Woods, David

Cork Open Research Archive

Title Caesar the elephant against Juba the snakeAuthor(s) Woods, DavidPublication date 2009-12Original citation Woods, D; (2009) 'Caesar the Elephant against Juba the Snake'.Numismatic Chronicle, 169 :189-192. http://www.numismatics.org.ukType of publication Article (peer-reviewed)Link to publisher'sversionhttp://www.numismatics.org.ukAccess to the full text of the published version may require asubscription.Rights © 2009, The Royal Numismatic SocietyItem downloadedfromhttp://hdl.handle.net/10468/756Downloaded on 2017-02-12T12:55:08ZThe Numismatic Chronicle VOLUME 169 LONDON THE ROYAL NUMISMATIC SOCIETY 2009 Caesar the Elephant against Juba the Snake DAVIDWOODS ON the basis of the hoard evidence, Crawford dates Julius Caesar's issue of a denarius with a reverse depicting an elephant about to trample a rising snake (RRC 443) to 49-48 BC, and identifies it as his first is suo after his rebellion in 49.1 He then argues that the design 'was intended to symbolise victory over evil' . More recently, t.inderski argues similarly that ' the elephant on the reverse, a symbol of victory and strength, promised destruction of his [Caesar's] treacherous enemies' .2 Hence both agree that the elephant symbolises victory, that the snake symbolises evil in some sense, and that the reverse 88 a whole celebrates the generic triumph of good over eviJ.l They agree that the reverse does not allude to any specific military event, past or prospective. Both commentatollJ specifically reject the arguments of AlfOidi that the elephant symbolises Caesar in particular, that the snake symbolises Africa, and that the reverse 88 a whole celebrates Caesar's campaign in Africa 47-46.4 However, the fact that AlfOldi erred in his attempt to redate this issue to 47-46 does not in itself require that he erred in his interpretations of all of the individual features on this revene. He argued that the elephant symbolised Caesar in particular on the basis 1 M.H. Crawford, Roman Republican Coinage, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1974), pp. 89, 73.5. The coin illu!trated above is BM 2002-1-2-4406 (Hersh bequOtt). 1 J. lioderski, 'Q. Scipio lrnperator', in J.lindersld (ed.),/mper/11m Sine Fine: T. Robert S. Bmughton and the Roman Republic, HlaUJrla Elnzelschriften I 05 (Stuttgart, 1996), pp. I 45-186, a1 173. 3 This interpretation Is now commonplaoo in acad$0\iC Btudles. See, fur example, K.W. Hart, Coinage in the Roman Economy, JOOBC to AD 'lOO (Bahimore, 1996), p. 5.5, claiming that Caesar produced th.is revmc type 'to proclaim the justice of his cauee •. One weakness with thia interpreUltion is that although our Judaeo·Christian culture predisposes us to interpret the snake In a ueaatlve fashion, the snake did not in fact conatitute an unambiguous symbol of avll in Oreco-Roman antiquity. On tbe contrary, the Roman domestic lararlum nonnally depicted the gfmill3 of the patetfumillus or place as a snake, often crestod and bearded. Furtbennore, it waa believed that the ~oda could take the tonn of snakes to father e~tceptional leaden~ (Piut. Alexo~r 2.4; Suot. AugustuJ 93), and they were also kept 811 pata (Piiny. NH 8.61; Suet. 1iberlus 72). • A. Allbldl, 'Die Brltllrung des Namena 'Caeaar' in den apl!trOmlschen Kompendien (zu v. Ael. 2.3-S)'. in Bonner Hlslorla-Augusla-Colloqulum /966167 (Bonn, 1968), pp. 9·18. 1~0 DAVID WOODS that a series of late Roman literary sources preserve a belief that the first person t be called Caesar had been so named because he had killed an elephant, the narn ° for which in Punic was caesai.5 The fact that none of these sources date before the fourth century AD does not mean that this etymology can be dismissed as a la~ Roman invention. It may well have circulated for centuries before this, and it is not impossible that Caesar did intend the elephant on this reverse to symbolise himself in allusion to a popular etymology of his name. 6 On the other hand, AlflHdi could not adduce sufficient evidence to prove that the snake symbolised Africa in particular. Here Linderski takes Alfi>ldi to task for misleading quotation from, and use of, the testimony of Pliny the Elder (NH 8.32) which, when read in full, proves that India was the proper place of the struggle between elephants and giant snakes, not Africa. Nevertheless, the fact remains that such beasts did occur in Africa. and that, in the political context of the day, those witnessing the reverse type would