governments to prosecute counterfeiters of initially needed, small change produced similar situations in first century Rome and late 18th century England and Colonial America and during the American Civil War. 41

Of “The Barbarous Coins of Ancient Israel”, David Hendin writes:

In general, the barbarous coins [of the Second Revolt] are struck from dies that are engraved crudely, often with “retrograde” or mirror-image writing, and struck on irregular planchets . . . What are these crude “barbarous” coins and who issued them? Most of the crude and barbarous issues of Greece and Rome are thought to be contemporary forgeries. However, I believe with great conviction that this was definitely NOT the case with the barbarous coins of Ancient Israel. Instead, it seems that these coins were made in a second mint workshop. In the case of the Jewish War and the Bar Kochba War there were almost certainly second mints, possibly moving with the troops, or by soldiers hiding out in the Judaean hills . . . Die studies by Leo Mildenberg clearly prove that barbarous Bar Kochba coins were not struck in the same mint as the standard issues . . . It is certainly possible that the barbarous Judaean coins were struck at the central mint by either poor craftsmen or apprentices who made errors. However, speaking strongly against this possibility is the absolute paucity of die links between the barbarous issues and the standard issues.

55 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Relationship Between the Denominations A summary of the coinage of Cleopatra in Cyprus shows the relationships between the denominations. Denominations in Cyprus during the time of Cleopatra VII Denomination Avg. diam. Median weight 42 rev. leg. Devices Cu drachms billon tetradrachm 25 mm 13.0g Pt Bust right / Eagle stg. 960 billon drachm 16 mm 3.0g C Bust right / Eagle stg. 240 bronze full-unit 28 mm 15.8g C Bust right / 2 cornucopia. 80 half-unit 25 mm 7.6g Pt Head of Zeus / Eagle KY∏P 40 “ 25 mm 5g Pt “ / 2 Eagles, Isis Headdress. quarter-unit 17 mm 4g Pt Head of Zeus / Eagle. 20 “ 17 mm 3.7g -Laureate Zeus / Zeus stg. 20 eighth-unit 10 mm 1.8g Pt Head of Zeus / Eagle. 10 “ 10 mm 1.7g Pt Bust right./ Cornucopia(e) 10 1/16th-unit 7 mm 0.9g Pt Thunderbolt / Eagle. 5 “ 7 mm 0.6g Pt Thunderbolt / Eagle. 5 Valuing Ptolemaic bronze coinage after the time of Ptolemy IV is a most difficult arena. Hazzard notes, “ . . . This convenient system of denominations was wrecked by Ptolemy IV.” Experts even disagree about which bronze was an obol, although Hazzard makes a very convincing argument that the 12 g coin of this era was an obol. Gresham’s Law implies that the value of an obol could only be less over time. The weight standard of the bronze obol eroded over time to about 7 grams and lower during the time of Cleopatra. 43 The same result is obtained when looking backward from the Roman Egyptian system. The Roman Egyptian denominations of Augustus were continuations of those of Cleopatra VII, and that the denominations of Cleopatra’s Cyprus mirrored those of her Egyptian bronze coinage, as set forth by Milne and others. The debased tetradrachm had the silver content of a Roman denarius. In the time of Cleopatra, the full-unit was likely a diobol, as types similar to those of Cleopatra VII were continued in Roman Egypt under Augustus. The half-unit was an obol. The quarter-unit was a hemiobol. The eighth-unit was a quarter obol. The tiny sixteenth-unit was a hemitetartermorion, an eighth of an obol. It was worth less than an hour of unskilled labor.

Median, not average, weights taken from RPC 3901; 3903. Tetradrachm and quarter-unit weights from Author’s examples with modest wear, except drachm weights which are from Svoronos. Includes Paphos II median weight figures, including worn and corroded examples. Private and museum collection examples noted in RPC weigh more. Also Private collection examples. 42

Analysis of coins found at the ongoing dig at the “Valley of the Golden Mummies” may lend support for the attribution of the 20 mm bronze as an obol. National Geographic July 2001 notes “In the hands of the mummies were bronze coins-payment for the ferryman to transfer the deceased into the afterlife.” The same source dates the find to the late Ptolemaic and first two centuries of Roman rule. The myth of the ferryman Charon states that the recent dead would pay Charon one obol as his fee for transport of their soul across the River Styx. Is the denomination of Cleopatra and Augustus that was marked with an M on the reverse the most common one in the role as “Charon’s obol?” If so, this supports Milne’s view of denominations. Under Cleopatra this denomination weighed 8 g. Early in the reign of Augustus the denomination weighed about 7 g. By the time of Hadrian, this denomination weighed about 4.5 g. If this was the most common denomination found in the hands of the mummies, they are likely to have been known as obols, a twenty-fourth of a tetradrachm. 43

56 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Circulating Earlier Ptolemaic and Foreign Coinage Prior Ptolemaic Cypriot bronze coinage remained in circulation on Cyprus during the reign of Cleopatra. The massive 41 mm, about 72 gram bronzes of the early Ptolemies were not common on the island, but diobols of about 18 grams, attributed by Svoronos to Ptolemy IX circulated. Hemidrachms weigh about 30 grams. A few larger coins are rare: tetrobols of 40-50 grams, and double-cornucopia drachms of about 70 grams. In a recent article by Catharine Lorber, “The Lotus of Aphrodite on Ptolemaic Bronzes” virtually every Ptolemaic bronze with a lotus blossom is reattributed to Cyprus. The later half-units struck on thin flans with one or two eagles on the reverse, struck with various symbols during the reigns of Ptolemy IX to XII are not easily distinguished from those of Cleopatra, except by the symbol before the eagle, and the difference in weight standard. Quarter-units with eagle reverse from the same period are on the same weight standard as those of Cleopatra VII. Pre-52 BC reform tetradrachms, however, might have been scarce by Cleopatra’s reign. Old tetradrachms contained 80% or more silver, and were valued at about 2000 copper drachma, according to a second century BC papyrus, which also notes conversion fees. Like the late coinage of Ptolemy XII, Cleopatra’s tetradrachm of about 33% silver was valid for debts in tetradrachms. It is worth noting from the ∏ on the Egyptian diobol and the M on the obol, that her tetradrachm apparently only tarriffed at about (80 x 3 x 4 = 960 or) 1000 copper drachma. A hoard found in Egypt (Coin Hoard 1732) buried in c. 19 AD contained 61 Cleopatra tetradrachms and only one earlier 80+% silver tetradrachm. The pre-52 BC reform tetradrachms were driven out of circulation–hoarded or melted–according to Gresham’s Law, “The bad money drives out the good.” Old Ptolemaic gold, foreign gold coins, and the 300 year-old gold coins of Classical rulers of Cyprus might have been occasionally seen. In general, gold was hoarded in preference to silver. The ratio of gold weight to silver weight throughout the Greek and Roman world was 12.5 to 1. For its gold, a huge 27.8 gram gold octadrachm struck from Ptolemy II through Ptolemy VIII (ending c. 145 BC, with a brief revival in 88 BC) would have been worth about eighty-four tetradrachms of base silver. An antique Attic weight 8.6 gram gold stater, a foreign reduced Attic weight 8.3 gram stater, an antique Cypriot stater of 8.3 grams or a Roman Republican aureus of about 8 grams might have been valued at about twenty-five tetradrachms of base silver. Classical and Hellenistic Cyprus had a unique history of small gold fractional staters: halves, thirds, quarters, eighths, tenths, twelfths, twentieths, and twenty-fourths. An antique gold fractional stater would have been valued by weight as well. Each use of a gold coin would have been quite unusual, although antique hoards were disbursed from time to time. In general, use of a moneychanger’s scale would have been required with each gold transaction. The Egyptian coinage of Cleopatra struck at Alexandria, portrait coins of full-unit and half-unit, are occasionally found on Cyprus, where they presumably circulated at parity to their Cypriot counterparts. Earlier non-Cyprus Mint Ptolemaic bronze coins are more common, presumably circulating at parity with local bronzes. Cut worn bronzes had some role as small change.44 Allowing the circulation of foreign coins in the Ptolemaic Kingdom was a reversal by Cleopatra of a policy dating from the reign of Ptolemy I, who dropped the weight of his silver tetradrachm from 17.2 grams to 15.7 grams in about 310 BC. With the exceptions of Asia Minor and the Aegean Islands, the Ptolemies banned foreign or autonomous issues. R. S. Bagnall surveyed the exceptions in “The Administration of Ptolemaic Possessions outside Egypt. (Leiden 1976, pp. 194-201).

44

A chart of the varied “foreign” coins found in Paphos II appears on page 127 of Paphos II.

57 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Some Roman “Fleet Coinage” with the portrait of Antony, on scarce larger denominations with that of one of his wives and a young man, circulated occasionally, in Cyprus at this time.30 This coinage was issued c. 38 BC or later, in the name of three different moneyers on three types of flans, from three different, nearby, Roman-controlled naval ports / mints. The beveled flans of the Fleet Coinage issued by Aratinus are similar to half-units, although RPC considers Corinth the likely mint for this moneyer. Those issued by Bibulus have been found on Cyprus, though RPC assigns them to a mint “in the East.” The Antony portrait style of the Bibulus semis (RPC 4092) resembles that on similar denarii. RPC states that the Fleet Coinage is denominated in Roman ases, and vastly overvalued in relation to other Roman coins of the time. The reverse markings A, S and three pellets on the three smallest denominations confirm that the Roman denominations as, semis and quadrans were intended. Perhaps the “heavy series” as, such as RPC 1456, and the “light series” as, such as RPC 1460, circulated as a 3/4-unit, but prior to Actium, they were viewed in transactions as a “foreign bronze coin,” if they were even accepted. For a region that was controlled by the Romans, Republican and Imperatorial Roman coinage in Cyprus is quite rare. No Republican coinage or Fleet Coinage was recorded at Paphos II. A single Antony legionary denarius represents all the Roman Imperatorial coinage found at this dig. No Cypriot coins of Roman Imperatorial types are known. Cato and the other Roman rulers of Cyprus 58-47 BC apparently permitted the ongoing use of local coinage, and presumably its striking. A few Hasmonaean, Herodian and Procurator prutot45, six Syrian chalkoi, as well as Cilician and other Asia Minor coins recorded in Paphos II made their way to Cyprus with travelers. Cox noted a similar percentage of Jewish coins at Curium. How these “foreign coins” were valued may have depended on the transaction. Except some Egyptian coinage, foreign coins were not often seen on Cyprus.

Jewish prutot perhaps were brought to Cyprus by travelers to the Jewish community on Cyprus. Herod Agrippa I was married to a woman named Cypros, whose father was Salaminios. The small Jewish community on Cyprus thrived from the time of Ptolemy I to the revolt at the end of the reign of Trajan. 45

58 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cypriot Bronze of Cleopatra, After Actium When the forces of Octavian occupied Cyprus, the Ptolemaic bronze coinage was conceivably devalued (declared invalid for state debts). If so, the people of Cyprus had worthless little bronze coins. Were the coins recalled? Perhaps the example of the statues of Cleopatra applies to the coins of Cyprus. Initially Octavian considered the destruction of the statues of Cleopatra, which might have included coins with her portrait. However, this action was not taken. Plutarch’s Life of Antony 86-9 notes: All his statues were torn down, but those of Cleopatra were allowed to stand, because Archibius, one of her friends, gave Octavius Caesar two thousand talents to save them from the fate of Antony’s [statues].

59 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

A recent British Museum exhibit re-attributes several statues previously thought to be earlier Egyptian queens as Cleopatra VII.46 47 48 Perhaps some of these statues were saved from destruction by Archibius. The political logic for this change is noted by Guy Weill Goudchaux in “Sauveur des “effigies” de Kléopåtre VII” in Atti VI Congresso, I, p. 651-6. He writes: The agreement between Octavianus, who was short of cash, and Archibios, possibly an Egyptian named Horemakhbyt, made it possible to maintain the religious function of her temple statues. Augustus was to be the future heir of her divine role. The money must have come from temple treasuries. As Kraay notes, the reign of Augustus “above all . . . involved constitutionalism – an observance and not too obvious manipulation of Republican forms.” The “inside the law 46

Two sculptures long-attributed to Cleopatra on the basis of her coins.

Statues in the Vatican and the Berlin Museum are considered among the best marble busts of Cleopatra. Berlin nose is a restoration. 47

Recent re-attributions of Cleopatra VII sculpture are not specifically connected to this book.

48

The Hermitage website notes: New attribution: a Statue of Cleopatra VII

Black Basalt statue now attributed to Cleopatra VII. One of the masterpieces in the Hermitage‘s Ancient Egyptian collection is a black basalt statue of a Ptolemaic queen (Inventory No #3936, height 105 cm, acquired in 1929 from the collection of the Duke of Leuchtenberg). It represents a striding woman in a long tight-fitting dress, wearing a long tripartite wig with three uraei (royal snakes) and holding a horn of plenty in her left hand and the ankh, the hieroglyph of life, in her lowered right hand. The inlayed eyes and the headdress (probably a solar disc between cow‘s horns) have been lost. The statue is completely finished as its surface is splendidly polished, but it is not inscribed which makes dating and identification of the person represented a particular problem. In 1957 I.A. Lapis identified the statue as Arsinöe II, sister and wife of Ptolemy II (3rd century B.C.), on the basis of the [incorrect] observation that, judging by the images on coins, although a horn of plenty was an attribute of several Ptolemaic queens, the double cornucopia (dikeras) was specific to her alone. This attribution was included in the catalogue of Egyptian sculpture in the Hermitage ( I.A. Lapis & M.E. Matye, Ancient Egyptian Sculpture in the State Hermitage Collection, Moscow, 1969, pp.124f, Cat. No 141) and more recently in the catalogues of several temporary exhibitions. However this iconographic dating is clearly at odds with the style of the statue, which is typical of a considerably later time, most probably the 1st century B.C. In order to reconcile the clash of iconography and style, it was suggested that the statue might be posthumous, produced many years after the death of Arsinöe II, since it is a known fact that her cult endured for a very long time. In the course of preparations for the major exhibition "Cleopatra of Egypt: From History to Myth" (Rome-London-Chicago, 2000-2002), one of its organizers, Sally-Ann Ashton, identified a group of statues in the Egyptian style without inscriptions, including the Hermitage work, as depictions of Cleopatra VII, the very queen whose life story and alliances with Caesar and Mark Antony have long since become one of the most famous legends of the Ancient World. This identification is based on the fact that, in contrast to Arsinöe II who wore only two uraei, three are characteristic of Cleopatra VII alone, while it proved possible to find a divided cornucopia on the latter's coins as well. Thus the Hermitage possesses one of the finest statues of the Ptolemaic period, depicting its most famous personage.“

60 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

approach” to the looting of the temple treasuries is characteristic of Octavian. Two thousand talents could have maintained Octavian’s army for an entire year.49 Like Cleopatra’s statues, the coins with her image were apparently not recalled. Hoard evidence and the extensive wear on almost all of her coins strongly suggest prolonged circulation over decades. In Egypt, Coin Hoards 1732 dated about 19 AD, included 61 tetradrachms of Cleopatra and 136 of Tiberius plus one earlier coin. Octavian issued bronze diobols (average weight 17.73g) in 30-28 BC, marked ∏ for 80 copper drachms, and obols (average weight 8.75g), marked M for 40, with identical reverses (RPC 5001; 5002) to the same denominations of Cleopatra. The two types were found together with other Augustan Egypt bronzes in the Abydos Hoard, as noted in RPC, (E. Christiansen, CH VII, no. A13). In Egypt the same diameter bronze denominations were continued at a thinner, slightly reduced weight standard after 19 BC. Some of the Augustan bronzes note the Greek letter denomination for old Ptolemaic copper drachms. Hemiobols (average weight 3.60g) from this slightly thinner issue (RPC 5009, 5010 and 5014) have a K for 20. Quarter obols (average weight 1.53g) of the third issue (RPC 5015, 5016) have the letter I for 10. The size and shape of the cast flans of these coins resemble the quarter and eighth-units of Cyprus. Billon tetradrachms of Cleopatra found their way to Egypt and Phoenicia, where they were more valued than in Cyprus. Many of her tetradrachms were melted during Augustus’ “transfer of wealth” between Actium and the Egyptian coinage reform of Tiberius, fifty years later. It seems most likely that the Roman law in Cyprus was similar to that of Egypt, permitting the use of existing coins, at a rate relating to the new coinage. As in Egypt, Cypriot bronze coins of Cleopatra circulated alongside those of Augustus. Finds noted in Paphos II support the notion that late Ptolemaic and Augustan coins did circulate together. Examples of Ptolemaic and Augustan coinage were found together, below later mosaics at Paphos II.23 24 The thin flan, 7.5 gram obols were equal to the c. 6.5 g obols of Augustus, cast flans with beveled edges, although thicker. The 3.7 gram quarter-unit with Zeus / Zeus standing was equal to the new 3.7 gram hemiobol, struck on cast flans of rounder and slightly thinner fabric. This means that the eighth-units were worth a sextans, and that the scarce and tiny 1/16th-units were worth an uncia. After Tiberius, the Romans on Cyprus did not mint the denominations below the as until the reign of Trajan. The plentiful Cleopatra small change circulated for generations.

J.M. Carter and M. Grant calculated that the cost of a legion during peace-time amounted to forty or fifty talents a year. 49

61 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Silver Denarii of Marc Antony, 37-30 BC Plutarch notes of Marc Antony: . . . There was a noble dignity about Antony's appearance. His beard was well grown, his forehead broad, his nose aquiline, and these features combined to give him a certain bold and masculine look, which is found in the statues and portraits of Hercules . . . It was moreover a tradition that the Antonys were descended from Hercules, by a son of his called Anton.

42 cm basalt head found in Egypt, probably of Marc Antony, c. 35 BC. The portrait denarii of Marc Antony struck in the East during the period 40-31 BC have a portrait style that shifts over time. While Crawford calls the mint for all of these Eastern coins “Mobile Mint,” the last three issues were apparently struck at Paphos. A mint traveling or elsewhere in the East was eventually transferred to Paphos. A variety of issues have similar style characteristics of both the late and earlier issues. Which mint are they from? Let us consider the three latest Eastern Antony (Paphos) portrait issues first, as well as the contemporary Legionary denarii, which are from a different but contemporary Eastern mint. The three final portrait issues are: 1) Cleopatra obverse, 2) P. hidden in hair. / 2 line legend, and 3) Victory in wreath. The three Paphos issues have dotted borders and 12:00 die axis, a somewhat unusual feature in Roman coinage. Because of the high relief obverse, closed striking cracks are fairly common. The style is clumsy, average at best. One or more issues have a hidden P. behind the ear. The reverse themes are all propaganda for Antony and his family. An important issue of denarii features the obverse portrait of Cleopatra with a small prow before, and the reverse portrait of Antony (Crawford 543). The clumsy-style Latin obverse legend translates as, “of Cleopatra, Queen of Kings, (and) of (her) sons, who are Kings.” Unlike most Imperatorial denarii, the coin has 12:00 die axis. Both sides have a dotted border. The hair of the portrait is shown as several heavy locks. The neck terminates in a graceful curve. There is some resemblance to the Armenian cap denarii (Crawford 539/1) of 37 or 36 BC. The reverse Latin legend translates as, “of Antony, since Armenia has been defeated.” Of all Cleopatra’s coinage, this issue most clearly proclaims the dynastic ambitions set forth by Antony in the “Donations of Alexandria.” Antony’s “Donations of Alexandria” listed a number of regions as the kingdoms of Cleopatra and her children. This is the only issue of denarii for Cleopatra, and her only issue with Latin legends, not Greek. The preferential placement of Cleopatra’s portrait on the more convex obverse of this issue suggests that the mint officials placed their Queen above her consort, Marc Antony. Of this type Sear writes,

62 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Careless engraving and shoddy execution . . . together with the imprecise form of the Latin, is consistent with their production by a mint which was unaccustomed to striking Roman coinage (i.e. Alexandria) . . . connected to Antony’s triumph in 34 BC. However, Paphos had inexpensive wood for fuel, more experience in minting silver and a location where denarii could have been utilized. In Alexandria, wood and metal workers were scarce imports. Denarii were acceptable to Roman legionaries, but not to local merchants. As a Ptolemaic mint with Roman influence, the coins could be from Paphos instead. Roman denarii were occasionally used on Cyprus. Wood for charcoal was accessible. The prow before the bust of Cleopatra honors the ships supplied by the Ptolemaic Kingdom to the alliance of Antony and Cleopatra. While Alexandria was the larger city, Paphos was a ship building center, and the main port of the Ptolemaic navy. Strabo described Paphos as “a triple harbor safe in all winds.” The prow could be a symbol of either port. Paphos was probably the mint for this issue. Crawford notes that this issue immediately preceded the legionary denarii, in 32 BC. Like the legionary denarii, it is also found plated and with banker’s marks. The frequency of the banker’s marks indicates that ancient merchants were aware that this issue was often plated. However, the issue is generally not of base silver, and should be considered as separate from the legionary denarii.

Cleopatra appears on the obverse of this denarius, not Antony. (3.43g) Very late in the reign of Cleopatra, in 34, 33 or 32 BC, a mint described in some references as “Mint-moving with M. Antonius,” or “mobile mint traveling with Antony,” or “Athens” struck silver denarii with a large portrait of Marc Antony. The issue also has 12:00 die axis, and dotted borders. The hair is likewise drawn as several heavy locks. The neck terminates in a curve. The reverse has his titles, or those of his Pro-quaestor M. Silanus (Crawford 542/2; 542/1). The letter “P.” appears behind the ear of obverses with both reverses. Since the initial discovery of this letter in a 1920 auction catalogue, the “P.” has been assumed to be the signature of an engraver, unique among Republican issues. However, an engraver had signed no other dies for 200 years. Those were in Southern Italy. “P.” is probably a reference to Paphos, the mint. Two other ancient issues are known with letters hidden in the hair, that is not an engraver signature. Both were struck at Paphos. Back in 322 BC, the minute letters NIKOKΛEOY∑ were hidden in the hair on Alexander the Great tetradrachms from Paphos (Price 3118-3123). The letters are sufficiently subtle that numismatists studying this series did not take note of the letters until 1919 (Newell, “Myriandros”). Price notes: . . . seven different [Paphos obverse] dies. The variance in the styles of the dies makes it certain that the name is not that of an engraver, and the conclusion that it must be that of [Nikokles] the king of Paphos is inescapable. The clandestine manner in which the inscription has been engraved suggests that it was not intended that it should be read by all . . . There was little chance that it would have been spotted in ancient times.

63 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The second issues with a hidden letter occurs on silver issues of Ptolemy I Soter, some of which have the ∏A Paphos mintmark.50 The letter delta is hidden on the upper portion of the aegis of silver from c. 310-305 BC, and behind the ear of all silver and gold after the recovery of Cyprus in 294 BC. Whatever delta means, it is not the signature of the die engraver. Even over 290 years, the idea of a subtle message hidden in the hair of portrait was familiar to engravers in Paphos. Engravers at Paphos had been marking their silver ∏A since the time of Nikokles in 322 BC. The same mintmark was used on many tetradrachms of the early Ptolemies. On a few Ptolemaic tetradrachms of Paphos, just the letter ∏ is the mintmark. The denarii of c. 32 BC were early Latin legend issues from Paphos. Greek ∏ became Latin P. The portrait style is not of special artistic merit, even by Roman standards; instead it is rather clumsy and vulgar. The portrait is quite similar to that of the Triumvir on the Cleopatra and Antony denarii, although the larger portrait fills more of the fields. Crawford, extrapolating from the numbers of dies in similar issues, notes that less than thirty obverse dies and less than thirty-three reverse dies for each of the two portions of this issue are known. This figure is probably inaccurate, but certainly there are many dies. All lack the “individual touch” that Classical and Hellenistic Greek signed dies exhibit. The dies are not special works that an artist would break tradition to sign. Every obverse die has the P.

