Page:Once a Week Volume V.djvu/583

 576

is no taste more general than that for collecting coins, yet there is none which is pursued with less judgment. The picture-buyer knows a Flemish from a Spanish master, and can even discriminate between the schools of Italy; the coin collector, in general, merely buys for rarity or beauty, without any distinct notion of the importance of the object he acquires. If there were any real idea of the interest of coins this would be far otherwise. The historian would be curious to examine unimpeachable monuments marking the rise and fall of kingdoms, the changes of belief and manners, and the various vicissitudes of human affairs. The artist would never weary of studying the handiwork of the best Greek schools, not as shown in the few true Greek statues, and the many corrupt Græco-Roman copies and imitations, or in the little varied bas-reliefs, but in an almost countless number of authentic monuments, bearing designs of every kind, with no drawback but the minuteness of the field they occupy. Coins of all ages are of value to both historian and artist, but the Greek take the first place, both because they illustrate obscure and most interesting periods, and as higher in artistic merit than any others. In history, modern coins are sometimes dangerous guides. The famous medal of the first Napoleon, “frappée à Londres,” is as untrue as the less known dollar of Frederic William IV., of Prussia, “elected Emperor of the Germans,” struck at Frankfort. Nor can we say much of the art of modern coins, with the florin and the new brass money before us. In both particulars, mediæval coins take a higher place; yet even they must yield to the currency of antiquity, in which that of the Greeks is in all respects the most important. In this paper, therefore, I propose to give some instances of the aid to history afforded by ancient Greek money.

We all know the history of the exile of Themistocles, how he fled to the King of Persia, and had allotted for his maintenance the cities of Magnesia, Lampsacus, and Myus, in Asia Minor; but it has never been certain whether he was really a traitor to Greece, or only a pretended servant of her enemies. A late discovery probably throws new light upon his character, and aids us to determine this question. Two coins, struck by him at Magnesia, have been identified by Mr. W. H. Waddington. They show that he had such an authority that he could strike his own money, a right allowed to no Persian satrap, excepting on extraordinary occasions for the payment of troops, although conceded to powerful vassals and to cities; and one of them leads to a far more interesting inference. The latter, which is here engraved, with one side of the other specimen, is in the British Museum. It is remarkable as a plated coin, being of copper covered with a thick coating of silver. Ancient plated coins were intended to pass as silver pieces. They are in general either forgeries of well-known currencies, as of Athens, or else they were issued by authority, as seems to have been done by the Tarentines, judging from their coins, during the war with the Romans. The coinage of Themistocles could scarcely have been common enough to induce forgers to imitate it. This piece was, therefore, probably issued by him, and as the revenues of his territory must have been amply sufficient for his sustenance, there can have been no reason but covetousness for recourse to this expedient. Strange that after so many ages a coin of Themistocles should be unburied to add weight to the evidence against his honesty.

It is not a forced transition from the patron of Themistocles, the first Artaxerxes, him of the long hand (always a sign of good blood), to the second, who took his surname from the equally princely endowment of a strong memory. Many years since, a very beautiful silver coin was purchased for the British Museum. It bears on the obverse, or principal side, the head of a Persian sovereign, and, on the reverse, a lyre and the word king (ΒΑΣΙΛ for ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ or ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ). Although