Page:EB1911 - Volume 19.djvu/905

GREEK COINS] money which he issued, and few neglected to do so, while the sovereigns of Egypt and Syria even assumed divine titles.

The reign of Alexander produced another great change in Greek coinage, very different from that we have noticed. He suppressed the local types almost throughout his empire, and compelled the towns to issue his own money, with some slight difference for mutual distinction. His successors followed the same policy; and thus the coins of this period have a new character. The obverses of regal coins with portraits have the head of the sovereign, which in some few instances gives place to that of his own or his country’s tutelary divinity, while figures of the latter sort almost exclusively occupy the reverses. Small symbols, letters, and monograms on the reverses distinguish the towns in this class.

The Graeco-Roman coins begin, at different periods, with the seizure by Rome of the territories of the Greek states. They are almost all bronze; and those in that metal are the most characteristic and important. In their types we see a further departure from the religious intention of those of earlier times in the rare admission of representations,

not only of eminent persons who had received some kind of apotheosis, such as great poets, but also of others who, although famous, were not, and in some cases probably could not have been, so honoured. We also observe on these coins many types of an allegorical character.

The following principal kinds of types may be specified, in addition to those of the two previous classes. (1) Head or figure of a famous personage who either had received a kind of apotheosis, as Homer (Smyrna), or had not been so honoured, as Herodotus (Halicarnassus) and Lais (Corinth). (2) Pictorial representations, always of a sacred character, although occasionally bordering on caricature. We may instance, as of the latter sort, a very remarkable type representing Athene playing on the double pipe and seeing her distorted face reflected in the water, while Marsyas gazes at her from a rock—a subject illustrating the myth of the invention of that instrument (Apamea Phrygiae). (3) Allegorical types, as Hope, &c., on the coins of Alexandria of Egypt, and many other towns. These were of Greek origin, and owed their popularity to the sculpture executed by Greeks under the empire; but the feeling which rendered such subjects prominent was not that of true Greek art, and they are essentially characteristic of the New Attic school which attained its height at Rome under the early emperors.

There is a class of coins which is always considered as part of the Graeco-Roman, although in some respects distinct. This is the colonial series, struck in Roman coloniae, and having almost always Latin inscriptions. As, however, these coloniae were towns in all parts of the empire, from Emerita in Spain (Merida) to Bostra in Arabia, in the midst of a Greek population and often of Greek origin, their coins help to complete the series of civic money, and, as we might expect, do not very markedly differ from the proper Greek imperial coins except in having Latin inscriptions and showing a preference for Roman types.

We have now to speak of the meaning of the inscriptions of Greek coins. These are either principal or secondary; but the former are always intended when inscriptions are mentioned without qualification, since the secondary ones are non-essential. The inscription of civic money is almost always the name of the people by which it was issued, in the genitive

plural, as ' on coins of the Athenians, ' on coins of the Syracusans, or the name of the city in the genitive singular, as  at Agrigentum. The inscription of regal money is the name, or name and title, of the sovereign in the genitive, as ', or ', on coins of Alexander the Great. Instead of this genitive an adjective is sometimes found, as on early Arcadian coins, on staters of Alexander of Pherae. This genitive or adjectival form implies a nominative understood, which has been generally supposed to be, “money,” or the name of some denomination.

There are a few instances in which a nominative of this kind is expressed on coins—, “I am the badge of Phaeno (?) or Phanes” on an archaic Ionian coin;  , “the striking, struck piece, or type of Gortys”; ' (silver money), or ' (“striking” or “struck piece”); and 

 (“engraving” or “engraved piece”). Seuthes (end of 5th century ) and Cotys (1st century ), semi-barbarian Thracians, afford no evidence for Greek usage. The other instances (all archaic) point to the nominative understood in early times being in reality some word meaning type, or badge. But, if so, this latent nominative was eventually superseded by one meaning “money” or “coin.” Thus the staters of Alexander of Pherae are inscribed , his drachms. Probably from the 4th century onwards “coin” was always understood. Occasionally the name of the issuing authority is found in the nominative, as (at Cumae), (Zancle-Messana),  on a late coin probably issued by the Athenians in Delos,  at Tarentum. These are by no means always descriptive of the type, but merely a straightforward way of naming the issuing authority. The simple inscriptions of the early period of Greek coinage are under the kings and the Roman empire replaced by elaborate legends, most of which, however, fall under the description above given. A certain number of inscriptions directly describe the type (not merely giving the name of its owner) as (the goddess of Gela) or (at Terina). Others, especially in Roman times. indicate the reason of issue, as on coins of Judaea under Vespasian, or names of festivals for which the coins were issued. These, however, properly belong to the class of secondary inscriptions which either describe secondary types, as , “rewards,” accompanying the representation of the arms given to the victor in the exergues of Syracusan decadrachms, or are the names of magistrates or other officers, or in regal coins those of cities, or are those of the engravers of the dies, of whom sometimes two were employed, one for the obverse and the other for the reverse, or are dates. These inscriptions are often but abbreviations or monograms, especially when they indicate cities on the regal coins.

The importance of Greek coins as illustrating the character of contemporary art cannot be easily overrated. They are beyond all other monuments the grammar of Greek art. Their geographical and historical range is only limited by Greek history and the Greek world; as a series they may be called complete; in quality they are usually worthy of a place beside

contemporary sculpture, having indeed a more uniform merit; they are sometimes the work of great artists, and there is no question of their authenticity, nor have they suffered from the injurious hand of the restorer. Thus they tell us what other monuments leave untold, filling up gaps in the sequence of works of art, and revealing local schools known from them alone.

The art of coins belongs to the province of relief, which lies between the domains of sculpture and of painting, partaking of the character of both, but most influenced by that which was dominant in each age. Thus in antiquity relief mainly shows the rule of sculpture; in the Renaissance that of painting.

It may be expected that Greek coins will bear the impress of the sister art of sculpture, filling up the gaps in the sequence of examples of the art of which we have remains, telling us somewhat of that which has but a written tradition. Our first duty is to endeavour to place the documents in the best order, separating the geographical from the historical indications, first examining the evidence of local schools, then those of the succession of styles. It is from coins alone that we can discover the existence of great local schools, reflecting the character of the different branches of the Hellenic race. In tracing the changes in these schools we gain a great addition to our ideas of the successive styles, and can detect new examples of those which owe their fame to the leading masters. But in dealing with works in relief we have the advantage due to their intermediate character. In our larger geographical horizon we can trace the character of the successive styles, not of sculpture only, but also of sculpture and painting.

Greek coins clearly indicate three great schools, each with its subordinate groups. The school of central Greece holds the first place, including the northern group centred in Thrace and Macedonia, and the southern in the Peloponnesus, with the outlying special schools of Crete and Cyrene. The Ionian school has its northern group, Ionia, Mysia and

Aeolis, and its southern, Rhodes and Caria. Beyond these are certain barbarous and semi-barbarous groups, of which the most important is that of eastern Asia Minor, Persia and Phoenicia, with Cyprus. The school of the West comprises the two groups of Italy and Sicily.

The whole duration of the schools is limited, by the repulse of the Persians and the accession of Alexander, from 480 to 332 Before this age all is archaic, and it is hard to trace local characteristics. After it, the centralizing policy of the sovereigns and the fall of the free cities destroyed local art. In certain cultivated centres under enlightened kings a local art arose, but it speedily became general, and we have thus to think of a succession of styles