The P. behind the ear of this denarius, previously interpreted as the signature of an artist, may be a mintmark for Paphos. Note the flan crack. (3.45g) Antony’s penultimate (32-31 BC) issue of silver denarii, now debased, has a galley on the obverse and legionary standards on the reverse (Crawford 544). Gold aurei of this type are also known. Twenty-two or twenty-three individual legions were named on these coins, as well as two special cohorts. This issue was of base silver. Pliny notes, “Antonius as Triumvir mixed iron (sic) into his denarii,” where iron is an error for copper, the actual metal used. As with Cleopatra’s debased tetradrachms, the silver content of this issue was lower than that of any other contemporary denarii. Crawford gives figures from 78-91% silver. Vagi notes that

The second, and far less certain issue with a hidden letter is the coinage of Ptolemy I as Satrap and Ptolemy I as King. The letter ∆ is on the top of the aegis and later behind the ear. (c. 310 – 285 BC). From the use of Alexander III mint symbols, the many dies of these issues are apparently from Paphos, Salamis, Soli and other mints. What does ∆ really stand for? 50

A tetradrachm of Ptolemy I as Satrap, attributed to Salamis here, Soli elsewhere, with the “signature” of Delta at the top of the aegis. Could Delta stand for something else? Another similar tetradrachm (Svor. 253) shares the same symbols as a bronze from Paphos. A third has been attributed to a mint in Asia Minor. Unless Delta traveled or shipped his work, only one mint attribution is possible. While generally attributed to Alexandria, arguments for Cyprus include: 1) access to fuel, 2) use of Alexandrian mintmarks, and 3) the loss of Cyprus from 305 to 294 compares with the abrupt change in tetradrachm weight and style.

64 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

legionary denarii “often were fourée.” In addition, the weight standard was slightly lower than that of prior denarii. The legionary issue was by far the largest single issue of the Republic and Imperatorial Period. No Ptolemaic billon tetradrachms were produced in Year 21 (32-31 BC), perhaps because silver was diverted to production of other denarii, and / or Legionary denarii at another mint, perhaps Patrae. Despite their low silver content, legionary denarii were valued at the full denarii in their time. The issue was produced quickly, with variable die-axis. Striking while hot gave the coins a more silvery look, as the more fluid silver went to the surfaces. Alternatively, the blanks were pickled to produce the same effect. Over time, other denarii with better silver content were withdrawn for hoards or for melting. The application of Gresham’s Law kept the legionary denarii in circulation for many generations. Today, many are found in very worn condition, with banker’s marks.

Legionary denarii and aurei were not struck on Cyprus. (3.50g) Millions of the base-silver legionary denarii were struck as payment for the massive force Antony amassed against Octavian before the Battle of Actium. The mint is uncertain, but must have had: 1) a position fairly near the troops of Antony, 2) access to silver, and 3) experience with alloying and minting debased silver coins. Paphos seems like a very slim candidate for this issue, because access to the troops by sea would have ended after the blockade of Agrippa, Octavian’s admiral. Antioch, Pergamum, or Ephesos would have been even further from the troops.

65 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

It is considered likely that the nearby Greek mint at Patrae struck the issue. A modest issue of silver had recently been struck there, with a portrait that looks like Cleopatra. 51 Patrae would have had a closer position to the troops. This mint attribution fits the rather sloppily produced issue well. The legionary denarii circulated alongside other Roman denarii into Severan times. Another less-common denarius issue has a similar portrait of Antony paired with reverse Victory in a wreath. (Crawford 545) Antony’s titles include Consul for the 4th time, which dates the issue to 31 BC, the last issue of Marc Antony. The portrait is stylistically closer to the P. signed issues of Antony and M. Silanus than any other issue. The more compact style is slightly improved. However, the art is average by standards of the time. This issue also has 12:00 die axis, and dotted obverse border. The IMP IIII and COS TERT in the obverse legend are essentially lies. Like the other issues of the period, Crawford attributes this to “Mintmoving with M. Antonius,” while Sear suggests “Actium (?).” The appearance of Victory on this coin of Antony, struck right before, or shortly after, the battle of Actium, is ironic. The monogram of Decimus Turullius, one of the assassins of Julius Caesar, appears on part of this issue. The issue of Turullius was struck of normal silver, rather than the base silver of the legionary denarii, which were issued at the same time. It is difficult to accept that the same mint would use two different silver standards, and two different standards of workmanship. This strongly suggests a mint further away from the legions, and the legionary denarius mint. For this issue, an attribution separate from the legionary denarius mint is certainly, “MintNOT moving with M. Antonius.” Based on comparison with other Antony portrait denarii and the possible post-Actium date, Paphos seems like the likely mint.

51

5.01g 2.37g LHS Num. A bronze 21 mm of Patrae that names Queen Cleopatra and a silver hemidrachm of the same city and time with a similar portrait. BMC 2-3 are dated to 250-146 BC with weights of 2.33 and 2.29 g. The obverse portrait is called “Head of Aphrodite right, wearing stephane,” but some experts see Cleopatra’s image. The reverse has magistrate name ∆A MACIAC with a large ∏ATPE monogram, all inside a wreath. Bronze coins with the title “Queen Cleopatra” and her portrait are known from this city (BMC 9; RPC 1245), c. 32-31 BC. Since the publication of BMC, the silver issue has been considerably down-dated. Dio 50.9.3 notes that Antony and Cleopatra wintered at Patrae. Of this issue, LHS Numismatics writes in their May ‘06 BCD auction: The silver issue produced by Damasias must have been enormous and must have been produced in relative haste. The dies are generally fairly crudely made, almost all known specimens seem to have been struck by dies that were heavily used and marred by die rust or die breaks, and the minting process itself often resulted in badly struck coins (among other faults the obverses are usually weakly struck, while the reverses are often very sharp). The coins must have circulated for a considerable length of time (many known specimens are quite worn). A date in the mid to late 30s, in conjunction with Antony’s preparations for the coming war with Octavian, makes good sense for this issue. The head of Aphrodite is very close to that of Cleopatra, which appears on the slightly later hemiobols minted by Agias Lysonos.

There are several similarities between this attribution and those suggested in this book. The dating suggested by BMC is considerably down-dated. A portrait of “Aphrodite” is connected to the time and place of Cleopatra VII based, in part, on the connection to a larger bronze with her name.

66 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The Antony denarii of Turullius are from the same time as the legionary denarii, but must be from a different mint, perhaps Paphos. (3.82g)

Denarii with the portraits of Antony and Octavian have fine style. The issue was struck before Antony met Cleopatra. It is not from Paphos. (4.09g)

Denarii with the portraits of Antony and Octavian (Crawford 517/8), both with Antony-like features, is perhaps too early to be from Paphos. (3.98g)

A denarius of 38 BC (Crawford 533/2) with Antony standing in priestly garb and reverse head of Sol may be from the same Eastern mint or Paphos. (3.92g)

The portrait style of the Military Trophy denarii (Crawford 536/3, 536/4) of 37 BC is similarly crude like the two line legend reverse, perhaps by the same untrained hand. (3.79g)

Note the resemblance of the Armenian cap denarii (Crawford 539/1) of 37 or 36 BC. Some examples may have a P behind the ear. (3.55g)

67 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Earlier issues of Antony denarii, some Fleet Coinage and some aurei seem to have stylistic links to these Paphos issues. The silver issues follow bronze “Fleet Coinage” with the titles and portrait of Antony paired with an untitled female traditionally called “Octavia.” If this was meant to be Octavia who was the rival of Cleopatra, an attribution to Ptolemaic Cyprus is not possible.30 The final denarius issues include one with the titles and portraits of Cleopatra and Antony. Most of the issues between these two double portrait ones, show similar titles for Antony. Attributions in other references include Athens and a traveling mint. Operation of a longterm traveling mint would have been expensive. The stylistic links and reverse themes suggest that some or all may have been struck on Cyprus. The bronze Fleet Coinage of Bibulus with Antony portrait has similar style portrait. They have been found on Cyprus. There are several denominations of the Fleet Coinage of Bibulus. All have 9:00 die axis. This argument is expanded in the endnotes.30a

Marc Antony dupondius struck by Bibulus has Antony similar portrait style to denarii attributed to Cyprus. (16.25g)

Marc Antony semis struck by Bibulus has Latin legend and Antony portrait similar to denarii of Cyprus, including a possible P behind the ear of Antony. (5.39g) A modest issue of gold aurei also seems to have similar style. The issue is dated to mid-34 BC, immediately before or during “the Donations of Alexandria.” On these gold coins, portraits of Marc Antony are paired with that of his son, 9 year-old Marc Antony Junior (C 541/1-2, Vagi 194-195, Sear 1514). On one die, the boy is on the obverse of the coin, as determined by concavity (C541/1, Vagi 195). The style of the Antony portrait is similar to that of the Armenian cap and Cleopatra and Antony denarii. While other mints that have been suggested for this rare issue, Paphos seems a more likely origin than a Traveling Mint, Alexandria, Syria or Armenia. The portrait denarii of Marc Antony struck during the period 37-31 BC all have similar portrait style. All have dotted borders. Most have die orientation tending toward 12:00. The reverse themes are all propaganda. Style is average at best. One or more issues have a hidden P. behind the ear.52 Previous attributions include Athens and a traveling mint. There are stylistic and reverse theme links. Flan cracks are common. Portrait denarii of Antony with a hidden P. mark and similar style portrait denarii without P. seem to be from Paphos.

52

Reverse of a Cleopatra / Antony denarius that seems to show a P behind the ear of Antony.

68 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Features of Eastern Marc Antony Octavian Sol Head Crawford# 517 533 Die Axis ~12 ~12 Peak Wt. 3.85g 3.80g Obv. Border dots dots Rev. Border dots dots P. style no n/a Q. Military Rev. yes yes

denarii, some probably Trophy Arm. Cap 536 539 ~12 ~12 3.85g 3.85g dots dots dots dots maybe yes? yes yes?

Cypriot Cleopatra 543 ~12 3.85g dots dots yes no

P. / Leg. Antyllus Victory 542 541 545 ~12 ~12 ~12 n/a 8.0(AV) 3.85g dots dots dots dots dots wreath yes yes yes no yes yes

69 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cypriot Coinage under Augustus, 30-22 BC Suetonius gives a telling account of Octavian’s visit to Egypt and the tomb of Alexander the Great. At this time he had a desire to see the sarcophagus and body of Alexander the Great, which, for that purpose, were taken out of the cell in which they rested; and after viewing them for some time, he paid honors to the memory of that prince, by offering a golden crown, and scattering flowers upon the body. Being asked if he wished to see the tombs of the Ptolemies also; he replied, I wished to see a king, not dead men.

A 30 cm bronze head of Augustus, dated c. 27-25 BC, found in Meroe Sudan, probably taken from Egypt, now in the British Museum. After Actium and Egypt, Octavian visited Cyprus. In January of 30 BC, he left the island when a mutiny among veterans in Italy threatened. Called Augustus in 27 BC, he ruled both Egypt and Cyprus without the nominal authority of the Senate, as his personal fiefs, adding to his immense personal wealth by direct and indirect taxation. No new colonies were founded. No cities were granted either full Civitas or limited privileges. The rapid Romanization of Cyprus was reflected in the new names for the calendar months on the island: Augustus, Agrippa, Livia, Octavia, Julia, Nero, Drusus, Aphrodite, Anchises, Rome, Aeneas, and Capitol. The Latin legends of Roman Cypriot coinage reflect the abrupt Romanization of Cyprus, while retaining the Cypriot denominations in which obligations were paid. In the Roman system of denominations, of the later Republic and onward, complex calculations could be made quickly in Base-2, with each denomination valued at twice that of the next smallest: denarius, quinarius, sestertius, dupondius, as, semis, quadrans. The complex math behind business transactions could be done quickly, anywhere in the empire. A simple abacus served as a calculator. On Cyprus, the mints struck bronze, brass and silver coinage.

70 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cypriot Bronze of Augustus - CA Coinage The Romanized Cypriot mint(s) under Augustus produced five Imperial denominations of brass and bronze, between 27 and 22 BC. RPC attributes some of these as probably Cyprus and others as probably Asia Minor, while RIC attributes them to Asia Minor, perhaps Pergamum and Ephesos. The flans were cast from two-part moulds, creating flans quite different from those from earlier single-part moulds. The rims were filed. The first obverse legend includes the unusual spelling CAISAR paired with a portrait of particularly fine style, with delicately rendered hair. Sydenham notes: On the C.A coins, the head is rather long and narrow, and the hair, instead of falling in loose locks, is arranged symmetrically in close curls. The muscles of the neck are apparently not indicated, and the lower line of the neck is treated in a distinctive curve. Sydenham also notes, “It is probable that the coins were struck at more than one mint, since they exhibit minor differences in the style of the portrait.” The reverse types features C.A inside either: a rostral wreath, corona rostrata or an oak wreath, corona civica. Others have AVGVSTVS in the corona civica, similar to later Antioch Mint S.C coinage. The corona rostrata commemorates the naval victory at Actium. The corona civica celebrates “Saving the Lives of Citizens,” not only for his decisive victory over Antony and Cleopatra, but also for his clemency in sparing the lives of his enemies after Actium. Augustus had received both crowns from the Senate. “C.A” was an abbreviation for Caesar Augustus, the issuing authority, which is sometimes spelled out AVGVSTVS instead. Suetonius tells us that this name assumed in 27 BC: . . . was not only new, but much more considerable than Quirenus or Romulus, which some of his friends wanted him to assume, because religious places and those wherein was anything consecrated by augury was called Augusta. Augustus was the sole ruler of Cyprus, which he ruled as his personal estate, with no input from the Roman Senate. As Kraay notes, the reign of Augustus “above all . . . involved constitutionalism – an observance and not too obvious manipulation of Republican forms.” The C.A coinage is an example of this “inside the law” approach. Of the beginnings of Roman administration, Mattingly’s “Roman Imperial Civilisation” notes: Augustus found a vast task awaiting him . . . What had he to direct his actions? [There were] lessons to be drawn from the kingdoms of the Greek East. From them something might be learned. The kings of Syria had a long experience in administrating the affairs of an extensive kingdom. The Ptolemies of Egypt had shown how a country might be run on the lines of a profitable private estate. From both these sources Augustus may have learned much. Again, he could draw upon the experience of Roman private life, the way in which Roman nobles handled their often complicated affairs. But what taught him most was the task itself with its urgent necessities. The tasks to be done could be seen clearly and it soon became obvious to Augustus what kind of instruments he required for them. Cyprus provided a large profit directly to Augustus. The island continued to be a steady supplier of copper, a product for which Cyprus had been named. Augustus sold some Cypriot

71 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

copper to Herod the Great.53 The mines in central Cyprus were connected directly to Paphos by a Bronze Age road. There were other mines as well. The copper was coined into currency, which was used to buy goods, both on and off Cyprus. Every coin made was produced at a profit, especially the brass dupondius and sestertius. The mechanism allowed Augustus to extract a steady tax on the economy of the eastern provinces, in an even-handed and troublefree manner. No tax-gatherers were needed, and the effective tax extended outside of Cyprus, to the nearby Senatorial provinces, which accepted C.A and AVGVSTVS coinage at parity with the Senatorial coinage with the moneyor’s name around a large S.C. The largest denomination was the brass 34 mm sestertius of average weight c. 22.2 grams. Brass dupondii of about 12.6 grams also feature either a rostral or laurel wreath reverse.

A brass C.A. dupondius of Cyprus produced profit for Augustus. (11.25g) Brass, a mixture of copper and zinc, with its golden color, was valued in coinage at nearly double reddish bronze. However, its production cost was similar to that of bronze. Its formulation and production were a highly profitable government secret. In Natural History (xxxiii 95) Strabo (64 BC - 23? AD) apparently wrote about brass (orichalcum). There is a stone in the neighborhood of Andeira [Troas] which when burned becomes iron, and then when heated in a furnace with a certain earth distills pseudargyros and this with the addition of copper makes the mixture called by some oreichalkos. Josephus (Ant. lud XVI 4,5) notes that Augustus sold half the output of the copper mines at Soli to Herod the Great for 300 talents. Herod used this copper to produce a similar, large-scale, high seigniorage, brass and bronze coinage for Judea. Reading into the Talmudʼs 3rd century AD Kiddushin 12, Herodʼs largest denomination was a quarter of a sestertius. The Jewish Talmud (Kiddushin 12a) written in about the 3rd century AD, a period of different denominations, provides an apparently slightly confused account of the denominations of Judaea during this time, combining Hellenistic (Base 2 with one 3) and Roman elements (Base 2). 53

Apparently Herod’s large bronze or brass denomination was equal to the Roman as. The entire issue is dated to Year 3, the date of Herod’s victory over Antigonus. “Year 3” coins may have been produced for many years. Are the relatively lightweight, thin flan, fine-style denominations of Herod of a more brassy metal mixture than the smaller bronze ones? They apparently took the place of the much thicker, poorly made, leaded-bronze coinage of Antigonus. Metal analysis should answer this question. Presumably, the other copper mines of Cyprus also fell under the direct or indirect control of Augustus. Galen, writing in the 2nd century AD, tells of the imperial control and operation of the Cypriot copper mines.

72 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Pseudargyros (Pseudo-silver) is presumably a term for zinc, while oreichalkos is orichalcum, brass. Zinc ore was found on Cyprus as well. Its use in refining herb medicine was noted by Theophrastus, Enquiry into Plants, IX, II.10. c. 300 BC. Zinc ores from Cyprus, which when heated in water produced carbonates and hydrosilicates of zinc; these stuck to the reed (calamus) with which the mixture was stirred, and so the name “calamine” is still applied to zinc lotions. Cadmia, when heated, give off zinc oxide vapor that was sublimated and adhered to the wall of the furnace in clusters; these consisted of oxide of zinc and were scraped off and known as spodium (ash). Cypriot brass items of pre-Roman era have been found. Some Hellenistic and Ptolemaic Cypriot base metal coins have yellow color characteristic of brass. Other denominations were struck in bronze. A 10.5 gram as has the same style and CAISAR obverse legend with AVGV STVS in two lines inside the wreath. Heavy examples noted in RPC may be dupondii. The 4.8 gram CA semis, and a 2.8 gram quadrans 54 with similar types were also struck, both in bronze.

Augustus, bronze as, (10.33g) Cyprus, CAISAR Head right. /AVGV STVS inside laurel wreath. RPC 2231. Roman Load, v-coins. Production of this coinage was increased in 25 BC, with a much larger percentage of brass coinage, about half of the vastly enlarged production. Howgego calls this coinage Group II. The new issue was struck with different obverse legends AVGVSTVS and CAESAR. This second C.A issue is generally attributed to a nearby Asia Minor mint. However, Asia was ruled as a proconsular province under the nominal control of the Senate. As such, Asia would have been expected to have S.C or the name of a governor or official on the reverse of their bronze and brass. Acceptance of this very large issue extended to Asia, Thrace, and beyond. This issue generally shows 12:00 die axis. The portrait style is slightly less fine. The borders of the sestertii are dotted, but the middle bronze borders are either dotted or linear. Howgego notes a CAISAR obverse from Group I which is paired with an AVGVSTVS reverse of Group II (Howgego 1e/2c; RPC2231 note). The heavier AVGVSTVS ases of RPC 2235 are perhaps actually brass dupondii. Weights listed as RPC 2235 include 13.83, 13.37 and 12.94 g. The weight distribution appears to be bimodal. These coins should be examined for zinc content to see if they are brass or bronze, either dupondii or heavy ases. Eleven worn examples of the first and second C.A / AVGVSTVS coinage were recorded by Paphos II, but no other Roman Imperial coins of Augustus. Five C.A / AVGVSTVS coins were The CA quadrans is not noted in RPC I or its supplement but appears in Howgego class 1f; FITA p. 167; Six Main Coinages of Augustus, p. 113; and Cox, The Coinage of Tiberius in Cyprus, pp. 27, 113, #211, plate viii; Mattingly, CREBM I pp. 115, 708-711. Two examples were found at Paphos II, 512 (2.50g) and 513 (3.18g). Analysis of zinc content would be useful to see if these were bronze or brass. 54

73 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

recorded at Curium, and no Roman Imperial coins of this ruler. In Balkan and Asia Minor finds, the moneyor ases and dupondii of Augustus are far more common. The denominations from Paphos II include all of the Cypriot Imperial denominations of Augustus except the largest. (The finds include two C.A quadrans, one C.A semis, two C.A middle bronzes, four AVGVSTVS ases, and one uncertain as. All but a single quadrans are quite worn. One worn C.A as has the countermarks of Domitian). Nicolaou attributes them all to Cyprus. No other Imperial Roman coinage of Augustus was recorded at this site. The C.A coinage circulated in Asia Minor, Syria, the Balkans, and even in the West. The extensive C.A coinage met the coinage needs of Cyprus and well beyond. Nicolaou calls all the C.A coinage “Cypriot Imperial Issues,” adding, “[these] are regularly found on Cyprus.” However, she does not expand upon the significance of this statement. The entire C.A coinage should be attributed to Cyprus. The island was a source of copper, with experience in mass production of brass and bronze coins. C.A or AVGVSTVS appears on the reverse, a designation that shows the special role of Caesar Augustus in the minting, and a role he did not hold in Asia Minor. The Latin legend on all of the C.A bronzes, differentiates them from those of Asia Minor, which continued use of Greek on all their bronze during this period, and through the First Century AD. The C.A semis and quadrans were apparently just for Cyprus. The find evidence of Paphos II shows that the C.A and AVGVSTVS bronzes were plentiful enough on Cyprus to keep the Roman Imperial bronze from other mints from common circulation on Cyprus.5556 With the striking of Cypriot copper into the vast C.A coinage; Augustus collected a tax on the economy of the entire Empire.

A brass C.A. sestertius with the Civic Wreath, instead of the rostral wreath, also produced profit for Augustus. (25.45g)

A possible Augustan date is suggested for the coins found in the ashes in Paphos II, Room CXLVIII. Ptolemaic and Roman coins were found. 55

33 CA coinage was found with late Ptolemaic coins in room XXVI. Room XXVI, 0.6 m, except 717, on the second (lower) floor 661 Worn Ptolemaic, Æ22, 5.9g, obol 520 Augustus, CA 9.0g as 425 Cleopatra, Æ25, 4.9g, obol, headdress of Isis 56

717 Uncertain Æ22, 8.7g, corroded

74 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

A bronze as with AVGVSTVS inside a Civic Wreath is also part of the same series. (10.84g) Three favorite quotations of Augustus apply to his policies for Cyprus. “A radish may know no Greek but I do.” Existing Ptolemaic Greek government and currency structures of Cyprus were folded into the plans of the new ruler. This occurred “as quick as blanched asparagus.” The efforts occurred quickly and smoothly, under well-chosen managers who might have been told to “Hasten slowly.” Because Cyprus was under the direct control of Augustus from 30 BC to 22 BC, one of his personal estates, the large seigniorage on the brass and bronze coins went directly to the personal wealth of Augustus, the richest man of his era.

75 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Non-export obols and hemiobol (?) of Augustus A sixth denomination for Augustus, the bronze obol (RPC 3904-5), was issued in 26 BC. The obverse has the Latin legend and bare head of Augustus. The reverse has the Latin titles and consular date of Augustus around Victory on a globe. The personification stands on a globe, holding a wreath and palm branch. The Victory type may have been taken from the statue on top of the Roman Senate, though the pose is a very standard one for Victory. This issue almost certainly celebrates the Victory of the Romans over the Egyptians at Actium. The comparison with the obol of Cleopatra is notable. The head of Ptolemaic Zeus-Ammon has been replaced with the head of Augustus. Nicolaou and Amandry note the similarity of the portrait style with the C.A semis. On the reverse, the Ptolemaic Eagle, holding a palm branch, has been replaced with Roman Victory, holding the same emblem. The beveled, cast flans of this issue are of slightly lower, if more consistent, weight to those of the late Ptolemies, but are more compact. The use of obols was apparently limited to just Cyprus, for they stood at an inconvenient relationship to the Roman as, two-thirds.

Latin legend obols have similar style to the C.A semis. (7g) A puzzling issue of 17 mm bronzes apparently dates from about this time. (RPC 3916) The obverse shows a Capricorn on a globe, with a star or comet before it. The edge is beveled and more concave on the reverse. The reverse has a scorpion left, with another star above it. The diameter is about 17 mm and the die axis is 12:00, if the star is oriented above on both sides. Neither side has any legend. Four examples were found with late Ptolemaic

76 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

and Augustan bronzes below a single second century mosaic floor at Paphos II.57 Nicolaou suggests: . . . it would be more reasonable to attribute them to an uncertain mint (Commagene (?)), than to Cyprus, the more so since there is no strong evidence supporting the latter attribution. The few specimens occurring in Cyprus may have come into the island through trade. However, Hill (NC, 1917, p. 24) notes that these coins are found in quantity in Cyprus, and RPC I Supplement notes twenty-four examples at the Nikosia Museum in Cyprus. The Capricorn / Scorpion coin is Cypriot. The obverse with star before the Capricorn is similar to the reverse of Augustan denarii (RIC 542). Mary Frances Williams suggests that the star may be both a comet and a star. She writes that Augustus interpreted “the Julian comet as a star which ratified the connection between Caesar and Venus.” The Capricorn was the birth-sign of Augustus. The other coins found under the same Paphos mosaic suggest a date of about this time. Scorpions were and are native to Cyprus and Southeastern Europe. The Scorpion on the coin is probably a second birth-sign, Scorpio. Three important Imperial family members appear on coinage with Augustus: 1) Livia, 2) Caius Caesar, and 3) Tiberius. Livia was born January 30th, which makes her an Aquarius. The exact date of Caius Caesar’s birth in 20 BC is known to between August 14th and September 13th (Likely Virgo, perhaps Leo). But, Tiberius was born on November 16th, 42 BC. His sign was Scorpio. Perhaps, the coin connects to the dynastic relationship celebrated on larger double portrait dupondii of Tiberius and Augustus. The 17 mm diameter and 2.68 gram average weight of the sixteen examples of this coin in RPC is about equal to the quadrans of Rome.

More coins below a mosaic between these rooms seem to be an Augustan deposit, although there is a very worn coin of Claudius, perhaps from a 2nd century AD repair to the mosaic. This is the only find of the Scorpion / Capricorn tesserae recorded at Paphos II. Between Rooms XXXVIII & XVI, below the mosaic at the western wall, 0.2 m 527 Augustus, Plautius, 1/2 AD, Æ14, 3.3g, hemiobol 587 Augustan period, Capricorn / Scorpion, Æ19, 1.6g, probably a tessera 528 Augustus, Plautius, 1/2 AD, Æ16, 3.2g, hemiobol 427 Cleopatra, Æ23, 4.2g, obol, headdress of Isis 551 Claudius, Æ36, 22.8g, drachm / sestertius 529 Augustus, Plautius, 1/2 AD, Æ16, 3.1g, hemiobol 530 Augustus, Plautius, 1/2 AD, Æ18, 2.4g, hemiobol 10 Alexander the Great, Æ18, 4.2g 428 Cleopatra, Æ25, 5g, obol 531 Augustus, Plautius, 1/2 AD, Æ18, 3g, hemiobol 330 Ptolemy XII, Æ21, 5.3g, obol, cornucopia 471 Cleopatra Æ16, 2g, hemiobol 532 Augustus, Plautius, 1/2 AD, Æ18, 3.2g, hemiobol 588 Augustan period, Capricorn / Scorpion, Æ17, 2.7g, probably a tessera 589 Augustan period, Capricorn / Scorpion, Æ18, 3.2g, probably a tessera 590 Augustan period, Capricorn / Scorpion, Æ17, 2.0g, probably a tessera 57

77 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Puzzling Capricorn / Scorpion Æ17 was a hemiobol, a tessera or a quadrans. The types are the birth-signs of Augustus and Tiberius. (2.47g)

78 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Silver Denarii and Quinarii of Augustus, 28-22 BC After Actium, Octavian took over Antony and Cleopatra’s minting operations at Paphos on Cyprus. A steady output of similar style denarii was maintained. Mattingly’s “Roman Imperial Civilisation” notes that: The imperial coinage carries a wealth of type and legend, which, on closer investigation, is found to be very purposeful. The coins steadily carry out to the world their little messages about what is happening and about what the Emperors have in mind . . . [Coins] passed from pocket to pocket; and, as men knew that they were always changing, they would study them with a care that we have forgotten, to see what new thing they might have to say . . . Augustus presents himself as the victorious prince of peace. An attractive issue of several denarius types and one quinarius, with similar legends and fine-style portrait, belongs to the same Cypriot mint(s) as the C.A and AVGVSTVS issues. Some gold is known. The obverses have similar style portrait, and the legend CAESAR or AVGVSTVS. Like the bronzes with these legends and style, the die axis tends toward 12:00. The borders are sometimes dotted, and the weight standard is a bit below that of Western issues. The first issue of denarii, from about 28-27 BC, has a fine style head, with the Latin legend of Octavian, CAESAR DIVI F COS VI (RIC 545, Vagi 247). A small Capricorn is below the bust, an apparent symbol that the coin came from Cyprus the personal possession of Octavian himself. Suetonius would later write (Vita Augustae 94): After having told the astrologer Theogenes his date of birth ". . . Theogenes jumped up and prostrated himself before Augustus. Later on, Augustus had such big confidence in his astrology that he published his horoscope and issued a silver coin with the zodiacal sign of the Capricorn under which he was born . . . . The reverse legend AEGYPT[O] CAPTA is above and below a crocodile. RIC records the dies as unadjusted. The borders are dotted. The weight peak is 3.85 to 3.65 grams. The obverse style resembles the CA coinage. It is the first of the types with this unusual portrait style, and the only one struck before Octavian became Augustus, probably immediately before this. The reverse legend and types defiantly proclaim the Conquest of Egypt by Octavian. A similar issue of Western-Mint denarii without Capricorn is also known (RIC 275). Gold aurei with COS VII in the name of Augustus are known (RIC 544), as well as a unique gold medallion of four aurei, with reverse hippopotamus (RIC 546).

79 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Some Octavian / Aegypto Capta denarii have a small Capricorn below the neck have a similar style to the CA coinage. (3.80g) Sydenham notes two basic types for the Eastern Mint denarii of Augustus. “It probable that the coins were struck at more than one mint, since they exhibit minor differences in the style of portrait.” He divides them into two classes. Class 7 (a) includes 1) denarii with hexastyle temple, 2) those with a laurel crown with prows and 3) quinarius with Victory on prow left. Class 7 (b) includes the “Young Bull” denarius and corresponding aurei. RIC gives them to a Greek Mint, and Samos. Reading the types in relation to the C.A coinage, the reverses of Sydenham’s Class 7 (a) relate to Cyprus. The temple of Zeus Salaminios was the most important temple of the city. The second type, which shares obverse dies with the first, has a rostral wreath. The quinarius shows a Victory on the Prow, in commemoration of the naval battle at Actium. The more graceful style Young Bull coinage also has a reverse connection to Paphos. Archaic and Classical era silver coins of Paphos feature a similarly posed bull, apparently of a very similar short-horned variety, with folds of skin on the neck. However, bulls are a common theme from most ancient cultures, and this type of bull is not native to modern Cyprus. The Candelabrum reverse seems closest to the Young Bull reverse. The difference in style, which is matched within the C.A coinage, might reflect the types of the cities of Salamis and Paphos, different engravers, or a couple of years of time. The finest style among these types is the “Young Bull” denarius (Vagi 267, RIC 475, Cohen 28). The reverse has a young bull (in some references called a heifer), and the legend AVGVSTVS. The connection to the fine style C.A. bronze is noted in many references. Many consider this the finest style denarius of Augustus. Sydenham notes their “ . . . superb style and artistic workmanship, scarcely surpassed in the whole of the imperial series.” The late, noted numismatist William Warden used this attractive coin on his business cards and advertisements. Like Antony portrait denarii from Cyprus, some examples have a closed striking crack. Gold aurei of this type are known. However, gold of a different but equally fine style portraits facing left or right with cow left or right reverse (RIC 536-538) is perhaps from Asia Minor. In RIC and other older references, the Young Bull issue has been tentatively assigned to a mint at Samos, during a visit of Augustus in 21 BC. Instead, the issue should be attributed to a city with significant silver-minting facilities in the region is likely Paphos, Pergamum or Ephesos–in about 26 BC. The portrait style bears only a limited resemblance to the Latin legend cistophorii of Asia Minor. However, the stylistic connection to the C.A coinage is stronger. Paphos would be the mint least likely to show any Senatorial influence (moneyer name) on a denarius. This issue would have circulated alongside denarii from other mints throughout the empire.

A fine style “Young Bull” denarius of Augustus has similar style to C.A bronzes from Cyprus.

80 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

A similar “Young Bull” aureus of slightly different style also similar to other C.A. and AVGVSTVS bronzes. (7.90g) A puzzling denarius appears be an issue of Cyprus from c. 27 BC. RIC 540 has obverse legend CA ES AR with a portrait of youth resembling Augustus on the Young Bull denarius. The title CA ES AR is the same as that of the Young Bull denarius and much of the CA coinage. The entire obverse is inside an oak wreath. Augustus had won the right to wear an oak wreath, the corona civica, “for saving the lives of citizens.” The AVG VST legend is next to a candelabrum on the reverse, all inside a floral wreath decorated with bucrania and paterae. The candelabrum rests on a tripod that may be composed of ship’s prows, perhaps a version of the corona rostra. There is a corresponding aureus with the same types, RIC 539. Generations of numismatists have struggled with the attribution of this type. Cohen connected the obverse head with Caius Caesar. Many since this time have accepted this attribution. Mattingly, writing in BMC Roman disagrees: The style and fabric of the coin are unique in the Augustan series. There is something suggestive of Eastern Workmanship in the decorative character of the coins, but we have no definite clue to guide us. The young head on the coin, with obverse legend CAESAR, rev. AVGVST. has been confidently identified as the young prince Gaius Caesar. But it is hard to conceive that the title ‘C. Caesar Augusti f.’ could ever be rendered in so short a form, especially as that short form is a distinctive title of Augustus. Failing definite proof, then, we must see in the young head a glorified and idealized portrait of Augustus himself, probably struck in the earlier part of his reign. Mattingly drifts into speculation, but with solid conclusions: The exact attribution of the coin is a riddle. A plausible guess might be that it was struck in Syria in B.C. 20, when Octavian spent some months there with Herod the Great, or perhaps in Judea by Herod himself in honor of him. The mint must be one that does not normally strike gold and silver, the date as early as possible after B.C 27. Were the coin assigned to Gaius, it would best be regarded as struck after his death, in Syria. But this attribution need not be very seriously considered. The only evidence against Eastern mintage of which we know is the finding of specimens of the aureus at Ambenay [Northern France] (date of burial c. B.C. 11. If the find has been correctly reported, this is well nigh conclusive against the attribution to Gaius Caesar) and Xenten [Germany]. The style and general character of the coin seems decisive in favor of the East. RIC I agrees in general:

81 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The aurei and denarii with ‘candelabrum’ reverse appear to commemorate the Ludi Saeculares of 17 BC. They have been found in hoards as widely apart as France, Sardinia and Romania [and footnote: Bulgaria], and although they seem to suggest Eastern treatment, this may well be illusory. It is probable that only distribution will help in the identification of the mint of origin. RIC notes weight peak of 3.80-3.70g, which is typical of the Eastern mints. Western mints struck denarii at the slightly higher weight standard of c. 3.95 g, which was just under 3.5 scruples, 84 coins per Roman pound. RIC notes that the die axis is “not regularly adjusted, but tending strongly toward” 6:00. There are no outer borders outside of the wreath. Sydenham’s description of the CA portrait style applies to the candelabrum denarii: The head is rather long and narrow, and the hair, instead of falling in loose locks, is arranged symmetrically in close curls. The muscles of the neck are apparently not indicated, and the lower line of the neck is treated in a distinctive curve.

Denarius with the portrait of a young Augustus has style similar to the CA bronze and the other Augustus denarii from Cyprus. (3.85g) Another angle of the Meroe head of young Augustus, c. 27-25 BC. As Mattingly notes, the use of CAESAR, a standard title of Augustus, coupled with the corona civica and the date early in the reign of Augustus eliminates serious consideration that the young head is that of Caius Caesar. The weight and style of the type is Eastern, with strong parallels with the both the Prima Porta portrait and the “Young Bull” denarii and the related the CA brass and bronze. A date of 27 BC is most likely, celebrating the Victory at Actium as well as the constitutional settlement that included his assumption of the name Augustus. Another attractive issue of silver, with obverse legend AVGVSTVS and Actium-related reverses may also belong to the same mint as the C.A coinage (RIC 472, Cohen 182, RIC 473, Cohen 335, and RIC 474, Cohen 328). RIC also notes that the portrait is similar although not identical to that of the Young Bull denarius. The reverse of RIC 472 shows a temple of six evenly spaced Doric pillars, entablature in a mixture of Doric and Corinthian, with a round shield in the pediment and palmettes on top. The reverse legend is IOVI OLVM, “Jupiter Olympus.” RIC gives these types the same date as the Young Bull issue, but attributes them to a “Mint in Northern Greece,” during a visit of Augustus. RIC notes that the dies are not aligned, a difference from the usual 12:00 die axis of the C.A bronze and Young Bull silver coinage. However, the examples viewed during the course of researching this book suggest dies tending toward a 12:00 die axis. The borders are dotted. The issue shares obverse dies with RIC 473, which means that both must be from the same mint. This denarius has no reverse legend and dotted borders. The reverse type is a laureate wreath intertwined with prows, the corona rostrata, the ties arranged centrally. This type celebrates the Victory at Actium, similar to that of the C.A coinage.

82 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The third type of this issue is a silver quinarius, an unusual denomination equal to half a denarius (RIC 474). The obverse is similar, although of smaller scale. Like the other denarii of this mint, and the C.A coinage the portrait has fine style, with finely detailed hair, high relief portrait and subtle facial expression. Both sides have dotted borders. The reverse has no legend. Victory stands on a prow facing left, holding a wreath and palm. This issue probably celebrates the recent Victory at the sea-battle of Actium. RIC connects this issue with the visit of Augustus to Greece in 21 BC, but CBN connects it to the C.A coinage six years earlier.

A quinarius of similar style has Victory on the prow of a defeated Ptolemaic galley, missing its prow-horn. (1.77g) The pose of Nike / Victory on the Prow on the Augustus quinarius similar to that of silver coins of Demetrios Poliorketes, issued 275 years earlier to celebrate his Victory at the Battle of Salamis, off the coast of Cyprus. On both types, Nike is standing atop a defeated Egyptian

83 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

galley. The practice of removing the divine protection of an enemy ship by removing its prow ornament was well understood.58 Naval warfare of the first century BC was not so different. The quinarius of Augustus with Victory on a prow shows a similar pose over a galley missing its prow-ornament, thus a defeated Egyptian galley. The galley prow before the portrait of Cleopatra on her denarii, its prow fully ornamented, makes an interesting “before and after” comparison with the reduced prow on the quinarius of Augustus a few years later. Is a specific Hellenistic statue of Victory on a prow, located in Salamis, pictured? Perhaps. Two ancient Cypriot coins, spread over centuries, depict a very similar scene. On the silver coinage of Demetrios Poliorketes of c. 300-294 BC joyful Nike stands, drapery billowing behind, blowing a trumpet in her extended right hand, with one wing visible, on the prow of a defeated Egyptian ship. The type commemorates the naval victory off Salamis in 306 BC. On the quinarius of Augustus, joyful Nike (Victory to the Romans) stands, drapery billowing behind, placing a wreath in her extended right hand, with one wing visible, on the prow of a defeated Egyptian ship. The type commemorates the naval victory at Actium in 31 BC. The similarity of the two types is strong. However, no statue model has yet been found and other cities used this type. The three issues have a slightly less fine-style portrait than the Young Bull issue. If the Young Bull issue was engraved by the same hand as the early fine-style C.A issue, then perhaps these portraits were engraved by an artist or artists connected with Howgego Groups II and III, the larger issues of bronze and brass of 25-22 BC. RIC assigns the issue, tentatively to a North Peloponnesian mint, traveling with Augustus, connecting it closely with the Samos mint for the Young Bull denarius. The similarity to the C.A, Candelabrum and Young Bull coinage suggests a Cypriot mint, although the varied die axis (if this is correct) works against a Paphos attribution.

58

The Nike / Victory on prow pose is similar to a much earlier tetradrachm of Demetrios Poliroketes. Of the coinage of Demetrios Poliorketes, Newell writes, . . . Nike is alighting on one of the defeated ships. This follows from a certain peculiarity observable on all of Demetrios’ coins bearing the Nike type. If the various specimens be carefully examined it will soon be observed that all show clearly a notch or break indicated at the topmost point of the stolos. Now the stolos, according to both ancient and modern writers, was the curved, swanlike object that rises from the stem, high above the prow, of an ancient ship. It served the purpose both of ornament and ‘weapon’ for the prow. At the period of which we are treating, namely the fourth century BC, it either curved backwards and ended in a round disk (or sometimes a volute-like ornament) having its convex side facing forward or, more often still and especially on warships, it curved forward and ended in a projecting horn called the acrostolion that is, the point or topmost part of the stolos. This latter form can be clearly distinguished on the various more or less contemporary coins given on [Newell’s] Plate xviii, nos. 8-14. Therefore the prows are certainly not those of defeated ships. In all cases the extra, forwardcurving ornament at the top of the stolos is plainly visible. It is this ornament that is so conspicuously missing from the prows found on Demetrios’ silver coins. Furthermore, we know that it was this particular ornament that the victors in ancient times were accustomed to saw off in order to carry away as trophies. For the ‘horn’, as a symbol of strength and power, was placed upon the prow by the Greeks for apotropaic reasons. But if now it were lost or removed, the ship would no longer be divinely protected and so, to the superstitious ancients, would no longer possess the power of offensive or defensive action–it would be hors de combat. On Demetrios’ coins, there being no reason in itself for the notch or break mentioned above, it is at once apparent that the artist desired to indicate that the horn of the stolos, in other words the acrostolion, had here been sawed off or broken away. Therefore the ship on all the coins of the Nike type, having been so evidently deprived of its acrostolion, can be none other than one of the defeated galleys upon which Nike is descending at the moment of victory. The argument is supported by the existence of a Classical Cyprus stater (BMC Cyprus p. xliv, plate xxv, #6), depicting Athena Nike resting on the prow of a ship, holding its cut acrostolion in her extended hand, gazing at it.

84 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

The temple reverse has been connected to the Temple of Zeus Olympus at Olympia, or that of the same god at Athens. Price and Trell suggest the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, but the strong stylistic connection to the CA brass and bronze coinage makes an attribution to Cyprus more likely. The Temple of Zeus Olympus (Zeus Salaminios) at the South end of the Agora of Salamis (also known as the Stone Forum) had been re-built under Augustus by 22 BC. A statue of Zeus stood in a temple although the statue may have been Hellenistic, after the similarly ornamented, but seated, Zeus of Pheidias. It was the chief shrine of the city of Salamis, and one of the three most important temples on Cyprus. Remnants of the Temple of Zeus Salaminios exist. One of the inscriptions found near this temple in the excavations of 1890 is in honor of Augustus' wife Livia and dedicated to Zeus Olympus. In Lefkos, a single, twenty-foot-high, gray-granite Doric column evidently quarried from the Temple of Jupiter at Salamis in 1550 stands in Attaturk Square, today known as “the Venetian Column.”

With the obverse link to the C.A coinage and the recent rebuilding of the temple by 22 BC, a “Zeus Salaminios” attribution for this Zeus Olympus temple seems likely. (3.90g) “The Venetian Column” today.

Augustus denarius with corona rostrata on the reverse shares obverse die with the above Temple of Zeus Olympus denarius. (3.72 g) Athlit Ram, a second century BC Ptolemaic bronze ram found off of Israel. An issue of denarii has an oak-wreathed head right of fine style, with no legend. (RIC 542) The reverse has a Capricorn, the well-known birth-sign of Augustus, with the word AVGVSTVS below it, and a star or comet above. A similar Capricorn and star appears on Cypriot tesserae / quadrans. The die axis is 12:00, and the weight peak is slightly lower than Western issues. The obverse border is dotted, while the reverse border is linear. A slightly different portrait is on a very similar type (RIC 541). The reverse has AVGVSTVS, with a Capricorn right, a cornucopia on its back, holding a globe, with a rudder attached. There is

85 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

no star. The types are identical to an issue of denarii in the West (RIC 126) but a bit lighter, and of very different, non-Western style. Cohen valued these at 50 gold francs, vs. 6 for the Western style. These fine style portraits do differ somewhat from the C.A / Young Bull denarius portrait. RIC notes, “Difference in the size of portrait between these two issues (RIC 541 and 542), together with the difference in reverse type, may indicate the work of different mints.” However, the obverse styles are very similar.

The Augustus denarii with Capricorn and star / comet reverse have some common features with CA bronze and related denarii. RIC 542 (3.91g)

Some Capricorn reverse denarii have an oak-wreathed head. RIC 541 (3.85g) Of this series of issues, BMC author Harold Mattingly cobbles together a very complex tale of ongoing mobile workers and equipment: The most possible solution seems to be that Octavian very soon after, perhaps even before, Actium (It is certainly strange that, against Antony’s enormous output, we have nothing of Octavian to assign to the years immediately before Actium, unless part of the ‘Caesar Divi f.’ coinage fills the gap. If so, the mint would be at Octavian’s military headquarters) collected a staff of Greek artists to design his coins; that for one or more years he had a “traveling’ mint (The evidence for the ‘traveling’ mint for a short period is rather strong: a) we find the later Ephesos and Pergamum styles combined in what looks like a single series; b) the historical conditions make it highly probable that Octavian struck military issues about this time, even before he gained possession of Asia Minor . . . Possibly these are only coincidences, but at any rate they need to be carefully considered) which struck as occasion demanded, but that about B.C. 30-29 it was settled in Asia Minor, some artists going to Ephesos, some to Pergamum. For its extreme complexity, Mattingly’s explanation rivals the BMC explanation of borrowed mintmarks on Ptolemaic tetradrachms. Against this convoluted explanation, a simple

86 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

solution can be offered: Money was generally minted at secure places of least-cost, near workers and fuel. After Actium, Octavian took over Antony and Cleopatra’s minting operations at Paphos on Cyprus. The mint maintained a modest but steady output of denarii with portraits similar to the CA bronze. The attractive obverse styles of denarii RIC 541 and 542 are paralleled by rare aurei with reverse of a cow left. Calico 169 and 168. Similar left-facing laureate head 170-1 seem to have no parallel denarii. Cyprus seems like a likely origin for all of these silver types. All were fairly modest scale issues, which are scarce today. All were struck at a slightly reduced weight standard, with weight peaks noted by RIC at 3.85 or 3.80 to 3.60, versus an additional 0.10 grams at mints in the Western Empire. Most have dotted borders and 12:00 die axis. Flan cracks were a production issue. Variations in style and high frequency of plated issues suggest a lack of control. All have fine style portraits, with delicately detailed hair, high relief portrait and expressive facial detail. Many have strong stylistic connections to the C.A coinage. None have “moneyor” names. The reverses generally name Augustus, and show themes related to the Battle of Actium. While traveling mints may have been needed during times of war, the consistency of these issues suggests a peacetime minting environment. A logical order is: 1) Crocodile, 2) Candelabrum, 3) Young Bull, 4 a, b & c) Wreath, Temple and Victory. All of the silver of Augustus would have circulated alongside denarii from other mints, throughout the empire, generally in the East. Features of Eastern, Early Augustan denarii, probably Cypriot Crocodile Candelabr. Young Bull Wreath Temple Victory RIC# 545 540 475 473 472 474 Die Axis var. var. 6:00 ~12 ~12 ~12 Peak Wt. 3.85g 3.80g 3.85g 3.85g 3.85g n/a Obv. Border dots wreath dots dots dots dots Rev. Border dots wreath dots dots dots dots Moneyer none none none none none none AVGVSTVS no yes yes yes yes yes CA style yes? yes yes yes yes yes Head bare bare bare bare bare bare Actium Rev. yes maybe maybe yes no yes Capricorn yes no no no no no Gold Known yes yes yes no no no

Capr. & Globe 541 ~12 3.85 dots linear none yes perhaps oak wreath no yes no

Capr. & Star 542 ~12 3.85g dots linear none yes perhaps laureate no yes no

87 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cyprus as a Senatorial Province under Augustus, 22 BC to 14 AD Cyprus became a Senatorial province in 22 BC, a concession to the Senate after a general consolidation of the power of Augustus in the East. A proconsular governor, under the nominal control of the Senate ruled the province. The leader of the Senate was still Augustus. Taxes were paid in the name of the Senate, rather than the “Privy Purse.” Bronze and brass coin production was reduced to meet demand on Cyprus and some of Syria, for the Senate had mints of its own in many cities where the C.A and AVGVSTVS coinage circulated. Under nominal Senatorial authority, Augustus was still shown on the obverse of the coinage, now wearing a laurel wreath. An issue of bronze ases and brass larger denominations, struck on “Syrian style” dumpy flans was minted either at Salamis, or a Syrian mint. RIC connects the style of the issue to the C.A coinage. RPC 4101 to 4105 are placed in Syria by RPC, with 10 of 11 proveniences in Syria, and one in Cyprus. However, RPC notes, On the other hand, the sestertius 4101 would probably be the only brass (if that is what the metal is–it looks like brass by visual inspection) coin ever made in Syria, which is rather unlikely, although not impossible. The brass sestertii have the longer obverse titles TR POT IMP AVGVST, a bare head right, dotted border and 12:00 die axis. The sestertius reverse has an oak wreath between two laurel-branches around OB CIVIS SERVATOS, “For Saving the Lives of Citizens.” One specimen was found at Curium. RIC notes: No probable mint has yet been proposed for these coins, which are of fair sestertius weight (Weight peak 24.00-22.50g). They may be eastern rather than western, to judge from obverse portraiture and legend, although not lettering. A unique 7.1 g example of this reverse is a trihemiobol if it is brass. The dupondius has a laurel wreath around AVGVST (RPC 3914). Paphos already had several years of experience minting brass C.A coinage. Syrian mints would not mint brass for several more years. An attribution to Salamis, the Cypriot port close to Syria, may balance the style, brass, and die axis with the find spots in Syria. Syria cannot be excluded. Certain coinage was issued on Cyprus in about 5 BC. Brass dupondii continued to be minted, with the portrait of Augustus. The reverse features the Senatorial legend, a large S.C in an oak wreath. Syrian dupondii of the same period have the same types and the same legends. However, the beveled or dumpy fabric and fine or crude style of the portrait can distinguish the mint of a dupondius (Cyprus or Syria). Three dupondii were found at Paphos II. Ases with S.C on full, round flans, of the same refined Cypriot portrait style and S.C reverse also exist. These have probably been confused with the more common Syrian ases in many collections. A similar issue with C.A and S.C in wreath reverse includes the date ΛT or 330 (RPC 4106, 4107). The issue may also be Syrian, as the die axis is variable. If Cypriot, the C.A. and S.C reverses, paired with the same date, indicate the coin must be from the transitional year 22 BC, the year when Cyprus was in transition from a fief of Augustus, to a Senatorial province. Year 330 could be counted from 352 BC, the year Pnytagoras became king of Salamis. Or perhaps the issue may simply be imitative of types encountered in circulation in Cyprus and Syria.

88 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

In 1 AD, during the visit of Caius Caesar, heir to Augustus, the Cypriot mint struck Roman bronze ases, 3/2 obols of c. 8.6 grams. Augustus and his heir appear on each sides of the beveled flan issue.

Statue of Caius Caesar. As/trihemiobol for Augustus and Caius Caesar. (9.34g) A modest issue of very good style “Caius and Lucius” denarii can be connected to an Eastern Mint at about this time. Cyprus is a candidate. In comparison to the much more common Lugdunum issues, the obverse portrait is quite delicate, with graceful lettering on both sides. The simpulum and lituus above Caius and Lucius are of considerably different form. The simpulum appears crushed, while the lituus has a split base. The heads of the princes are of adult proportions to their bodies, roughly seven to one. While often connected to the Trajanic restorations, the consistently heavy weights exclude issue after the coinage reform of Nero. The generally 12:00 die axis, slightly low weight, and refined style suggest an Eastern origin.

Augustus, AR denarius (3.82g) Eastern Mint, struck c. 1 AD, Delicate style. In 1/2 AD during the governorship of A. Plautius, the Paphos mint struck bronze denominations of 6.7 grams and 3.7 grams. The latter two named the proconsul A. Plautius Proconsul as the issuing authority on the reverse. He had been Consul Suffectus in 1 BC. The issues (RPC 3904 and 3905) change the Ptolemaic Zeus-Ammon portrait to that of Augustus. Amandry observes there are two legend varieties paired with two different styles of portrait. To Amandry, this suggests two mints. RPC 3907 a hemiobol, perhaps from Salamis (RPC 3907), has a reverse of Zeus standing in the same pose as Cleopatra’s quarter-unit, identified as the statue of Zeus Salaminios. However, the statue is apparently “Romanized,” since the hemiobol of the time of Cleopatra. Instead of the grain ears, Zeus holds a patera. The scepter is eagle-tipped, yet another Roman symbol.

89 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Roman quarter-units of Augustus with reverses of a statue of Zeus Salaminios, holding a patera and an eagle-tipped scepter and Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos, with conical stone at its center. (c. 3.5g) The temple of Zeus at Salamis had been rebuilt under Augustus in by 22 BC. A similar coinage (RPC 3906) shows the Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos on the reverse, a continuation of the very rare post-Actium, Ptolemaic issue with this temple. Tacitus would note, “The image of the goddess is not in human shape, but is a rounded stone, tapering upward like a cone from a broad base to a small circumference.” A conical black stone shown at the center of the Temple, now at the Museum of Kouklia in Paphos, has been confirmed as an andesitic boulder, not a meteorite. Tiberius issued similar temple reverse hemiobol in the name of his son Drusus. RPC (p. 577) suggests that the smaller denominations were perhaps struck on an old semiuncial standard, as a semis and a quadrans. However, perhaps an obol and a hemiobol are intended. This seems to fit with denominations of Ptolemaic and Roman, Egypt and Cyprus. This interpretation of Roman Cypriot denominations seems more likely, in consideration of the average weights of bronzes quoted and the existence of a prior EgyptianCypriot denominational system. A likely valuation of coinage after the time of Cleopatra, in both Egypt and Cyprus, would be based on the ongoing relationship of the Cleopatra tetradrachm at about 33% silver and c. 13.0 grams to the Roman denarius that was nearly pure silver and about 3.9 grams. The Cleopatra tetradrachms contain 4.3 grams of silver. The actual silver weight of the tetradrachm, in relation to the Roman denarius supports this system. Probably, a tetradrachm of Cleopatra was worth one denarius, a slight undervaluation of the coinage of the loser of the Battle of Actium. This system assumes that the bronze relations were constant. Six obols made one sestertius. The 8.6 gram coin was perhaps a lightweight as. The 6.7 gram denomination was 2/3 of an as, an obol. And the 3.7 gram coin was one-third of an as, a hemiobol. The unusually thin fabric of the 8.6 gram Augustan “obols” is similar to the half-unit of the late Ptolemies, although the 6.7 gram coin is chunkier. RPC I (p. 688-689) notes that the standard value of the Roman Egyptian tetradrachm was the same as an Imperial denarius during Claudian and Neronian times. The figures for the silver content of a Cleopatra tetradrachm are apparently mistaken, perhaps based upon the surface silvering. Hazzard notes the parity between the denarius and the tetradrachm in “Two Hoards of Ptolemaic Silver” NC 1994 pp. 62-64. One hundred years after Cleopatra, in 72 AD, a papyrus notes that an Egyptian tetradrachm was equal in value to a Roman denarius.59 At this later date, each contained a little more than 2 grams of silver. So from the debasement of the Ptolemaic tetradrachm under Rabirius Postumus in c. 58 BC well into Roman Imperial times, a tetradrachm of Alexandria was equal to a denarius of Rome. Julio-Claudian coins of Cyprus, related to the old Ptolemaic system. 59

RPC II p 320, Walker, Metrology I, p. 155, citing Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum 11, p. 112ff.

90 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

RPC # Avg. Weight (g) Cypriot / Roman denomination issue of c. 36 BC, reduced “Fleet Coinage” *1461 4.95 3/2 obol / as, Other Fleet Coinage. *1470 3.91 3/2 obol / as Denarii in the name of Antony, c. 37 (?) -32 BC Crawford 542 3.9 silver 24 obols / denarius Other denarii as well. Issue of c. RIC 545 2227-9 2230 Unpub. 2231 2232 Howg. If

27 BC, under Augustus. 3.8 silver 22.2 brass 12.67 brass 12.84 brass 11.48 4.82 2.8

Issue of c. 25 BC, under Augustus. RIC 475 3.8 silver Other denarii as well. 2233 23.12 brass 2234 12.44 brass 2235 11.19

24 obols / denarius 6 obols / sestertius 3 obols / dupondius 3 obols / dupondius 3/2 obol / as 3/4 obol / semis 3/8 obol / quadrans 24 obols / denarius 6 obols / sestertius 3 obols / dupondius 3/2 obol / as

Issue of c. 1/2 AD, as a Senatorial province. 3904 6.73 obol / 2/3 as 3905 6.73 obol / 2/3 as 3906 3.70 hemiobol / 1/3 as 3907 3.64 hemiobol / 1/3 as Issue of c. 5 BC (Paphos, similar to Syria RPC 4248) 3914 14.73 brass 3 obols / dupondius 3915 14.53 brass 3 obols / dupondius Unpub. 9.29 3/2 obol / as (only 1 weighed) Issue of 1 AD, during the visit of Caius Caesar. 3908-13 8.70 3/2 obol (?) / as Time of Tiberius Caesar, c. 9 – 14 AD 3916 2.68 Issue after 15 AD 3917-8 14.69 brass 3919 8.58

tessera, quadrans 3 obols / dupondius 3/2 obol / as

Issue of 19-20 AD 3868-9 15.58 brass 3870 8.35

3 obols / dupondius 3/2 obol / as

Issue of 22/23 AD 3920 6.23 3921-26 3.62

obol / 2/3 as (only 1 weighed) hemiobol / 1/3 as

Issue of c. 45 AD

91 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

3927 25.90 3928 24.91 3929 14.15 3930 16.23 3931 6.72 3932 9.78 *Not struck at a

brass brass brass brass Cypriot mint.

6 obols / sestertius 6 obols / sestertius 3 obols / dupondius same (2 examples weighed) obol / 2/3 as (3 examples weighed) 3/2 obol / as

92 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cypriot Coinage under Tiberius and Later, After 14 AD To the people of Cyprus, far from the frontiers of the Empire, the centuries of the Pax Romana formed an uneventful although contented period. Mattingly notes, “Cyprus . . . lay just outside of the main currents of life.” A population unused to political independence or democratic institutions did not find Roman rule oppressive.

Radiate Divus Augustus and laureate Tiberius on c. 15.6g Cypriot dupondius - triobol. In c. 15-16 AD the laureate head of Tiberius was paired with Livia seated right (RPC 3919, as) and paired with that of Divus Augustus (RPC 3917 and 3918 dupondii). Both types are copied from Roman Imperial types of the early reign of Tiberius. For his son Drusus, hemiobols were struck with the reverse designs begun by late in the reign of Cleopatra: Zeus Salaminios and the Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos. In addition, a reverse with both of these symbols was struck.

Drusus obverse was paired with either Zeus Salaminios, or Temple of Aphrodite reverses, as well as this reverse that shows both. (4.19g) Conical black stone found in 1888 near the ruins of the temple of Aphrodite at Paphos, now in the Museum of Kouklia. RPC assigns similar Latin legend Tiberius ases and dupondii dated 19-20 AD to Commagene (?) (RPC 3868-9 dupondii, 3970 as). RPC notes: The attribution is based on the occurrence of the same reverse type on coins of Commagene and the similarly beveled flans, which also occur on coins of Antiochus of Commagene (particularly the finest style group, Ia). The attribution was doubted by Grant (Roman Anniversary Issues, pp. 57-8), while C. Howgego (GIC, p. 23, n. 1) has suggested that Antioch was the only other possible (though unlikely) mint [noting 1) modest hoard evidence; 2) shared countermarks and 3) connection to beveled edge Commagene coinage of Antiochus IV 38-72 AD] . . . On the other hand, an attribution is made unlikely by the rare occurrence of the coins in the Antioch excavations (only two)

93 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

compared with Dura (seven) . . . and the fabric of the coins, which seem thinner and broader than coins of Antioch of Tiberius, minted in 14 and 31 [AD].” RPC concludes, “The attribution has therefore been left at ‘Commagene?’ However, the Latin legend and dating also fits Tiberian Cyprus. The round, thin, beveled flan resembles Augustan Cypriot dupondii RPC 3914-15. Subsequent dupondii of Claudius have similar flans. So flan characteristics suggest that either the issue must represent dramatic mint shifts from the chunky, oval flans of Antioch in 14 and back to them in 31 AD, or the issue is typical for Cyprus. The dupondii show yellow metal. Find sites include Cyprus, though none were recorded at Paphos II or Curium.

The beveled flan and style of this Tiberius Æ30 suggest Cyprus. (15.92g) The Cypriot coins of the early reign of Claudius were struck on beveled flans. The Latin obverse contrasts with the Greek inscription for Cyprus, surrounded by a wreath or the titles of the governor. After that time, Greek fully replaces Latin and no governor is noted on the Cypriot coinage. Sometime after 43 AD, Cyprus was ruled as part of the province of Syria. The relative stability of Cyprus during the Pax Romana is closely reflected in the coinage, which closely followed that of Rome and Antioch, the two largest cities of a generally peaceful Roman Empire. Cypriot coins of this time are largely considered a subset of those of Syria, with some influence from Rome. Some Syrian style coinage with S.C in a wreath was probably produced on Cyprus, at Paphos, or perhaps at Salamis, the city closest to Syria. The legends are the same as for coinage of Antioch, but the style and flan are quite different. Denominations include a c. 14 gram dupondius and a c. 7 gram as. RPC distinguishes between Cypriot and Syrian S.C dupondii of Augustus only. An as of fine Cypriot style is also known. The cast flans are more round, broader, thinner, and beveled on the rim, with concave reverse a bit broader than the convex obverse, similar to Roman Egyptian coinage of the time. Some of the cast-flan S.C Claudian and Neronian brass exhibit this type of flan with a lituus or other symbol before the portrait. RPC I notes die links between the beveled flan S.C issues of Nero, Galba and Otho and the scarcer beveled flan legate issues (RPC 4303, 4313, 4316) noting both the legate of Syria and the city of Antioch in the wreath. RPC II notes of the issues of Domitian: “. . . coins struck on thin, broad flans with beveled edges . . . the difference may indicate separate workshops or simply a variation in the fashion of manufacturing flans.”

94 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

7.22g 23 mm Nero bronze on a round beveled cast flan and a 6.98g 19 mm example on a typical chunky flan. The former may be Cypriot. In any manufacturing process, standardization of methods arises over time. The ongoing use of two different flan-making methods from the same Antioch mint is extremely unlikely. Mint officials would deem one method or the other “better,” gaining some additional efficiencies of scale. However, Antioch and Paphos were quite far apart geographically. Their metal workers had different traditions. Standardization of manufacturing processes in a single SC mint would be expected, but would be more difficult across this distance. Round, beveled, cast-flan S.C coins of Otho, Galba, Vespasian, Domitian, Nerva and Trajan are also known. Analysis of the trace lead isotopes could confirm the origin of the copper, (Gaza or Cyprus?) but not the actual mint.

A round beveled flan S.C triobol - dupondius is similar to the antique Ptolemaic bronzes. (12.57g) Galen, writing in the 2nd century AD, tells of the imperial control and operation of the Cypriot copper mines. Was Roman Imperial monopoly copper exported to Syria in bar form?

95 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Or, as in Ptolemaic and early Augustan times, was export of metal delivered as finished coins? Evidence of access to craftsmen and fuel suggests that the minting may have been closer to the mines. Are the beveled flan S.C bronzes all of Cypriot origin? Some Cypriot Flavian tetradrachms of decent silver and didrachms of better silver were struck, as well as brass sestertii and dupondii, and copper ases. All have one of two reverses: 1) The temple of Aphrodite at Paphos, or 2) Zeus Salaminios standing. RPC II suggests two theories for the Rome-like style of the bronze and brass, and the Antioch-like style for the silver. Perhaps the silver was struck at Antioch, while the brass and copper was struck at the Rome Mint. Alternatively, personnel and methods may have been moved to Cyprus from the two large cities. The silver has legends identical to Antioch coins, but RPC II notes that there are no known die links to Antioch tetradrachms. The same reference notes that the 6:00 die axis, and system of brass and copper denominations suggests that this Cyprus issue may have been struck at Rome, or “a strictly organized eastern branch mint of Rome, . . . producing an issue of Roman-style coins specifically adapted for local circulation in the East.” Similar Rome-style brass coins were produced for Antioch in 74 AD (RPC II 1982-2005). Cypriot Æ under the Flavians was of three denominations: 1) Brass sestertii/drachms of c. 24 grams, and 2) brass dupondii of c. 12 grams, while 3) bronze coins of 9-11 grams, with designs the same as the brass dupondii, were ases. The dupondii and ases were recognizable as such, by the slight difference in their weight, and the yellow color of the brass dupondius. 30 RPC II does not always distinguish between the brass and bronze denominations though the listed weights fall into two distinct weight bands: dupondius and as.60

Brass Paphos dupondius (12.55g) of Vespasian, Year 8. RPC 1821. All Flavian bronze and brass coinage is dated year 8 (75 to 76 AD) following an earthquake that devastated Paphos and other cities. The silver is dated Year 8, 9 or 10 of Vespasian, 75 to 78 AD, or Year 2 of Titus, 80 to 81 AD. The tetradrachms are about 0.6g heavier than two

RPC II weights (in grams) for Flavian Cypriot middle bronzes RPC 1820: 15.23; 14.47; 13.15; 12.87; 11.76; 11.53; 11.25; 10.83; 10.23; 9.90; 9.75 RPC 1821: 13.64; 13.63; 12.82; 12.68; 12.66; 12.24; 12.16; 11.48; 11.18; 10.96; 10.86; 10.66; 10.41; 9.90; 9.09 RPC 1824: 12.31; 12.19; 11.07 RPC 1826: 12.50; 12.35; 10.50 60

96 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

didrachms, but a bit less pure. 61 The Flavian beveled flan SC coinage is dated to 76/77 AD.62 No smaller change was produced in Cyprus under the Flavians. Earlier small change, Ptolemaic, Augustan, Tiberian and Claudian presumably continued to circulate. The political peace of the island suffered a single interruption through the great Jewish rising of AD 115-116 that affected Cyprus as it did Cyrenaica and Egypt. The excesses of the rebels (vastly exaggerated contemporary figures speak of 240,000 dead on Cyprus alone) were followed by terrible counter-measures under Hadrian, Trajan’s governor of Syria, and ultimately his successor to the imperial purple. After the revolt, the Jews were expelled from the island. Trajan struck some small bronzes with no obverse legend on flans of similar style to Ptolemaic bronzes. The reverse has a large S.C in a wreath. Typical examples are 11-14 mm in diameter, with average weight of 1.3 grams. The flans are cast, with roundness and beveled rim similar to the eighth-unit of Cleopatra, and the S.C coinage of Cyprus. The issue was continued on a larger scale under Hadrian, (RIC629b; C. 1396, Vagi 1379) but with a shift in the type of flan. The flans of Hadrian uncias are often cut from a rod, but some seem to be cast. One example of the Hadrian type was found at Paphos II, in Courtyard CI, in ashes among quarter-units of the Zeus standing type and other Ptolemaic coins. This tiny type is almost exclusively found in the East, especially in Syria and Cyprus.

An “uncia” of Trajan and Hadrian may have been a quarter obol (2 uncia) of Cyprus, the Roman equivalent to a small bronze of Cleopatra. Alternatively, it may have been a Syrian lepton (1.5 uncia). (1.35g) RIC II follows Cohen in calling this denomination under Hadrian an uncia, noting “‘Trés petit module’, C[ohen] : certainly far smaller than the ordinary quadrans, perhaps a third of it, an uncia.” However, the Roman uncia had not been in use since Republican times. The quadrans, the smallest Roman denomination of the times was itself infrequently issued. RIC II also notes, The quadrantes seem to have been issued in fairly large quantities. But the fact that their issue was sporadic and practically deceases after the time of Hadrian suggests that they were in small demand as ordinary currency and were mainly used as donatives for public distribution.

61

RPC II p. 262 gives figures of 90% vs 95% silver for the didrachms, which are about 5% lighter.

A scarce group of brass ases and dupondii were struck during 77 to 78 AD (RIC 800-3 and others). These have been linked by style to a rare issue of o-mintmark denarii in 76 AD (RIC 375-383). The metal analysis provided by Carradice and Cowell in NC 1987 shows that the yellow metal is from Asia Minor, and is consistently different from contemporary brass in Cyprus. The denarii with similar style and o-mintmark must be from the same place. 62

Scarce o-mintmark denarius from Asia Minor.

97 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

An uncia would be of very little use in an economy where the smallest regular denomination was an as. At an average weight of 1.25 grams, the issue is about 35% heavy for a 1/12 of a bronze as of 11 g. This weight gap is unusually large, even for bronze. In general Roman provincial issues were lighter than their Roman Imperial counterparts. Surely some other small Eastern denomination was intended. Both Cyprus and Syria were part of the same Roman province. Trajan’s small SC bronze was probably worth either 2 or 1.5 uncia. In Cyprus, the “uncia” may have circulated as a quarter obol (2 uncia), successor to the tiny eighth-units of Cleopatra. The type also circulated in Syria. Alternatively, the denomination may have been valued as a halfquadrans / lepton (3/2 uncia). The round, cast flan of the Trajanic issue does suggest a Cypriot mint. But the Hadrian “uncias” were struck on flans cut from a rod, more like most regular Antioch issues. Similar tiny coins of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius are unpublished but known. The reverse S.C is typical of both Cyprus and Syria. Both were part of the same province. Both Antioch and Paphos may have struck this denomination small coin, which in either case, was not an uncia. The brass “ases” and “semisses” of Trajan and Hadrian may have been issued for use in the East as 2/3 and 1/3 of a dupondius. Some have a large S.C at the reverse center, surrounded by a wreath and the emperor’s titles. The circulation of this issue extended throughout the East. They may have been useful on Cyprus where these would have been equal to diobols and obols. Antioch and Rome have been suggested as possible mints. The portrait style and 6:00 die axis suggests that this issue may also have been struck at Rome, or– as with the Cypriot Flavian bronze– “a strictly organized eastern branch mint of Rome, . . . producing an issue of Roman-style coins specifically adapted for local circulation in the East.” Some other Trajan coins from Cyprus have similar “Rome-style” look. All were struck very late in his reign.63 The other denomination of this issue, which was valued at double the smaller one, also with a radiate crown. This radiate crown is confusing in the Imperial system of denominations, for no Roman Imperial as after the time of Nero bore it. In the late first and entire second century, the radiate crown was otherwise reserved for the dupondius, the double as.

Radiate 4 gram and 8 gram brass coins of Trajan may have been 1/3 and 2/3 dupondius coins, useful change for obols in the East. (7.84g diobol) The new issues of Trajan may have been 1/3 dupondius and 2/3 dupondius coins. The radiate crown and special weights of this brass denomination support this idea. Why would such odd denominations exist? On Cyprus, six obols equaled a sestertius, a brass coin of about In “The Guide to Biblical Coins,” David Hendin connects this late Trajanic issue of 115-117 to the revolt of the Jews in Kyrene, Egypt, Cyprus, Mesopotamia but probably not Judaea. The Moorish general Lusius Quietus ruthlessly put down the rebellion in Mesopotamia. Marcus Turbo put down the rebellion in Kyrene and Egypt. Hadrian who was governor of Syria (which included Cyprus) is credited with putting down the rebellion brutally. Dio Cassius notes (probably incorrectly) that 240,000 were killed on Cyprus. Salamis was badly damaged during the revolt. Dio Cassius adds that from this time onward, Jews were not allowed to appear on Cyprus under penalty of death. Lusius Quietus was recalled and executed in 118 AD. 63

98 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

24 grams. The brass obol has an average weight of 4 grams. The diobol has an average weight of 8 grams. As “Imperial” denominations this coinage circulated outside of Cyprus. Inside of Cyprus, change for an obol could be made quickly. Other Eastern communities may have made change this way as well. The coinage of both brass denominations was continued under Hadrian (RIC II 680-689, 698-700 and others), but generally without the radiate crown. These are Eastern, and may be Cypriot. A 4 gram denomination (called quadrans by RIC 629a), with SC in wreath was probably also 1/3 of a dupondius. The obverse die is the same size and style as a denarius die. Regular Roman Imperial denarii and bronze made up the bulk of coins circulating on Cyprus during the second century, supplemented by Syrian S.C coinage and coins struck with Cypriot types. During the reign of Trajan, Cypriot brass and bronze has a style very close to the Roman Imperial coinage, leading some experts to suggest that the dies or the coins may have been made at the Rome mint.64

Trajan dupondius-triobol shows the temple of Aphrodite at Paphos. Note the conical stone at the center and the semi-circular courtyard in front. (13.38g) Ruins of the temple. After Trajan and Hadrian, most Cypriot issues have the Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos reverse, while some have Zeus Salaminios standing. A few are dynastic issues, with portraits of imperial family members on both sides.

Antoninus Pius and his heir Marcus Aurelius on this Cypriot sestertius - drachm. (25.81g) Trajanic restorations of Republican and early Imperial denarii could be Cypriot. One of the four Imperial denarii found at Paphos II had Republican types with the titles of Trajan. By comparison, of the 81,044 silver denarii published in the Reka Devnia hoard, 5,217 were Trajan and zero were Restitutions by Trajan. A closer look may be needed. However, Komnick’s study of Trajan Restitution issues notes find spots: Germany: 11 examples; France 9; Italy 6; Belgium 14; UK 3; Spain 3, Austria 3; Switzerland 2; Africa 2; India 1; Poland 1; Sweden 1; Turkey 1 and this coin. Konick’s find data and the style strongly suggests Rome Mint. However, the Cypriot brass and bronze of this time is very similar in style to that of the Rome mint. Dr. Gunnar Seelentag’s book Taten und Tugenden Traians Herrschaftsdarstellung im Principat suggests a date of 112, rather than 107 (p. 410-484). 64

99 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Under Antoninus Pius, Paphos struck a fairly large issue of sestertii-drachms with the young Marcus Aurelius Caesar on the reverse. There was a smaller issue of similar dupondiihemidrachms. If some of the smaller coins are of red metal and slightly shorter weight they were intended as ases. Check ANS 1952.142.357 at 9.64g. Is it red metal? Cox notes that some of this issue was overstruck on Ptolemaic coins. Similar “two-headed” types on cast, round, beveled flans, with portrait and legend style, for Faustina Sr. and Galerius Antoninus include denominations of sestertius, dupondius and as. These are perhaps Cypriot, as first noted by Amandry in his 1993 work, although given to “Uncertain Greek Mint” in other references, and without known Cypriot provenance. With the more common beveled flan Pius / Aurelius Cypriot bronze and brass coinage, they made a set of the Imperial family on coins.

Faustina Senior and her son Galerius Antoninus appear on this triobol-dupondius, which may be Cypriot. (14.0 g) The Severans continued the tradition by issuing some Roman brass and bronze denominations with the Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos reverse. One Caracalla bronze issue has an eagle on the reverse. Rare “two-headed” dynastic issues with Caracalla and Geta are known. Some examples have the head of Geta effaced.

This Cyprus mint tetradrachm is wholly Syrian in character. It was worth 4 Roman denarii, 16 brass sestertii - Cypriot drachms. (15.54g) A group of Caracalla “Syrian style” silver tetradrachms with grain-ear mintmark has recently been attributed to Cyprus (Bellinger plate xxvi, #10). Cox and Amandry identified some Syrian-style Æ20’s of Elagabalus, with ∆E, (some with SC), in a wreath as perhaps Cypriot.

100 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Severus Alexander Æ19 of Province of Syria, perhaps Cyprus. (4.29g) Unique Severus Alexander Æ25 Alliance of Paphos and Sardes. (5.61g) The last Roman Cypriot coins were struck under Severus Alexander, including more with the same Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos, a unique bronze showing an economic alliance with Sardes, and smaller bronzes with the SC ∆E in wreath reverse. Regular Roman Imperial sestertii and some Syrian coinage circulated on Cyprus during Antonine and Severan times as well. It is possible that Ptolemaic small change still circulated until the mid-2nd century AD. A small group of early Flavian coins found on the floor of Room LXXXVIII of Paphos II includes late Ptolemaic coinage with Jewish coins including one from the First Jewish Revolt.34 A cloth bag of coins was found in Paphos II. The bag contained three Flavian Cypriot silver didrachms and six Cypriot bronze coins dated from Augustus to the time of Hadrian. The bag also contained three different and enigmatic 1.1 to 2.2 gram bronzes, but no Ptolemaic bronze. Paphos II calls the three small bronzes “unidentified foreign issues,” although they may be better described as simply “unidentified,” with some role as local small change or tokens at the time. Cox calls a similar small bronze “unidentified Greek.” Perhaps the small bronzes of Cleopatra were demonetized before this time. However, one extremely worn Ptolemaic obol is known overstruck with an oval countermark of the head of Hadrian. The countermark may have extended the circulation life of a worn antique coin. Under the Roman system of ases and obols, the Cypriot Ptolemaic small bronzes would have still been useful as small change. The extensive wear on many examples of the half, quarter and eighth-unit suggests a prolonged circulation, well into Roman Imperial times. The ongoing use of antique small change is similar to nearby Judaea, where the tiny leptons and prutot of Alexander Jannaeus and his successors, mass-produced on similar flans by similar methods, circulated as small change for centuries. Cox observes of the finds at Curium: The proportion of coins of large denomination [found at Curium] is exceptionally high, and three bronze medallions further emphasize the Cypriotes’ apparent predilection for large [Roman Imperial] money. Cox understates the importance of this data. Finds at Curium and Paphos II show that there were very few middle bronzes. The one hundred and ten Roman Imperial coins recorded by Cox at Curium, from Tiberius to Gallienus include: 1 quadrans (Hadrian, mines of Nordicum) 5 ases (AVG. in wreath, Agrippa, Pius/Marcus, Faust.I, Caraca.) 2 dupondii (Severus Alexander, Julia Mamaea) 89 sestertii65 3 bronze medallions (Marcus & Commodus, Commodus x2, 1 gilt) 7 denarii (Hadrian, Pius, Faustina Sr., Severan x3, Maximinus) 3 antoninianii (Philip, Aemilian, Gallienus)

65

Sestertii include 19 Antonine; 13 Severan; 57 Military Emperors (235-268).

101 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

No Roman Imperial bronze was found at Paphos II, but the dig at the nearby Odeion found four sestertii from 222-249 AD and no other Roman Imperial coins. At Curium and the Odeion, many small Ptolemaic coins were found. Roman Imperial sestertii were valued as drachms. The lack of ases in relation to sestertii supports the idea that the as (equal to a rather clumsy 1.5 obols) did not fit well into the Cypriot denominational system of six obols per sestertius / drachm. The lack of other small change suggests the ongoing use of antique Ptolemaic and Augustan small change, perhaps at least as late as the reign of Gallienus. Amandry summarizes this later coinage on Cyprus: In the second century, Roman coins form the largest group, dominating the Cypriot bronzes. The same is true for the third and fourth century. Apart from occasional eastern provincial coin, Roman currency is predominant. Most of the coins come from the nearest mints, Antioch, Cyzicus and Hercaclea in the third century, Antioch, Constantinopolis, Alexandria, Cyzicus, Nicomedia in the fourth. At that time, Cyprus had been fully absorbed into the Roman imperial monetary system. Bronzes of Cleopatra circulated as money in Dark Age Cyprus. Cox described a jumble of “over 400 miscellaneous small pieces, mostly illegible” found in the sewers of Curium. Some are Ptolemaic. Cox writes: From their distribution it seems that these unrelated coins and bits of metal all circulated together. J. G. Milne’s remarks on the exchange media of fifthcentury Egypt (“The Currency of Egypt in the Fifth Century,“ NC, 1926, p. 62) perhaps hold true for Cyprus also in the early sixth century: ‘that any piece of metal would serve for the purpose of a unit – virtually a counter – and that no guarantee of value by the government was attached to any of these pieces.’ Examination of other well-dated and documented Cypriot hoards containing Ptolemaic small change would be useful.

On Cyprus, the plentiful little portraits of Cleopatra VII, Queen of Kings, and the last Queen of Egypt and Cyprus, gradually wore away in circulation as very small change in the hands of her rivals the Romans. (1.73, 1.47g) “The Coinage System of Cleopatra VII, Marc Antony, and Augustus in Cyprus” included several denominations. Each was struck in a political and economic context. Each reflected earlier and contemporary issues of Cyprus and her trading partners.

102 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Table of Suggested Attribution Changes This is not a complete listing of coins from Cyprus. Rather, it is a listing of coins not attributed to Cyprus in the major references, or with other significant changes in attribution. (Cross-listings with Price; Svoronos; Sear, Greek; BMC; RIC; Sear, Roman; Crawford; Vagi and RPC I, Supplement and II). Changes and unpublished varieties are in italics. Conventional Attribution, metal, denomination, (typical weight of uncorroded examples with little wear, not photographed example) Mint, Obverse legend. Obverse type. / Reverse legend. Reverse type. Reference(s). Suggested Change(s) in ruler, mint, and / or denomination. Other comments.

Paphos, Æ16, (4.4g) Head of Aphrodite left, wearing ornate headdress. / Rose. CCC92, otherwise Unpublished. BMC 49 var (double denomination). Lotus instead of rose. c. 330 BC.

Alexander III, gold stater, (8.6g) Alexandria or Memphis Mint, Helmeted head of Athena right. / Nike standing, EY or ∆I symbol, often with rose. Issued with varying symbols from several mints on Cyprus and numerous mints throughout the Kingdom of Alexander. EY for Salamis or Paphos Mint. Athena or Alexander as warrior? Lotus instead of rose.

Alexander III, gold stater, (8.6g) Helmeted head of Athena right. / Nike standing, ∏AI monogram. Price-; Muller-. Unpublished. Paphos Mint? Two examples In CNG catalogs. Athena or Alexander as warrior?

Alexander III, silver tetr. (17.2g) Salamis Mint, Head of Hercules right, wearing lion skin headdress knotted at base of neck. / Zeus seated left, mint symbols before Zeus and below throne. Issued from several other mints on Cyprus and numerous mints throughout the Kingdom of Alexander. Alexander’s facial features as Hercules.

103 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Alexander III, silver tetradrachm, (17.2g) Paphos Mint, similar, with the name NIKOKΛE∑ hidden in the lion-skin, behind the ear. / ∏AI monogram before Zeus. Several varieties. Price 3119 with rose below throne. Lotus instead of rose. Alexander III, silver tetradrachm, Memphis Mint, Lifetime of Alexander, 323 or before, similar, with crossed legs, different symbols. All Salamis or Paphos Mint, after 323 BC. Alexander III, silver drachm, (4.3g) Salamis Mint, similar. / ∏A before Zeus, Γ below throne. Price 3183. A stater and tetradrachm have the same symbols. Paphos? Is the name NIKOKΛE∑ hidden?

Alexander III, Æ17 (7.1g), Cyprus Mint, Similar obverse. / AΛEXAN∆POY or BA Club, bow, and bow-case, mint symbol below. Issued from several other mints on Cyprus and numerous mints throughout the Kingdom of Alexander. Attic hemiobol. Alexander’s facial features as Hercules. Marium Mint also struck. Alexander III, Æ17, Paphos, similar. NIKOKΛE∑ hidden in the lion-skin, behind the ear. Alexander III, Æ10 (1.8g), Cyprus Mint, Similar types. Issued from several other mints on Cyprus. Alexander’s facial features as Hercules Attic 1/8th obol. Alexander III, Æ10, Paphos, similar. NIKOKΛE∑ hidden in the lion-skin, behind the ear. Alexander III, gold stater, (8.56g) Memphis. Similar obverse. / Prow right. Svor. 25. Cyprus, probably Salamis. Alexander III, tetr. (17.1g) Memphis Mint, Head of Alexander the Great, wearing elephant skin. / Zeus seated left, legs crossed, various symbols including rose. Cyprus Mint(s). Double lotus?

Alexander III, tetr. Attic weight standard tetradrachm, (17.1g) Memphis or Alexandria Mint, Head of Alexander the Great, wearing elephant skin, some with delta at top of aegis. / AΛEXAN∆POY Athena advancing right, bearing raised spear and shield. Cyprus Mints. Delta not an engraver’s signature. EY for Soloi, mint for some. Alexander III, Attic weight standard drachm, (4.3g) EY symbol. Svor. 43. Same. EY for Eunostos of Soloi, son-in-law of Ptolemy I.

104 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Attic tetradrachm. Cut to 22 obols at right of name Alexander.

Alexander III, tetr. 22-obol weight standard. (15.7g) Head of Alexander the Great, wearing elephant skin, small delta at top of aegis. / AΛEXAN∆POY Athena advancing right, bearing raised spear and shield. Often overstruck on older Attic tetradrachms, reduced in weight. Emergency issue, struck in Cyprus c. 306 BC, Delta not an engraver’s signature. Alexander III, tetr. (15.7g) Similar. ∏TOΛEMAIOY Caduceus symbol. Svor. 96. Emergency issue, struck in Cyprus c. 306 BC, Delta not an engraver’s signature. Salamis Mint, the last city to fall to the invaders. Alexander III, AR drachm, 22-obol weight standard, (3.7g) Similar. Svor. 34. All 22-obol standard except ∆O and EY. Similar, but base core. (Possible official issue?) Alexander III, AR drachm, Attic? weight standard, (3.7g) Corinth, Ptolemaic Occupation, c. 306 BC, Similar. ∆O symbol. Svor. -; S 2640; Kraay plate 14, #255. Found only near Corinth, ∆O symbol shared with Corinthian staters and drachms. (cf. Ravel 1091) Alexander III, AR 22-obol standard hemidrachm (1.75g) Similar, ∆I. Svor. 35 Cyprus. Ptolemy I, Æ17 1/16th drachm (4.2g) Paphos Mint. struck c. 306 BC, Similar. / AΛE Eagle standing left, wings open, EY and ∏A monogram at sides. Svor. 46.

Ptolemy I, Æ20 1/8th drachm (8.5g) Paphos Mint. struck c. 305 BC, Head of Aphrodite right, wearing stephanos, lotus behind. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY Eagle standing left on thunderbolt. Svor. 74. 1/4 obol Svor. 80. 1/8 obol Svor. 82.

Ptolemy I, gold reduced stater, (7.1g) Kyrene, c. 305-283 BC, Diademed bust of Ptolemy I, aegis at neck, delta behind ear. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Alexander the Great in quadriga of elephants, monogram below. Svoronos 102. Ptolemy I as Zeus.

105 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy II, gold pentadrachm (trichrysa), (17.8g) Alexandria, Diademed bust of Ptolemy I, aegis at neck, delta behind ear. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, on thunderbolt, ∑T and ∏A monogram before. Svor. 367. Ptolemy I as Zeus. The second reverse monogram is ∏A for Paphos. ∆ is probably not a signature. After the 294 BC re-conquest of the island by Ptolemy. Worth 50 drachms of silver, and not a trichrysa. Ptolemy I, AR 21-obol tetradrachm (14.8g) Alexandria, Diademed bust of Ptolemy I, aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left on thunderbolt, monogram before. 294-290 BC.

Ptolemy I, gold hemidrachm, (1.78g) Alexandria, Diademed bust of Ptolemy I, aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left on thunderbolt, wings open, monogram before. SNG Cop. 45 Ptolemy I as Zeus. After the 294 BC re-conquest of the island by Ptolemy. Ptolemy I, AE8, (0.87g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed bust of Alexander the Great right. / Eagle standing left, wings open. Cf. Svor 216 for 1.55g double denom. 1/16th obol.

Ptolemy I, AR tetradrachm, (14.2g) Alexandria Mint, After 305 BC, Similar types. ∑T and ∏A monograms. Svor. 368. Ptolemy I as Zeus. The second reverse monogram is for Paphos. ∆ is probably not a signature. After the 294 BC re-conquest of the island by Ptolemy, and after the 290 BC introduction of this 14.2g denomination. Ptolemy I, AR tetradrachm, similar, ∑T KI and AX monograms before eagle. Svor. 366. Similar. Kition Mint. Ptolemy I, AR tetradrachm, similar, ∆I and AX monograms before eagle. Svor. 373 Similar. Alexandria Mint. Ptolemy I, AR drachm, (3.35g) Similar obverse. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEO∑ Eagle standing left, wings open. Svor. 372 Ptolemy I as Zeus. After the title of King, c. 305 BC.

Ptolemy I, AR 1/16 drachm, (0.21g) Yehud Coinage, Judaea, after 333 BC, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right. / Eagle with wings spread, standing left, on thunderbolt. Hendin 438. After 294 BC, when Ptolemy initiated other coinage with his own portrait.

106 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy I and II, AR tetradrachm, (14.2g) Alexandria, Phoenicia or Cyprus Mint, countermarked in Byzantion, Thrace, after 250 BC, Similar, with the addition of a countermark including city and magistrate’s name monogram. Ptolemaic tetr. worth 20 Attic obols. 264/3 BC.

Ptolemy II, gold octadrachm (mnaeion), (27.8g) Alexandria Mint 270 BC, Veiled bust of Arsinöe II right, A to E behind. / AP∑INOH∑ ØIΛA∆EΛØOY Double cornucopia, bound with fillets, tendrils at base. Troxell Group I. Several varieties and styles. Sidon Mint. Not a mina or a mnaeion. 264/3 BC. A to E share obverse dies with tetradrachms dated Year X = 22.

Byzantion, Thrace, AR tetradrachm, (14.2g) After Alexander or c. 250 BC, Veiled and diademed head of Demeter right. / ∑I ∏Y Poseidon seated right on rocks, holding aphlaston and trident; legend below. S 1587; BMC 26. There are similar tetradrachms from Kalchedon, with Apollo seated, BMC 19. Similar, BMC 27 / 20 (5.34g) “octobols,” actually trihemidrachms of nine Ptolemaic obols. Technically Ptolemaic. Could the obverse be better described as “diademed and veiled bust of Arsinöe II as Demeter (or Hera)?” This back-dates the coin to c. 263 BC. Similar, AR Attic octobol. Ptolemaic 3/2 drachm / siglos. Similar tetradrachm and octobol from Kalchedon. Apollo seated reverse. Same.

Arsinöe II, Asia Minor Mint, Æ11, (2g) c. 264 BC, Veiled and diademed bust of Arsinöe II right. / BA∑I[Λ] ∏TO[ΛE] Eagle standing left. Svor. 387 (Arsinöe II); SNG Cop.-; ANS 2000 pl. 9 #5-61 (Thrace, Ptolemy Ceraunus). Byzantion. Arsinöe II as Hera. Byzantion, Thrace, Æ11, (2g) c. 264 BC, Laureate head of Apollo right. / BA∑ ∏TO Single cornucopia Schnert-Geiss 1970-72; J of ANS 2000 pl. 9 #3-4 (Ptolemy Ceraunus). Of similar size and design to the later Cleopatra VII / Cornucopia. The flan is very different, rounder, with a hollow reverse and not cast en chapelete. See flan of above picture.

Uncertain, Æ12, (1/4 obol) (1.93g) Uncertain Mint, Ptolemiac, 12:00 die axis, Double cornucopia, dotted border. / BA∑IΛ . . . Eagle standing left, wings closed, dotted border. Svor.-; BMC-; SNG Cop.-; Paphos II-. Probably not Cypriot. Unpublished. Berytus??

107 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Berenike II, AR Attic pentadrachm, (21.3g) Alexandria Mint, struck under Ptolemy III, 246-221 BC, Diademed and veiled bust right. / BEPENIKH∑ BA∑IΛI∑∑H∑ Single cornucopia bound with fillet between two pilei. Svor. 989; BMC 7. Both a Ptolemaic standard hexadrachm and Attic pentadrachm. Trade coin. Sidon Mint. Berenike II, gold Attic pentadrachm, (21.3g) Similar, stars instead of pilei. Svor. 973. Ptolemaic standard hexadrachm. A 42.6 Ptolemaic gold dodekadrachm was worth 120 silver drachms. Svor. 972. with other gold denominations at 3, 6, 12 and 30 silver drachms, and a silver denomination at 15 drachms. Because a Ptolemaic drachm was 5/6 of an Attic drachm, these are 2 1/2, 5, 10, 25 and 100 Attic drachms. Trade coins. Sidon Mint. Ptolemy II, gold octadrachm (27.8g) A∆EΛØΩN Jugate heads of Ptolemy II and Berenike II / ØEΩN Jugate heads of Ptolemy I and Berenike I. 240 BC, perhaps Third Syrian War loot. Ptolemy III. Sidon Mint. The obverse and reverse should be switched. Ptolemy II, gold tetradrachm (13.9g) Same.

Ptolemy II to X, AR tetradrachm (14.2g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed bust of Ptolemy I, aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, on thunderbolt, symbol(s) before and behind. Various symbols. Much of the coinage attributed by Svoronos to Alexandria was struck in Sidon (until 200 BC) generally later than dates in Svoronos. Portraits seem to show features of current rulers, likened to Zeus and perhaps Ptolemy I.

Ptolemy II to V, various bronze denominations, (12 g / obol) Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing right on thunderbolt, various symbols. Generally later than in Svoronos. Mostly from Sidon mint. Ptolemy VI to IX, various bronze denominations, (12 g / obol) Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / [∏TOΛEMIOY] BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing right on thunderbolt, various non-lotus symbols. Generally later than in Svoronos. From Kyrene mint. c. 165 to 96 BC.

Ptolemy III, Æ obol, (11.8g/obol) Cyprus, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Facing cult-statue of Aphrodite. Svor. 1006.

108 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Paphos Mint. 3/2, 1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 obol. Svor. 1005-9. Related to Earthquake Relief sent to Crete c. 225 BC. Antiochus III-VIII_, Æ11, (1.70g) Antioch Mint, c. 2nd century BC, Laureate head of Apollo right. / . . . NTIO. . . BA∑ΛE (sic). . . T Single cornucopia. Unpublished. An unpublished 2nd century BC Seleukid Antioch Æ with types similar to the later Cypriot Æ of Cleopatra from Paphos.

Ptolemy VI or VIII, gold octadrachm (mnaeion), (27.8g) Alexandria Mint c. 145 BC, Veiled bust of Arsinöe II right, large K behind. / AP∑INOH∑ ØIΛA∆EΛØOY Double cornucopia, bound with fillets, tendrils at base. SNG Cop. 322; Svor. 1499 (Egypt); S 7888A. Several varieties and styles. The common “bulging eye” type bears similarity to some late tetradrachms, dating as late as c. 87 BC.

Ptolemy VI (?), gold tetradrachm, Alexandria Mint (13.9g) c. 145 BC, Veiled bust of Arsinöe II right, large K behind. / AP∑INOH∑ ØIΛA∆EΛØOY Double cornucopia, bound with fillets, tendrils at base. BMC p. 45, #40, plate viii #10; Svor. 1500. Same. Ptolemy VI, Æ29, (23.8g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / [∏TOΛEMIOY] BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing right on thunderbolt, scepter behind, lotus symbol before, EYΛ between eagle’s legs. Svor. 1396; SNG Cop. 293; BMC 16. Diobol. Struck c. 168 BC from dies with the name of “Ptolemy” effaced by Seleukid invaders, thus Antiochus IV. Svor. Plate XLVII #21-24 are similar.

Ptolemy VI, Æ36, (42.07g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / [∏TOΛEMIOY] BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing right on thunderbolt, rectangular counter-mark E behind eagle, lotus symbol before, EYΛ between eagle’s legs. Svor. -; SNG Cop.- Paphos II 174 as Ptol. IV, [(38.7g) porous, without countermark]. Unpublished. Tetrobol. Struck c. 168 BC from dies with the name of “Ptolemy” effaced by Seleukid invaders, thus Antiochus IV. Svor. Plate XLVII #21-24 are similar. The E countermark may be a later valuation of this 4 obol coin as 5 obols. More likely it is a mark for Ptolemy VIII Euregetes. Ptolemy VI, Æ46, (84g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing right on thunderbolt, EYΛ between eagle’s legs. Svor. 1395. Cyprus Mint. Octobol. c. 168 BC.

109 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy V, Head of Cleopatra I as Isis right. / ∏TOΛEMIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, wings spread, some with ∏A monogram before. Svor. 1233, 1234, 1235, 1237, 1238, 1384, 1385, 1387. Ptolemy VIII for Cleopatra II.

reduced. Ptolemy VIII, Æ45 (68.8g) Cyprus? Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ EYEPΓTOY Double cornucopia. Svor. 1640. Drachm. Kyrene. c. 145 BC

Ptolemy VIII, Æ45 (71.2g) Kyrene Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ EYEPΓTOY Single cornucopia, Ø at right. Svor. 1640. CNG XXIX #395, ex-Malter 2 2/78 #240, otherwise unpublished. c. 145 BC, Drachm. The Phi is for Ptolemy VI Philopater. There are similar issues with K for Kleopatra II and Theta-E for the Gods Ptolemy VIII and Cleopatra II.

Ptolemy VI, Æ22, (9g / obol) Head of Alexander the Great right, wearing elephant skin headdress. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, wings spread. Svor. 1493, 1495. Late reign of Ptolemy VIII, c. 125 BC, Various denominations.

110 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy VIII, Æ25, (11.1g / obol) Head of Hercules right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, sometimes with ∏A monogram before. (1492, 1494, 1496-7). “Paphos” Mint.

Ptolemy IX, 1st reign, silver tetradrachm, (14.0g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right, wearing aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, date before, ∏A monogram behind. S 7944-6; Svor. 1847-1870. Found in Paphos Hoard I, c. 95 BC. Portrait of Ptolemy X as King of Cyprus (as Zeus), Second Paphos Mint?

Ptolemy V, Æ21, (8.5g) K behind obverse head, dated to Year 3. Svor. 1191. Ptolemy IX, 1st reign, obol, 114/3 BC. Kyrene. Ptolemy V, Æ27, (17g) Similar with Zeus head right, K behind. / Similar, with same monogram, dated year 4. Svor. 1193. Ptolemy IX, 1st reign, obol, 115/4 BC. Kyrene.

Cleopatra III and Ptolemy X, joint rule, AR tetradrachm, (14g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right, wearing aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ One eagle standing left, ∏A behind, dual dates of Cleopatra III and Ptolemy X before. S 7940-2. Ptolemy X as Zeus. “Paphos” Mint.

Cleopatra I, Æ30, (24g) Alexandria Mint, Greek legend, “Queen Cleopatra” Diademed and horned head of ZeusAmmon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, cornucopia before, ∏A between legs. Svor. 1380. Triobol. Ptolemy X with Cleopatra III. 106-101 BC. “Paphos” Mint. Similar, (24g) Svor. 1381. ∏A at left. Triobol. “Paphos” Mint.

111 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cleopatra I, Æ22 (8g), KΛEO∏ATPA∑ BA∑IΛI∑∑H∑ Diademed and horned head of elephant-headress on Alexander the Great (?) right / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ One eagle standing left, ∏A monogram before. Svor. 1381. Obol and hemiobol. Ptolemy X as Alexander with Cleopatra III. 106-101 BC. Paphos Mint.

Ptolemy VI, Æ29, (24g) Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, cornucopia before. Svor. 1424. Triobol. Ptolemy X with Cleopatra III. 106-101 BC. Common. A similar 30 g version (also Svor. 1424) is Ptolemy VI and VIII c. 160 BC. A variety of the 24 g has ∏A monogram. Svor. 1383. “Paphos” Mint. Ptolemy VI Æ20, (8g), similar. Svor. 1426 (and 7?) Obol. Ptolemy X with Cleopatra III. 106-101 BC. Very common.

Ptolemy VI or other Ptolemies, Æ25, (15g) Kyrene, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Head of Isis right. Various denominations: 7.5g, 3.8g, 1.9g, and 1g. 7.5 g obol. All for Ptolemy Apion, c. 105-95 BC. Common near Kyrene.

reduced. Ptolemy III, Æ36, (45g) Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, wings spread, head turned. Svor. 1424 with countermark. Ptolemy IV-V. Sidon Mint. The Ptolemy VI era countermark associated with Svor. 1424, revaluing this tetrobol as a 4 1/2 obol coin. Ptolemy III, Æ30 (22g) Similar types. Smaller countermark. Svor. 1375. As above, diobol to 2 1/4 obols. Ptolemy VIII, Æ24, (8.4g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, lotus and date (26 to 36, 41) before. Svor. 1621-1632. Obol. Askalon, Palestine, AR11 (1.1g) Before 104 BC, Diademed bust of Aphrodite right, hair in chignon, one tress dangling. / A∑ Dove standing left, ∏PA (?) monogram before. BMC 1, Sear 6073. Cleopatra as Aphrodite. Scepter (?). c. 35 BC. Dove or Eagle? Silver content equal to a late Ptolemaic drachm.

112 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Askalon, Palestine, Æ12 (1.5g) Before 104 BC, Diademed bust of Aphrodite right. / A ∑ Dove standing left or right, no monogram before. BMC 3, Sear 6079. (BMC 9, with ∏PA (?) monogram). Cleopatra as Aphrodite. c. 35 BC. Dove or Eagle? Quarter obol. Ptolemy IX-XII, Æ9-Æ40, Cyprus, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle(s) standing left, various symbols at left. Paphos Mint, obol fractions, obols, and multiple obols. Later dates than in Svoronos. Ptolemy IX-XII, Æ24, (9.14g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, star before but no T or delta below the star. Svor. -, but cf. Svor. 1625 for a similar symbol at right of eagle, with date. Ptolemy VIII c. 130 BC Obol (Weight from a single example).

Ptolemy XII, 1st reign, silver tetradrachm, (14.0g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right, wearing aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, date before, ∏A monogram behind. S 7944-6; Svor. 1847-1870. Portrait of Ptolemy XII (as Zeus), “Paphos” Mint

Ptolemy X, silver tetradrachm, (13.6g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I as Zeus right, wearing aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, date before, ∏A monogram behind. S 7942; Svor. 1686-7. For some of these, the Time and Portrait of Ptolemy XII, Paphos Mint, dated Year 24-25, 58-55 BC. These can be identified by their lower silver content. “Paphos” Mint

Berenike II, Æ21, (8g) Alexandria Mint, BEPENIKH∑ BA∑IΛI∑∑H∑ Diademed and draped bust right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left. Svor. 1055. There are varieties with reverse Cornucopia, Cornucopia flanked by club and eagle, and Eagle with open wings. There are denominations of 16g, 8g, 4g and 2g, last two with abbreviated legends. Kition? Berenike III, co-ruler with Ptolemy X 101-87 BC, with Ptolemy XI 80 BC. Diobol, obol, hemiobol and 1/4 obol. Sextus Pompey, Æ as, (23g) Spanish and Sicilian Mints, 45-36 BC, Laureate janiform head with facial features attributed to Pompey the Great. / PIVS Prow right, IMP in exergue. C479/1; Syd. 1044a. Valued when issued as equal to the antique heavier ases of the mid-2nd century, as a dupondius. The common cut-halves of this type were ases. Ptolemy IX, Æ23, (7.4g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, helmet before. Cf. Cox. Pp. 15, 106 no. 119, plate IV. Second reign of Ptolemy IX. Obol. Ptolemy IX 2nd reign, Æ16, (1.9g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, helmet before. Svor.-, noted in Paphos II.

113 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy IX, Æ23, (7.4g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, cornucopia before. Svor. 1814. Late 2nd reign of Ptolemy IX to early reign of Ptolemy XII. c. 80 BC. Obol.

Ptolemy IX, Æ23, (6.75g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, aphlaston (stern ornament) before. Svor. 1813 Ptolemy XII. Obol. Ptolemy IX, Æ23, (6.2g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, T and star before. Svor. 1711 Ptolemy XII. Obol.

Cleopatra VII, Æ23, (5.91g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, transverse palm branch below wing, KY∏P monogram before. RPC 3903 Ptolemy XII, 2nd reign. Obol. Ptolemy IX, Æ23, (5.3g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, Delta and star before. Svor. 1706 Ptolemy XII, late 2nd reign. Obol.

Ptolemy XII, 2nd reign, silver tetradrachm, (13g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right, wearing aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, palm branch behind, headdress of Isis and date before, ∏A monogram behind. S 7947-8. Dated years 26 to 30. Portrait of Ptolemy XII (as Zeus), “Paphos” Mint. 33% silver. Perhaps some of the very common Λ = year 30 may be A without crossbar for Ptolemy XIII or XIV.

Ptolemy XII, 2nd reign, silver drachm, (3.2g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy XII right, wearing aegis at neck. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, palm branch behind, headdress of Isis and date before, ∏A monogram behind. S 7949; Svor. 1838. “Paphos” Mint. Silver debased to c. 33%. Ptolemaic Cyprus, Ptolemy X (?), Æ13, (3.5g) Cyprus or Kyrene Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛ Headdress of Isis. SNG Cop. 685 (as late 2nd to 1st century BC); BMC (Ptolemy X) 48-56 (Kyrene?). Ptolemy XII (2nd reign); 1/4 obol; Perhaps Cyprus Mint.

114 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemaic Cyprus, Ptolemy X (?), Æ11, (1.80g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Cornucopia. Svor.-; Paphos II 382-4, otherwise unpublished. Ptolemy XII (2nd reign); 1/8 obol. Octavian (?), Brass 20 mm, (7g) c. 38 BC, Uncertain, Syria or Cilicia, Bare head right. / Fiscus, sella, quaestoria and hasta; Q below. RPC 5410; Grant, FITA p. 13. Larger bronze denomination also known, as well as both denominations with plowing scene reverse. RPC 5409; 4082, 4083. Portrait of Gaius Sosius, general of Antony.

Cleopatra VII, billon tetradrachm, 40-45% silver, (13g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, date and headdress of Isis to left, ∏A to right. Dated Years 1 to 4, 7 to 20 and 22. “Paphos Mint,” 33% silver, head of Cleopatra VII. and/or her brothers depending on date.

Caesarion (?), billon tetradrachm 40-45% silver, (13g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Ptolemy I right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, date, star and headdress of Isis to left, ∏A and pellet to right. Dated Years 1 or 4. Svoronos 1816 and 1820. “Paphos Mint,” 33% silver, Perhaps Ptolemy XV, with his portrait. Comet?

Cleopatra VII, billon drachm, 40-45% silver, (3g) Alexandria Mint, Diademed head of Cleopatra VII right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing left, date and headdress of Isis to left, ∏A to right. Sear 7954; Vagi-; Svor. 1853, 1858 var.; BMC 1. “Paphos Mint,” 33% silver. Ptolemy IX, Æ28 diobol, (15g) Paphos Mint, 12:00 die axis, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / Partial Greek legend, “[Ptolemy, King].” Two eagles standing left, ∑* symbol before. SNG Cop.-; BMC-; cf. Svor. 1706-7, RPC-, RPC Supplement-; Paphos II 315. Perhaps Cleopatra VII, before 38 BC. Similar double eagle coins with different symbols are from the same time. Time of Cleopatra VII, Æ28 diobol, (12.1g) Paphos Mint, c. 51-39 BC, 12:00 die axis, Laureate head of Zeus right, of Cypriot style. / Partial Greek legend, presumably, “[Ptolemy, King].” Two eagles standing left, palm branch before. SNG Cop.-; BMC-; Svor.1876 (Cleopatra)- Paphos II-, RPC-, RPC Supplement-. As suggested by the laurel wreath, a feature not seen on other Ptolemaic coins with the exception of the Zeus standing hemibols of Cleopatra, Svoronos is correct about the time period.

115 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Time of Ptolemy XIII - XV and Cleopatra VII (?) Æ28 diobol, (13g) Paphos Mint, c. 51-39 BC, 12:00 die axis, Laureate head of Zeus right, of Cypriot style, star before. / Mostly unstruck Greek legend, presumably, “[Ptolemy, King].” Two eagles standing left, together holding scepter. SNG Cop.-; BMC-; Svor. - Paphos II-; RPC-; RPC Supplement-. Unpublished in the major references, though noted in Cox, Excavations at Curium, #118 attributed there to Ptolemy IX to X.

Time of Cleopatra, Æ28 (diobol) (8.0g) Very crude head of Zeus right. / Crude Greek legend, “Ptolemy King” Two eagles standing. Svor. 1917 (Cleopatra and co-rulers). Many sizes. Cyprus mint. Perhaps imitative, after types of Cleopatra III with Ptolemy IX and X.

Cleopatra VII, Æ28, (15.8g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and draped bust of Cleopatra VII right, as Aphrodite, holding scepter and infant Caesarion. / KΛEO∏ATPA∑ BA∑IΛI∑∑H∑ Double cornucopia, joined at bottom and bound with fillet, KY∏P monogram to in lower right field. RPC 3901; Sear 7957; BMC 6; Svor. 1874. Paphos Mint, c. 38 BC, diobol, holding baby Alexander Helios.

Late Ptolemaic Cyprus, Æ24, unstruck diobol or trihemiobol, (13.96g) Blank, with dimple where the limestone mould was drilled. / Blank, with signs of casting, and a neat cut or break where the planchet was disconnected from the casting tree. Paphos II -; Unpublished. At about 14 grams, this is too heavy to be a 12 gram obol of Ptolemy II to V. In addition, the flan is en chapelete, not lathed.

Time of Cleopatra, bronzes from Chalkis, Damascus, Antioch (under Romans and Parthians), Seleukia and Laodikea, coinage of c. 42 to 35 BC, with countermarks of female bust or head right, some attributed to Apollo in RPC. Cleopatra portrait countermarks for local Syrian circulation. Cleopatra VII, Æ25, (9.9g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, grain ear behind, KV∏P monogram before. RPC 3902. (2 weighed: 11.98 and 7.85g) Paphos Mint, obol. The 11.98 g example is puzzling. These weights suggest the joint reign of Ptolemy IX and X, though there are just two data points.

116 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Ptolemy IX (2nd reign), Æ25, (9.5g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, no symbol before. Svor. 1713 (?). Paphos Mint, obol. These weights suggest the joint reign of Ptolemy IX and X, though there are just two examples weighed. Ptolemy IX (2nd reign), Æ24, (6.6g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles stg. left, wreath before. Svor. 1702 Perhaps Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XIII or XIV. Obol. Paphos Mint.

Ptolemy XII, Æ23, (5.17g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, headdress of Isis at left. S7850; Svor. 1842; BMC1. Cleopatra VII, Paphos Mint. Obol.

Ptolemy XII, Æ23, (5.0g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, headdress of Isis above KY∏P monogram at left. S7850 var.; Svor. 1842 var; BMC 1 var. Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV, Paphos Mint. A late issue c. 32 BC. Ptolemy XII, Æ21, (4.0g) Cyprus Mint, Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Two eagles standing left, headdress of Isis above small monogram (of KY∏P?) at left. Paphos II 464 and 468; S7850 var; Svor. 1842 var; BMC 1 var. Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV, Paphos Mint. A late issue c. 31 BC. Small monogram varieties. The small monogram variety is about 20% lighter, and is presumably later. It is apparently from smaller dies. The monogram is KY∏P.

Time of Cleopatra VII, Æ17, (3.7g) Laureate head of Zeus right. / No legend. Zeus standing head to right, holding ears of grain on single stalk (?) in right hand and a scepter in the left hand, star above head. BMC Ptolemies-; Svor. -; SNG Cop.-; RPC-; RPC Supplement; Cox, Excavations at Curium, 128; Lichochka, Un type de Zeus sur les monnaies hellenistiques de Nea paphos, 5-6 (dated to mid-1st century BC); Museum of the History of Cypriot Coinage, Coin catalogue, Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, Nicosia 1996 Ch. 11, coin #35 (as Cleopatra VII), noted in BMC Cyprus. There are several varieties and styles, Some presumably later examples are on small flans from small dies. Paphos Mint, hemiobol. Statue of Zeus Salaminios (?)

117 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Time of Cleopatra VII, Æ15, (1.5g) Similar types. Small dies and small flan. Struck c. 31-30 BC.

Time of Ptolemy X to Cleopatra VII, Æ15, (2g) Diademed and horned head of Zeus-Ammon right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Cornucopia. Paphos Mint, hemiobol or 1/4 obol. c. 80 BC.

Ptolemy IV and Arsinöe III, Æ10, (1.7g) No legend. Diademed bust of Arsinöe right. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Double cornucopia. Svor. 1160. Cleopatra VI and PtoIemy XV, Paphos, 1/4 obol Svor 1161 is a variety with a single cornucopia. Does this exist?

Ptolemy IV and Arsinöe III, Æ10, (2g) Similar but crude. Cf. Svor. 1160; S 7850 (as Æ14). Several varieties and styles. Cleopatra VI and PtoIemy XV, Paphos, 1/4 obol. Crude examples are often on heavier, dumpy cast flans.

Ptolemy IV and Arsinöe III, Æ10, (1.9g) flan cut from a rod, not cast, Similar. SNG Cop. 648. Cleopatra VI and PtoIemy XV, Paphos, 1/4 obol.

Ptolemy IV and Arsinöe III, Æ9, (1.2g) Similar obverse. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑ Eagle standing. Svor. 1162. Generally cast flans. Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV, Paphos, 1/4 or 1/8 obol. Perhaps a mule with the smaller 1/8 obol.

Ptolemy IV and Arsinöe III, Æ8, (0.94g) Similar. cf. Svor. 1162 for slightly heavier examples. Cast flan. Same as above?

118 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV, Paphos, 1/8 obol. Both obverse and reverse die are small.

Ptolemy V, Æ8, (0.8g) No legend. Winged thunderbolt, with five rays on both sides. / ∏TOΛEMAIOY BA∑IΛEΩ∑, legend blundered. Eagle standing right. Svor. 1246. Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV, Paphos, 1/8 obol. Cast flans. Some perhaps cut from a rod.

Marc Antony, AR denarius, (3.95g) Travelling Mint, 41 BC, 12:00 die axis, M ANT IMP AVG III VIR RPC L GELL Q P Head of Marc Antony, right, jug behind. / CAESAR IMP PONT III VIR RPC Head of Octavian right, with features of Marc Antony, lituus behind. RSC10, Syd.1188, C517/8. Aureus. C517/7. 39 BC? Paphos?

Marc Antony, AR denarius, (3.90g) Athens Mint, mid 38 BC, M ANTONIVS M F M N AVGVR IMP TERT Marc Antony, dressed as a priest, standing right, holding lituus. / III VIR RPC COS DESIG ITER ET TER Radiate head of Sol right. RSC13, Syd.1199, C533/2. Paphos?

Marc Antony, silver denarius, (3.90g) 37 BC, Athens (?) or Mint moving with Marc Antony, variable die axis, M ANT AVGVR III VIR R P C Bare head right, dotted border. / Military trophy made up of captured arms, sometimes including prow, IMP TER across field, dotted border. C 536. A possible P visible behind the ear of the portrait on some higher grade examples. Paphos?

Marc Antony, silver denarius, (3.90g) 37 or 36 BC, Athens (?) or Mint moving with Marc Antony, variable die axis, ANTONINVS AVGVR COS DES ITER ET TERT Bare head right, dotted border. / IMP TERTIO III VIR R P C Armenian tiara superimposed over crossed bow and arrows, dotted border. C 539/1; Vagi 168. A possible P visible behind the ear of the portrait on some high-grade examples. Paphos?

119 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Marc Antony, Æ semis, (4.52g) Issued by Bibulus, at a mint in the East, 9:00 die axis, c. 38-37 BC, M ANT IM TER COS DES ITER ET TER III VIR R P C Bare head right. / L BIBVLVS F F PR DESIG Prow of galley right. RPC 4092. Cyprus? Style similar to Eastern Antony portrait denarii. Possible P. Marc Antony, Æ Fleet Coinage, at a mint in the East, 9:00 die axis, c. 38-37 BC Several other bronze denominations for Bibulus: 1, 2, 3 and 4 as pieces. 4091, 4090, 4089, 4088. Cyprus? Style similar to Eastern Antony portrait denarii. Perhaps the female portrait is Cleopatra and the secondary male portrait is Antony Junior. Marc Antony and Marc Antony Junior, gold aureus, (8.0g) 34 BC, Mint moving with Marc Antony, variable die axis, ANTON AVG IMP III COS DES III III V R P C Bare head of Marc Antony right, dotted border. / M ANTONINIVS M F F Bare head of Marc Antony Junior. C 541; Vagi 194-195; Sear 1514 (Syrian or Armenian Mint). Paphos Mint?

Cleopatra and Marc Antony, silver denarius, (3.90g) Mint moving with Marc Antony, or Alexandria Mint, 32 or 34 BC, ANTONI ARMENIA DEVICTA Bare head of Antony right, Armenian tiara behind. / CLEOPATRAE REGINAE REGVM FILIORVM REGVM Diademed and draped bust of Cleopatra right. S1515 (Alexandria, 34 BC) Vagi 209; C 543/1. Cleopatra is the obverse. Paphos Mint. 31 BC? A possible P visible behind the ear of the portrait on some higher grade examples. Cleopatra and Antony, Æ12, (1.78g) 12:00 die axis, Year 31 of the Pompeian Era = 34/3 BC, Dora, Phoenicia, L ΛA. Diademed bust of Cleopatra left. / Bare-head of Antony left, [∆]Ω before. RPC I-; RPC I Supplement. Unpublished. Apparently unique, a half-denomination of the unique 16 mm, 3.15g RPC 4754 in the Israel Museum, and a one third- denomination of the also unique 17 mm 5.41g RPC 4753, both with female head right identified by Meshorer as that of Cleopatra with doubt shed by RPC I.

Marc Antony, silver denarius, (3.90g) 33 BC, Mint moving with Marc Antony, 12:00 die axis, ANTON AVG IMP III COS DES III III V R P C Bare head of Antony right, P. in hair behind ear. / M SILANVS AVG Q PRO COS in two lines. RSC 71; C 542/1. Paphos Mint, P. is a mintmark, not a signature.

Marc Antony, silver denarius, (3.90g) Similar obverse. / ANTONINVS AVG IMP III in two lines. RSC 2; C 542/2. Paphos Mint, P. is a mintmark, not a signature.

Marc Antony, silver denarius, (3.90g) D. Turullius, 31 BC, Mint moving with Marc Antony, 12:00 die axis, M ANTONIVS AVG IMP IIII COS TERT III VIR R P C Bare head right, dotted border. / Victory advancing left, holding wreath, D TVR in field, all in wreath. Vagi 171, C 545/1; RSC 11. Variety without monogram. C 545/2. Not from a traveling mint with Antony, Paphos Mint?

120 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Time of Cleopatra, Æ21, (3.50g) Eagle / Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos. A Catalogue of Coins of Cyprus, p.88, #36; Amandry, Coinage Production and Monetary Circulation in Roman Cyprus p. 5-6, ill. #2; otherwise unpublished. After Actium, c. 30 BC, hemiobol, Paphos Mint. After Actium, Æ18, hemiobol, (c. 3g) c. 30 BC, Paphos Mint, Laureate head of Zeus right. / Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos. Private collection.

After Actium, Æ16, hemiobol, (c. 1.9g) c. 30 BC, Paphos Mint, Laureate head of Zeus right. / Possible legend “Ptolemy.” Zeus Salaminios, holding patera instead of grain ears. Private collection. Uncertain, Æ15, (2.3g), Victory / Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos. Paphos II 657 (otherwise unpublished). Octavian (?), after Actium quarter-obol. Uncertain, Æ10, (1/4 obol) (2.12g) Paphos Mint, Unstruck / BA∑IΛE . . . Thunderbolt. Svor. 1244.- BMC-; SNG Cop.-; Paphos II.

Octavian, silver denarius, (3.85-3.60g) Asia (?), 28-27 BC, dies not adjusted, CAESAR DIVI F COS VI Bare head right, small Capricorn below. / ÆGYPTO CAPTA crocodile r. RIC 5 45; BMC 653; RSC 4. Paphos Mint. The Capricorn is a mintmark. Octavian, gold aureus, (c. 8.0g) Asia (?), 27 BC, COS VII Similar types./ AEGYPT CAPTA Similar. S-; RIC 544; BMC 653; Vagi 231; Calico 158. Paphos Mint. Augustus, gold medallion of four aurei, (31.97g) Asia (?), 27 BC, IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVST COS VII VI Bare head right, small Capricorn below. ÆGYPTO CAPTA Rhino (?) or similar animal right. RIC 546 (authenticity doubted). Unique. Paphos Mint. Hippopotamus.

Caius Caesar (?), AR denarius, (3.80g) Uncertain Mint, 17 BC, Dies tending toward 6:00, CA ES AR Bare head right, all inside laurel or oak wreath. / AVG VST. Candelabrum ornamented with ram’s heads, all inside wreath entwined with bucrania and paterae. RIC 540, BMC 684. Augustus. Paphos Mint, c. 27 BC. Corona Civica / Corona Rostra. Caius Caesar (?), gold aureus, (7.95g) Similar. RIC 539; BMC 683; Calico 163. Augustus. Paphos Mint, c. 27 BC. Similar.

121 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Augustus, silver denarius, (3.85g) Pergamum or Samos? Mint, c. 27 or c. 22 BC, Dies tending to 12:00, CAESAR Bare head of Augustus right, of very good style. / AVGVSTVS Young bull standing right. Vagi 267; S1593; RIC 475; RSC 28; BMC 662. Nice style. Paphos Mint. c. 27 BC

Augustus, gold aureus, (c.8.0g) Pergamum or Samos? Mint, c. 27 or c. 22 BC, Similar. RIC 475 note.; Calico 172a (Berytos, 19-15 BC, heifer) Paphos Mint, c. 27 BC.

Fine, but different style. Calico 168. Calico 169. As above but laureate head. Calico 170. As below, but heifer left.

Fine, but different style. Calico 171.

Fine, but different style. Calico 172. Perhaps Paphos.

Augustus, silver denarius, (3.85g) Pergamum or Samos (?), c. 27 or 22 BC, die axis variable, AVGVST VS Bare head of Augustus right, dotted border. / IOVI OLVM Temple of Zeus Olympus, with six evenly spaced Doric pillars, entablature in a mixture of Doric and Corinthian, with a round shield in the pediment and palmettes on top, dotted border. RIC 472; BMC 666; RSC 182. Salamis, Temple of Zeus Olympus at Salamis. Die axis tending toward 12:00.

122 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Augustus, Similar. / No legend. Rostral wreath, ties arranged centrally. RIC 473 (attributed to a mint in Greece); BMC 669. Salamis. Die axis tending toward 12:00.

Augustus, silver quinarius, (1.9g) Pergamum or Samos? 27 or 22 BC, die axis variable, AVGVSTVS Bare head right, of style similar to the C.A bronze coinage. / No legend. Victory standing left on prow left, holding wreath and palm branch. S 1643; RIC 474; BMC 670. Salamis. Die axis tending toward 12:00. The prow may be that of a defeated Ptolemaic ship of Actium.

Augustus, silver denarius, (3.80g) Eastern Mint, die axis normally 12:00, c. 22 BC, Laureate head of Augustus right, of very good style, dotted border. / Capricorn right, bearing cornucopia and globe, AVGVSTVS below, linear border. RIC 541. Oak wreath, not laurel. Paphos or Salamis? Or another Eastern Mint? Cf. Calico 169 for a similar obverse style aureus.

Augustus, silver denarius, (3.80g) Eastern Mint, die axis normally 12:00, c. 22 BC, Laureate head of Augustus right, of very good style, dotted border. / Capricorn right, star above, AVGVSTVS below, linear border. RIC 542. Salamis or Paphos? Comet? ? Cf. Calico 168 for a similar obverse style aureus Augustus, brass sestertius, C.A coinage, (17.35g) Cyprus Mint, c. 25 BC, CAISAR Bare head right. / Large C.A in rostral wreath. RPC 2227 (Asia Minor Mint); BMC 713; RIC 496; Vagi 356. Another type has civic wreath. Paphos Mint? Augustus, brass dupondius, (12.83g) Paphos Mint, [C]AISAR Bare head right. / AVGVS TVS in laurel wreath. RPC(reverse legend variety). Unpublished. Weight taken from a single specimen, now in the BN. Augustus, Æ semis, (c. 4.8g) C.A coinage, c. 27 BC, CAISAR Bare head right. / Large C.A in laurel wreath. RIC 498 (Pergamum); BMC 708-710. Cyprus Mint. Augustus, Æ17 hemiobol, (3.5g) Paphos, Cyprus, DIVI F IMP CAESAR Head of Augustus right. / A PLAVTIVS PRO COS Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos, containing conical xoanon, semicircular courtyard. RPC3906. Similar, reverse die without legend.

123 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Reverse die with A CLAVTIVS PRO COS.

Augustus, brass sestertius, C.A coinage, (23.12g) Asia Minor Mint, c. 25 BC, AVGVSTVS Bare head right. / Large C.A in laurel wreath. RPC 2233 (Asia Minor Mint); BMC 713; RIC 496; Vagi 356. Cyprus Mint.

Augustus, brass dupondius, (12.44g) c. 27 BC, Asia Minor Mint, C.A coinage, AVGVSTVS Bare head right. / C.A in rostral wreath. RPC 2234 (Asia Minor Mint); RIC 497 (Pergamum); BMC 707. Cyprus Mint.

Augustus, Æ25, (11.48g) C.A coinage Cyprus, c. 27 BC, CAISAR Bare head right. / AVGV STVS in laurel wreath. RPC 2231. BMC 730. Cyprus Mint. The listing of weights in RPC includes: 13.83 g; 12.07g; 12.70; 12.39; 12.05g brass dupondii. Copper for ases, c. 10.5 g. Augustus, Æ25, (8.79g) C.A. coinage, c. 26 BC, CAESAR Bare head right. / AVGVSTVS in laurel wreath. Howgego 1c / 2c. RPC 2231/2235 as imitation or intermediate. Cyprus Mint.

Augustus, Æ25, (11.19g) C.A coinage Ephesos, or Pergamum (?), c. 25 BC, CAESAR Bare head right. / AVGVSTVS in laurel wreath. RPC 2235 (Asia Minor Mint); RIC 495 (Pergamum); BMC 712 or RIC 500 (Pergamum). Cyprus Mint. The listing of weights in RPC includes: 13.83 g; 13.37 g and 12.94 g brass dupondii. Copper for ases, c. 10.5 g. Augustus, brass sestertius, (23.5g) Ephesos, or Pergamum (?), c. 25 BC, CAESAR Bare head right. / AVGVSTVS in laurel wreath. RIC 483-484. Cyprus Mint.

124 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Augustus, Æ23, (c. 9.5g) Syrian Mint, variable die axis, AVGVST TR POT Laureate head right. / S.C or CA, ΛT (330) date above, all in laurel wreath. Crude. RPC 4106, 4107. Syrian or perhaps Salamis? 22 BC?

Augustus, brass sestertius, (23.7g) Syria (?), 12:00 die axis, 22 BC, IMP AVGVST TR POT Laureate head right. / OB CIVES SERVATOS in laurel wreath. RPC 4101; BMC 738. Syrian or Cyprus Mint.

Augustus, Æ24, (7.10g) Syria (?), 12:00 die axis, 22 BC, AVGVSTVS Laureate head right. / OB CIVES SERVATOS Laurel wreath and shield. Unpublished. Syrian or Cyprus Mint. If brass a diobol.

Augustus, Æ25 (as), (9.29g) after 22 BC, Paphos (?) Mint, Cyprus, TR POT AVGVST Laureate head right. / Large S.C in ring inside laurel wreath. Unpublished as Cypriot. cf. RPC 4248 for this type from Syria, and RPC 3915 for a dupondius of this style.

Time of Augustus (?), Æ17, (2.68g) Cyprus Mint (?) Die axis is 12:00, if the star is oriented above on both sides. Capricorn on a globe, star before. / Scorpion left, with a star above it. RPC 3916. Late reign of Augustus to early Tiberius, c. 9-18 AD, Cyprus Mint, quadrans. Birth signs of Augustus / Tiberius. Hemiobol? Augustus, Æ10 (1/4 obol), (1.10g) Cyprus Mint, No legend. Laureate head right, dotted border. / Large E shape, with all three branches of the E radiating from a single point, border of large dots. RPC-; RPC Supplement.

125 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Augustus, AR denarius (3.8g) Rome Mint, c. 107 AD, CAESAR AVGVSTVS DIVI F PATER PATRAE Laureate head of Augustus right, of delicate style. / AVGVSTI F COS DESIG PRINC IVVENT Caius and Lucius Caesar togate and standing, shields and spears between, and holding volumina, above, simpulum to left, on left, and lituus with split base to right, on right, C L CAESARES in exergue. cf. RSC 43 and RIC 208 for Lugdunum mint style; BMC 536 (plate 13, #18). Eastern Mint, probably Cyprus, c. 1 AD. Adult reverse figures. Tiberius, Æ29, (15.58g) 19-20 AD, Commagene (?) 12:00 die axis, TI CAESAR DIVI AVGVSTI F AVGVSTVS Laureate head right. / PONT MAXIM COS III IMP VII TR POT XXI Caduceus between crossed double cornucopia and two olive branches. RPC 3868; RIC 89; BMC 174. Cyprus ? Hemidrachm / dupondius. Branches, not wings.

Tiberius, Æ29, (15.58g) 20 AD, Commagene (?) Similar but TR POT XXII RPC 3869; RIC 90; BMC 175-6. Cyprus ? Hemidrachm / dupondius. Branches, not wings. Retrograde reverse die known. Tiberius, Æ23, (8.35g) 19-20 AD, Commagene (?) 12:00 die axis, TI CAESAR DIVI AVGVSTI F AVGVSTVS Laureate head right. / PONT MAX COS III IMP VII TR POT XXI Caduceus between four ears of grain. RPC 3870; BMC 171. Unique ? Cyprus ? Trihemiobol / as.

Claudius, Æ26, Antioch, Syria, (14.16g) late in reign, 12:00 die axis, beveled edge IMP TI CLAVD CE AVG GER Laureate head right, lituus in front. / Large S.C in laurel wreath of 8 leaves. RPC 4282. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius. Nero, Æ28, Antioch, Syria, (14.90g) undated, 12:00 die axis, beveled edge IM NER CLAV CAESAR Laureate head right, lituus or serpent or simpulum in front. / Large S.C in laurel wreath of 8 leaves. RPC 4307, 4309, 4311. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius.

Nero, Æ22, Antioch, Syria, (7.4g) Similar. RPC 4308 or 4310 or 4312; BMC 181-183. Cyprus? Trihemiobol / as.

Civil War, silver denarius, (3g) Uncertain Mint, 68 AD, AVGVSTVS CAESAR Bare head of Augustus right, of good style. / IMP Young bull standing right. RIC -; BMC -, but cf. RIC 94. Coin Galleries 12/08, #190. Western Mint (?) Civil War restoration of the antique Paphos Mint, Young Bull denarius.

126 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Nero, Galba, and Otho, Æ28, (c. 14-15g) legate issues, Dated year 115 (Nero), or 117 (Galba, Otho), 12:00 die axis, beveled edge Latin legend as similar SC bronzes, Laureate head right. / 5 line legend giving name of legate, Antioch, and date inside 8 leaf laurel wreath. (RPC 4303, 4313, 4316). Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius.

Galba, Æ28, (14.66g) Antioch, Syria, 68 / 69 AD, 12:00 die axis, beveled edge, IM SER SVL GALBA CAE Laureate head right. / Large S.C in laurel wreath of eight leaves. RPC 4315; BMC 203-204. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius. Galba, Æ22, (6.77g) Similar. RPC 4315; BMC 205. Cyprus? Trihemiobol / as. Galba, Æ28, (13.7g) Cyprus Mint, 12:00 die axis, 68-69AD, ΓAΛBAC CEBACTOC Laureate head of Galba right, behind circular countermark of illegible letters around round shield. / KOINON KY∏PIΩN ETOYC H Zeus Salaminios standing, or Temple of Aphrodite. RPC 3934, 3935. Brass for dupondii, with slightly higher weight, c. 14g. Copper for ases, c. 11g.

Otho, Æ28, (14.0g) Antioch, Syria, 69 AD, 12:00 die axis, beveled edge, IMP M OTHO CAE AVG Laureate head right. / Large S.C in laurel wreath of eight leaves. RPC 4318, 4320; Wruck 64; BMC 208-211. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius. Otho, Æ23, (7.15g) Similar. RPC 4319, 4321. Cyprus? Trihemiobol / as. Vespasian, Æ27, (14.0g) Antioch, Syria, 76/77 AD (?), 12:00 die axis, beveled edge, IMP CAESAR VESPASIAN AVG Laureate head of Vespasian left. / Large S.C in laurel wreath of eight leaves. RPC II 2009 var. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius

Vespasian, Æ26, (11.91g) Brass or copper, 6:00 die axis, Cyprus Mint, with the influence of the mint at Rome, Year 8 = 75/76 AD, OYEC∏ACIANOC KAICAP Laureate head of Vespasian right. / KOINON KY∏PIΩN ETOYC H Zeus Salaminios standing, or Temple of Aphrodite. RPC II 1820, 1821.

127 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Not KAICAP, should be CEBACTOC. Brass for dupondii, with slightly higher weight, c. 12.5g. Copper for ases, c. 10.5g. Titus, Æ26, (11.91g) Brass or copper, 6:00 die axis, Cyprus Mint, with the influence of the mint at Rome, Year 8 = 75/76 AD, AYTOKPATΩP T OYEC∏ACIANOC Laureate head of Titus right. / KOINON KY∏PIΩN ETOYC H Zeus Salaminios standing, or Temple of Aphrodite. RPC II 1823, 1824. Brass for dupondii, with slightly higher weight, c. 12.2g. Copper for ases, c. 11.0g. Domitian as Caesar, Æ26, (11.78g), Brass or copper, 6:00 die axis, Cyprus Mint, with influence of Rome mint, Year 8 = 75/76 AD, KAICAP ∆OMITIANOC Laureate head of Domitian right. / KOINON KY∏PIΩN ETOYC H Zeus Salaminios standing. RPC II 1826. Brass for dupondii, with slightly higher weight, c. 12.4g. Copper for ases, c. 10.5g

Domitian, Æ28, (14.0g) Antioch, Syria, 81-83 AD, 12:00 die axis, beveled edge, IMP DOMITIANVS CAES AVG Laureate head right or left. / Large S.C in laurel wreath of eight leaves. RPCII 2021, 2023. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius. Domitian, Æ23, (7.0g) Similar. RPC II 2022; 2024. Cyprus? Trihemiobol / as.

Nerva, Æ27, (14.6g) Antioch, Syria, beveled edge, IMP CAESAR NER VA AVG III COS Laureate head right. / Large S.C in wreath. BMC 259. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius Nerva, Æ23, (7.3g) Similar. Cyprus? Trihemiobol / as.

Trajan, Æ27, (14g) Antioch, Syria, beveled edge, Laureate head right. / Large S.C in wreath. Wruck 190. Cyprus? Hemidrachm / dupondius

128 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Trajan, Æ sestertius / drachm, (26g) Paphos, Cyprus, Greek legend. Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right. / Zeus Salamis standing. BMC40. The style of the obverse die appears Roman Imperial.

Trajan, Æ dupondius / diobol, (13g) Paphos, Cyprus, Greek legend. Radiate, draped and cuirassed bust right. / Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos containing a conical stone, courtyard before. SGI 1065; BMC 36. The style of the obverse die appears Roman Imperial. Trajan, Æ as, (11g) Paphos, Cyprus, Greek legend. Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right. / Similar. cf. SGI 1065. The style of the obverse die appears Roman Imperial.

Trajan, brass as, (8g) Eastern Mint, 115/116 AD, IMP CAES NER TRAINO OPTIMO AVG GERM Radiate bust right. / DAC PARTHICO P M TR POT XX COS VI P P around oak wreath containing S.C. RIC 644; 646-8. Brass diobol / 2/3 dupondius, Cyprus?

Trajan, brass semis, (4g) Similar. RIC 645; 649-650. Brass obol / 1/3 dupondius, Cyprus?

Trajan, Æ uncia, (1.3g) No legend. Laureate head right. / No legend. Large S.C in wreath. C 348; BMC 1075; Vagi 1266. Cyprus Mint, 1/4 obol.

Hadrian, brass as, (8g) Rome Mint, HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS Laureate head right. / COS III S C City-goddess towered, seated left, holding grain-ears and resting left elbow on stork, perched on rock, river-god in front swimming. RIC II 680. Eastern Mint, perhaps Cyprus. Diobol = 2/3 dupondius. Hadrian, brass as, (8g) Rome Mint, HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS Laureate head right. / COS III S C Griffin, in various positions. RIC II 681-683. Eastern Mint, perhaps Cyprus. Diobol = 2/3 dupondius.

129 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Hadrian, brass as, (8g) Rome Mint, HADRIANVS AVGVSTVS Laureate head right. / COS III S C Lyre. RIC II 684. Eastern Mint, perhaps Cyprus. Diobol = 2/3 dupondius. There are other brass 2/3 dupondii.

Hadrian, Æ semis or quadrans, (4g) Rome Mint, IMP CAESAR TRAIAN HADRIANVS AVG Laureate head right. / Roma seated left. RIC 685. Tyche seated left. RIC 686. Radiate Head. / Pegasus running right. RIC 687. Lyre. RIC 688. Eagle between two standards. RIC 689. Eastern Mint, perhaps Cyprus. obol = 1/3 dupondius. Hadrian, Æ quadrans, (4g) Rome Mint, IMP CAESAR TRAIAN HADRIANVS AVG Laureate head right. / No legend. Large S.C. in laurel wreath RIC 629a; C 1395. 12:00 die axis, brass obol / 1/3 dupondius, Cyprus Mint. Bare head on some.

Hadrian, Æ uncia, (1.25g) Eastern Mint, No legend. Laureate head right. / No legend. Large S.C in laurel wreath. Vagi 1379; RIC 629b; C 1396. Perhaps Cyprus Mint, perhaps 1/4 obol (2 uncia). Perhaps Antioch as a lepton (1.5 uncia) Time of Hadrian, Odd Æ c. 17 mm, (1.1 to 2.2g) “Unidentified foreign issues” Various designs. Paphos II, “Found with the Skeleton,” quoting a previous article by Nicolaou. Otherwise Unpublished. Cypriot origin. Local tokens. Unidentified Greek, Æ17, dotted borders, Nude male figure standing left. / Stag right. Cox 209. Probably also 2nd century local token. Hadrian, Æ24, (6.33g) Cyprus, Oval countermark with laureate head of Hadrian right, on a worn obol, apparently showing a bearded Zeus head on the obverse. / Worn. Ongoing use of a Ptolemaic coin, c. 120 AD. Antoninus Pius, Æ uncia, (1.39g) Cyprus Mint(?), No legend. Laureate head right. / No legend. Large S.C in wreath. Unpublished. Weight taken from a single specimen, attributable only from the portrait. Antoninus Pius & Marcus Aurelius Caesar, Æ26, (11g) Cyprus, Weak Greek legend. Laureate head right. / Weak Greek legend. Bare-headed and draped bust right. BMC 51. Brass for dupondii, with slightly higher weight, c. 12.2g. Copper for ases, c. 10.6g Faustina Senior & Galerius Antoninus, Æ33, 12:00 die axis, cast flan, (c. 24g) Uncertain Greek Mint, ØEA ØAY CTEINA Draped bust right, hair in bun behind. / M ΓAΛEPIOC ANTWNINOC AYTO KPATOPOC ANTWNINOY YIOC Bareheaded and draped bust right. SGI 1540var.; Cohen 1; Vagi 1516. Perhaps Cyprus, as noted by Amandry. Sestertius / Drachm.

130 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Faustina Senior & Galerius Antoninus, Æ27, (c. 11g) Similar. Cohen 2; Vagi 1517. Perhaps Cyprus, as noted by Amandry. Dupondius / Hemidrachm in yellow metal, c. 12g; as / trihemiobol in copper, c. 9 grams. Marcus Aurelius (?), Æ uncia, (1.15g) Cyprus Mint(?), No legend. Laureate head right. / No legend. Large S.C in wreath. Unpublished. Weight taken from a single specimen sold in a 1991 CNG mail-bid sale, attributable from the portrait. Marcus Aurelius & Commodus, Æ48 medallion, (97.55g) Rome, No inscription. c. 177 AD, Confronting busts of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus. / PROPAGA TORIVBS IMPERII in wreath. Gnecchi-; Cox 230 (this coin). Unique. Found at Curium. Of four sestertius weight, thus a denarius for circulation. Perhaps of Cypriot origin.

Julia Domna, Æ32, (20g) Bust right. / Temple of Aphrodite at Paphos, conicial stone at center, elaborate paved semicircular courtyard before. Cop. 90. Caracalla and Septimius too. Sestertius / drachm. Geta as Augustus, Æ30, (14g) Similar. ANS 1952.122.6. Caracalla & Geta, Æ30, (20g) Cyprus Mint, Partial legend. Laureate, draped and cuirassed right. / Partial legend. Bare-headed, draped and cuirassed bust right. Lindgren III A1664A (listed as unique). Sestertius / drachm. No longer unique.

Severus Alexander, Æ25, (5.6g) Sardes or Paphos Mint, Alliance Issue between the two cities, Laureate, draped and cuirassed bust right. / EPI NEIKOMAX CAR∆IANΩN . . . ∏AØIH Temple of Aphrodite of Paphos. Unpublished.

131 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Appendix I Analysis of declining obol weight standard, taken from Svoronos data.

Ptolemy III Æ26 obol (12.33g). Svor. 1006. Svor. # Average g/obol of # of spec. w/o * Type 1005 11.77g 9 Ptolemy III, Aphrodite 3/2 obol 1006 11.66g 9 “ (c. 260 BC) obol 1007 11.77g 7 “ 1/2 obol 1008 11.27g 15 “ 1/4 obol 1009 13.14g 7 “ 1/8 obol All types 11.8g 47 Ptolemy VI Æ29 diobol (21.6g) Svor. 1396. Note the effaced reverse legend. 139566 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 All types

10.25g 11.43g 10.14g 10.78g 11.65g 11.33g 10.50g 11.4g

1 8 2 2 7 1 2 23

Ptolemy VI, EYΛ below eagle (some struck under Antiochus IV) (c. 168 BC)

Ptolemy VIII Eueregetes Æ45 drachm (71.24g). Svor. 1640. 1640 11.46g 7 Ptolemy VIII Eueregetes, Double Cornucopia, drachm, Phi. 1641 seems to be a mixture of Eagle right denominations: An unpublished Æ36 with effaced name of king, lotus symbol and EYΛ below the eagle weighs 42.07g, presumably a tetrobol of 10.27 g / obol. It has a countermark E, likely from either a later revaluation from 4 to 5 obols or E for Ptolemy VIII Eueregetes. 66

132 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

a drachm, hemidrachms, and tetrobols, all with Phi. 1642 11.03g 14 Eagle left, obol, Phi. 1643 10.85g 7 Eagle right, obol, Phi. 1644 10.12g 4 Eagle left, wings closed, obol, Phi. 1648 11.91g 4 Eagle right, diobol, K for Kition. 1649 seems to be a mixture of different denominations: diobols and trihemiobols, K in Svor pic. All types 11.1g 36 Ptolemy IX, 1st reign 1190 11.20g All types 11.2g

8 36

Ptolemy VIII and co-ruler (joint rule) Æ34 triobol, (24.4g) Svor. 1696. 1694 1695 1696 1697 1699 1701 All types

9.48g 11.0g 10.15g 9.88g 8.85g 8.30g 9.6g

6 1 1 1 1 1 11

Ptolemy VIII and Cleo II

Ptolemy VIII Æ25 obol dated Year 34 (10g) Svor. 1629. Svor. Year Avg. Obol # specimens 1621 26 10.20g 2 Ptolemy VIII dated obols 1622 27 9.09g 7 1623-5 28 9.22g 4 1626 29 10.43 1 1627 30 7.00g 1 1628 33 9.46g 5 1629 34 9.79g 5 1630 35 8.94g 2 1631 36? 10.39 1

133 / 140

1632 41 All dates

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

7.65g 9.2g

3 31

Some chronological conclusions about additional bronze issues can be inferred from the above data. Larger denominations with cornucopia symbol before a single eagle were issued on the same scale as the “Statue of Aphrodite” types. Svor. 1002, 1003 and 1004 were a drachm, triobol and diobol. The weight standard and production methods are very similar to large bronzes issued under Ptolemy IV. Issues with lotus symbol were produced from the time of Ptolemy VI to c. 50 BC, during the reign of Cleopatra VII. The lotus symbol appeared on Classical coins of Paphos. It is probably a Paphos mintmark. The round examples of close to 12 g per obol (such as Svor. 1403, 1404, 1411 and 1414) are from the reign of Ptolemy VI. Later issues of 10 g (and less) per obol are less round. Weight and fabric may be used to narrow the time period of a given example.

Æ33 triobol, Svor. 1233 with the head of Cleopatra II as Isis, attributed here to the first years of the reign of Ptolemy VIII, 145-142 BC. (29.73g)

A similar Æ28 trihemiobol Svor. 1384 with a ∏A monogram for Paphos before the eagle. (14.01g) The series of bronzes (triobols, diobols, trihemiobols, obols, and hemiobols) with Cleopatra II as Isis are less round and at a slightly lower weight standard than the EYΛ issues from the early reign of Ptolemy VI, dated to include 168 BC above. Therefore, they are too late to be Cleopatra I, who was regent in 180 to 176 BC. The style of the eagle is similar to the bronze naming Ptolemy VIII. Indeed this series is slightly lighter than the average obol weight of Ptolemy VIII named bronze. Instead they must be of Cleopatra II, wife sister of Ptolemy VI and VIII. Ptolemy VIII married his sister Cleopatra II, who was also his brother’s widow. Ptolemy VIII married his sister Cleopatra II, who was also his brother’s widow. This marriage gave him additional legitimacy. This issue may be dated to 145-142 BC. (Svor. 1233, 1234, 1235, 1237, 1238, 1384, 1385, 1387 (weights mixed in Svor.))

134 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Æ22 obol Svor. 1495 attributed to the to the early first sole reign of Ptolemy IX. (9.96g) The next bronze series had trihemiobol, obol and hemiobol with a portrait of Alexander the Great. (Svor. 1493, 1495, (weights mixed in Svor.)) The series may date to c. 125 BC. A fairly non-descript “Anonymous” coinage filled the years of c. 125-100 BC. Various symbols (including no symbol) were used. The weight standard of an obol fell from 11 to 8 grams.

Æ25 obol (9.65g) Svor. 1494 var. attributed to Ptolemy VIII. Note the ∏A mintmark on this variety The series of bronzes (diobols, trihemiobols, obols, and hemiobols) with obverse of Hercules are of a less round and similar average weight per obol. They are probably from the reign of Ptolemy VIII, c. 114 BC. (Svor. 1492, 1494, 1496, 1497 (weights mixed in Svor.)) It was the first of the broad flan obols, preceding the dated coinage.

Æ30 triobol Svor. 1380 with cornucopia before the two eagles re-attributed tothe joint reign of Ptolemy X and Cleopatra III. (23.94g) A series of bronzes (triobols, obols, hemiobols) with obverse legend “Queen Cleopatra” may follow these. (Svor. 1380, 1381, 1382). The reverse has the usual legend “King Ptolemy.” The larger denomination has two eagles, not one. The flans are en chapelete. For the two smaller denominations, the portrait may be Alexander the Great. Other references date this type to Ptolemy VI. Here, on the basis of the flans and their average weight they are attributed to the reign of Ptolemy X. The Cleopatra named in the obverse legend is Cleopatra III, the mother and co-ruler of Ptolemy IX and X. An estimated date is 106-101 BC. Silver tetradrachms were issued during this period, with the name of Ptolemy and the dates of both Ptolemy X and his mother Cleopatra III. Both have the ∏A mintmark for Paphos. This series of bronzes names mother and son.

135 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Similar and common Æ31 triobol Svor. 1424 with cornucopia before the two eagles reattributed to either the joint reign of Ptolemy X and Cleopatra III. (21.77g) The common two eagles with cornucopia symbol coinage have been called Ptolemy VI. The 8g 19-21 mm of this type was the fourth most common Ptolemaic bronze found in the excavations at Kurium. The flans are also en chapelete, with the weight variance that this implies. Svor. 1425 is 29-34 mm, of average weight of 24.17 g for the 102 examples of weight recorded by Svoronos. Its smaller counterpart is Svor. 1426, which has an average weight of 8.09 g for 37 examples. (Svor. 1427 is perhaps a variety of Svor. 1426, with a shorter flan). The average weights of 1425 and 1427 show a 3:1 relationship. Scarcer types Svor. 1425 and 1428 with average weight of 14.25 g and 3.28 g may represent double and half of Svor. 1426. Logic suggests that the common types are the obol and triobol and that the scarcer types are the diobol and hemiobol. What time period had both two rulers symbolized by a double eagle and an 8 g obol? The traditional attribution of Ptolemy VI would have an average obol weight of c. 11.3 g. Cox suggests both Ptolemy VI and the joint reign of Ptolemy IX with Ptolemy X. At 8 g per obol, these cannot be Ptolemy VI. One fit for this coinage is the joint reign of Ptolemy IX and X, 106-88 BC. However, the two eagle thin flan obols are from Paphos during this joint reign. Alternatively, the coins may be attributed to the joint reign of Ptolemy X and his mother, Cleopatra III, 106-101 BC. The types are the same: Zeus / Two eagles with cornucopia symbol). Svor. 1380 has the name of “Queen Cleopatra” on the obverse. Triobol Svor. 1380 has average obol weight similar to Svor. 1425. (7.85g vs. 8.06g) Tetradrachms of this period have a similar single eagle with reginal dates for both Ptolemy X and his mother. Which of these simultaneous attributions fits better? The 25 mm thin flan obols are probably from Paphos. The thick flan obols of 22 mm are probably from the other larger Paphos Mint that has been called Alexandria. Both Paphos mints produced tetradrachms marked ∏A.

Æ36 tetrobol Svor. 1148 of Ptolemy IV(?) with a later countermark of a cornucopia before the eagle. The countermark revalued the coin as a drachm on the same standard as the 24g triobols Svor. 1424 with cornucopia before eagles. (44.0g) Existing older bronzes were revaluated at this time. A cornucopia countermark was placed before the left wing of common 48 g tetrobols of Ptolemy IV-VI, revaluing it as a

136 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

drachm. 24 g Svor. 1375 was a similar half denomination, with a similar countermark. The diobol became a triobol. The rare corresponding Æ47 octobols of c. 95 g, the largest Ptolemiac coins, would have been revalued as a didrachm, though countermarked Æ47 are not known.

Æ20 obol Svor. 1191 has obverse K for Cleopatra or Cyprus. The reverse is dated to Year 3, perhaps of Ptolemy IX. (7.82g) Another slightly scarcer series with similar obverse has a K for Kition behind the head of Hercules. Svor. 1190 and 1191 are diobols and obols, struck on thicker flans. The reverse symbols are Ω ∑ and L Γ. The latter symbols are for Year 3. This date is important. The style does not work for Ptolemy VIII, nor does the lack of the title Euregetes. The date does not work for Ptolemy X who was not king in his own year 3 because he dated his rule from his governorship of Cyprus. The weight standard is correct for Ptolemy IX. A Zeus obverse with K behind follows the next year. Weight standard is similar. The same Ω ∑ symbol is paired with L ∆ on Svor. 1193.

Four denominations of bronze coins have obverse Greek legend “Berenike Queen” with a diademed portrait of a Ptolemaic queen. The reverse Greek legend reads “Ptolemy King.” One example was found at Paphos II, though the flan shape shows a mint other than Paphos, probably the same mint that struck the K bronzes noted above and the Cleopatra 40 and 80 drachma. There are four reverse types. One has a large cornucopia. Svor. 1051-2 (16 g diobol); Svor. 1054 (4 g hemiobol). The second has a similar large cornucopia with a club and an eagle at its sides. Svor. 1047 to 1049 (8 g obol) and Svor. 1053 (4g hemiobol). The third has just an eagle with closed wings. Svor. 1055 (8 g obol). The fourth has an eagle with open wings. Svor. 1056-7 (4 g hemiobol, 2 g 1/4 obol). Overall weight standard is about 8 grams per obol. This weight standard and en chapelete method of flan manufacture excludes the prior attribution to Berenike II, wife / sister of Ptolemy III. 8 gram obols suggest an attribution to Berenike III, either with Ptolemy X (101-87 BC) or Ptolemy XI (80 BC). Berenike IV (58-55 BC) is not excluded by the weight standard, though the reverse legend suggests the former attribution. Small denomination bronzes without symbol were issued during much of this time.

137 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Appendix II Octavia or Cleopatra? The attribution of several female portraits on coins to Octavia is questioned here. While still technically still married to Octavia, Antony married Cleopatra in 37 BC. Plutarch, Comparison of Demetrius and Antony notes that he was married to Cleopatra and Octavia at the same time, a position that was invalid under both Greek and Roman law, but nevertheless implies that he did consider himself married to Cleopatra before he divorced Octavia in 32 (Plutarch, Antony 57.2). Strabo 17.1.11 also calls Cleopatra Antony's wife. (Chris Bennett, Cleo.7 #41) The coin legends allow for a date for the coinage from either period. None of the coins show the titles of the woman in question, though all include the portrait and titles of Marc Antony. Two types of gold Antony portrait aurei have an unnamed female portrait on the reverse. (C527, C533/3a-b). Two types of silver cistophorii are known. These were struck for circulation in Asia Minor, at Ephesos and / or Pergamum. One (RPC2002) shows the jugate bust of a woman with Antony. The second (RPC2001) shows a draped female bust atop a cista, between snakes. The woman’s diadem is a royal symbol, which is unexpected for a Roman woman such as Octavia.

(8.03g) Gold aureus (38-37 BC) with heads of Marc Antony and his wife: Octavia or Cleopatra? M·ANTONIVS·M· F·M·N·[AVGVR]·IMP·TER Bare head of Marc Antony right. / COS·DESIGN·ITER·ET·TER·III·VIR·R·P·C Diademed female head right, hair in bun. The titles of Antony make up both legends. C 533/3a. This is the first Roman Imperial coin with the portrait of a living woman. Note the diadem, a royal symbol.

(11.25g)

138 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

(11.88g) Silver cistophorii with heads of Antony and his wife: Octavia or Cleopatra? Bronze “Fleet Coinage” sometimes has a female bust with Antony. The female bust faces Antony on all the larger bronze denominations, and is jugate on some ases. There are a variety of hairstyles. On the three-as “Fleet Coinage” piece, a second young male head appears jugate with Antony. Both male heads face the female head. This second male head appears in a subordinate position, behind Antony. This younger male only appears on this denomination, which tends to make him appear as less important than the female, who appears with Antony on this denomination as well as one, two and four-as coins. There are no titles for anyone but Antony on the Fleet Coinage. However, if this younger male portrait is Octavian, a pairing with Cleopatra is ruled out. If the younger male portrait is Marc Antony Junior (Antyllus), then the unnamed female is probably Cleopatra. Alternatively, use of a diadem, a regal and quasi-divine symbol nearly eliminates Octavia. Without a very clear example, it is difficult to say whether Octavia or Cleopatra was intended.

Bronze “Fleet Coinage” three-as of Bibulus. (20.22g) Western Mint silver quinarii of c. 40 BC have a veiled female head of Concordia. Vagi identifies this head with Octavia, who was the Concord between Antony and Octavian. The type is a successor to the quinarius of Fulvia as Victory.

139 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

Photos Most photos supplied by Classical Numismatic Group. Other photos supplied by Atlantis, Edward Waddell, Forum, Freeman & Sear, David Hendin, Beast Coins, Tom Cederlind, Goldberg Coins, Dieter Gorny, Lanz, John Lavender, Wayne Sayles, British Museum, the Author, and others. Photos are not to scale. Thank you for input from: Michel Amandry, William Andreas, Chris Bennett, Allen Berman, T. V. Buttrey, Joseph Charter, Curtis Clay, Frank Cochran, Greg Conlin, Henri Delger, Basil Demetriadi, Victor England, David Hendin, Walter Holt, Stephen Huston, David Kaplan, Jonathan Kern, Frank Kovacs, Brenda Kreuzer, Brian Kritt, James Lamb, Peter Lampinen, John Lavender, Cathy Lorber, Richard McAlee, David Michaels, Barry Murphy, Daniel Pelak, Adam Philippidis, Richard Pincock, Robert Sekulovich, Joseph Sermarini, Justin St. Louis, David Vagi, Alan Walker, Kerry Wetterstrom, and Rick Witschonke. Not all of the readers endorsed the conclusions presented here. Copyright Matthew Kreuzer 2000-2009. Bibliography M. Amandry, Coinage Production and Monetary Circulation in Roman Cyprus, (Nicosa, 1993) BMC, Egypt, Catalog of Greek Coins in the British Museum, (London 1882 reprinted) BMC, Cyprus, Catalog of Greek Coins in the British Museum, (London 1904 reprinted) SNG Copenhagen, Danish National Museum, (1942 on, reprinted) D. H. Cox, Coins from the Excavations at Curium, 1932-1953NNM 145, (New York, 1959) M. Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage, (Cambridge, 1974) Col. J. Curtis, The Tetradrachms of Roman Egypt, (Chicago, 1957) Richard Hazzard, Ptolemaic Coins, An Introduction for Collectors, (Toronto, 1995) Richard Hazzard, JSSEA XX, The Composition of Ptolemaic Silver (Toronto, 1990) David Hendin, Guide to Biblical Coins, Fourth Edition (New York, 2001) David Hendin, “Barbarous Coins of Ancient Israel” The Celator, (Lancaster, April, 2003, p. 44) Chris Howgego, Greek Imperial Countermarks, Royal Numismatic Society Special Publication #17. (London, 1985) James & Thorpe, Ancient Inventions, (New York, 1994) H. Lindgren, Ancient Greek Bronze Coins, (Quarryville, 1993) Catharine Lorber, "The Lotus of Aphrodite on Ptolemaic Bronzes," Swiss Num. Rev. 80 (2001), pp. 39-52 Harold Mattingly, Roman Imperial Civilisation, (New York, 1957). Michael Marotta and Ann Zakelj, Portraits & Representations of Alexander the Great, Celator, 7/02, p. 6. Y. Meshorer, Ancient Jewish Coinage, (New York, 1982) Milne, Catalogue of Alexandrian Coins in the Ashmolean Museum, (Oxford, 1927 reprinted) O. Morkholm, “Ptolemaic Coins and Chronology: The Dated Silver Coinage of Alexandria,” ANSMN 20 (1975) Museum of the History of Cypriot Coinage, Coin catalogue, Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, (Nicosia 1996) Newell, Standard Ptolemaic Silver, (New York, 1941) Newell, The Coinages of Demetrios Poliorketes, (Chicago, Obol Reprint of 1978) Newell, Royal Greek Portrait Coins, (New York, 1937) Ino Nicolaou and O. Morkholm, Paphos I: A Ptolemaic Coin Hoard, (Nicosia, 1976) Ino Nicolaou, Paphos II: The Coins from the House of Dionysos (Nicosia, 1990) Price, The Coinage in the Name of Alexander the Great and Philip Arrhidaeus (Zurich / London, 1991)

140 / 140

THE COINAGE SYSTEM OF CLEOPATRA VII, MARC ANTONY AND AUGUSTUS IN CYPRUS

M. Prieur, A Type Corpus of The Syro-PhoenicianTetradrachms and their Fractions from 57 BC to AD 253 (Lancaster, 2000) David Sear, Roman Coins & Their Values, Millennium Edition, (London, 2000) David Sear, The History and Coinage of the Roman Imperators 49-27 BC, (London, 1998) Stager and Walker, American Expedition to Idalion, Cyprus 1973-1980, Part VI by I Nicolaou. (Chicago 1989) C H C Sutherland, “L’attribution des deniers Augustéens aux types du “temple”, de la “couronne” et du “jeune tareau”, RN 1974, 59 Rev. E. A. Sydenham, The Coinages of Augustus, (New York Reprint of Numismatic Chronicle, 1977) M. Thompson, Morkholm & Kraay, An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards, (New York, 1973) David Vagi, Coinage & History of the Roman Empire, Volume I & 2, (Sidney, Ohio, 1999) Susan Walker & Peter Higgs, “Cleopatra of Egypt, from History to Myth,” (London, 2001) W. Wruck, Die Syrische Provinzialpragung von Augustus bis Traian (Stuttgart, 1931) O. Zervos, The Early Tetradrachms of Ptolemy I, ANS Museum Notes (New York, 1967)