instantly have thought of Africa, not India. The purpose of this note is to draw attention to overlooked evidence which suggests that Al:fflldi was nearer to the truth in this matter than has been realised, but that the snake symbolised King Juba I ofNumidia in particular rather than Africa mo"' generally. The key to the interpretation of the snake lies in its depiction with what ia sometimes called a dragon's head, including some form of protuberance sweeping backwards from the top or back of its head. Here the small scale and the fact that the snake is depicted in profile prevents easy identification of this element. Js it a horn ? Or is it a crest '?The best way to approach this problem is to ask how a contemporary Roman might have imagined a monstrous, dangerous snake to look. Virgil providet the classic description of such a beast when he describes how a pair of snakes attacked the Trojan priest Laocoon on the beach near Troy (Aeneid 2.203-08): ecce autem gemini a Tenedo tranquil/a per a/ta (horresco referens) immensis orbibus angues incumbunt pelago pariterque ad litora tendunt: pectora quorum inter jluctus a"ecta iubaeque sanguineae superant undas: pars cetera pontum pone legit sinuatque immensa volumine terga. And lo! from Tenedos, over the peaceful depths- I shudder as I speak - a pair of serpents with endless coils are breasting the sea and side by side making for the shore. Their bosoms rise amid the surge, and their crests, blood-red, overtop the waves; the rest of them skims the main behind and their huge backs curve in many a fold. 7 s The earliest are: Servius, Aen. 1.286; SHA, Aelius 2.3-5; Lydus, De Mensibus 4.1 02. 6 See F. Ahl and E. Fantham, Yirgil: Aeneid (Oxford, 2007), p. 381, where it is IIC(!epted that Caesar alludes to this et;ymology in this reverse-type, and that Virgil may have been familiar with it also. On the popularity of such play upon names, see E.S. McCmney, 'Puns and Plays on Proper Names', CJ 14 (I 9 19), pp. 343-358; V. Matthews, 'Some Puns on Roman Cognomina', G & R 20 ( 1973), pp. 20-24. 1 Text and translation from H.R. Fairclough (revised by C.P. Ooold), Virgll /, Loeb Classical Library 63 (Cambridge, Mass., 1999), pp. 330-331. CAESAR THE ELEPHANT AGAINST JUBATHI! SNAKE! 191 This suggests that the protuberance sweeping back from the head of the snake represents a crest viewed in profile rather than a horn. The key point here lies in the Lati.n tenn used to describe the crest of a snake - iuba. 8 This is identical to the Latin fonn of the name of King Juba ofNumidia, tuba. lt is arguable, therefore, that Caesar chose to depict a crested snake in particuJar upon this reverse type in order to play upon the fact that King Juba's name could be interpreted to mean 'snake-crest' in Latin.9 Hence the reverse depicted an elephant. Caesar, about to crush a crested snake, Juba.The fact that Caesar did not in fact defeat the Pompeian forces in Africa, together with their ally Juba, until the battle of Thapsus on 6 April 46 does not teJI against this interpretation. Here one must remember that Caesar had originaHy sent the propraetor Gaius Scribonlus Curio against the Pompeian forces in Africa, including Juba, during the summer of 49, aJthough this expedition had ended in disaster when Juba defeated Curia at the battle of the Bagradas River in August of that year. 10 (t is arguable, therefore, that Caesar issued the reverse type symbolising him attacking Juba in association with his despatch of Curio to Africa in 49. 11 It is entirely consistent with his propaganda during the greater part of the civi 1-war period that he should have highlighted his actions against a foreign enemy, even though he and most his troops were actually engaged against fellow Romans. It is no more incongruent that he should have misrepresented his despatch of an anny to Africa as an attack upon Juba in particuJar than that he should have celebrated a triumph for his final success there in 46 as if this had been against Juba alone also. 11 Jndeed, this initial reluctance to appear to ceJebrate his actions against his Roman enemies also forms the strongest argument against the interpretation of this reverse type as advocated by Crawford, Linderski, and others.13 The probJem with a reverse type 8 On tuba, see Thesaun19 Linguae Latinae VII, 2 (Leipzig, 1990). cols. 570-574, esp. 571 on its use to mean 'snake-crest'. Otber possible meanings included 'mane'. Clcero, De lege ograrlu 2.59, puns upon the latter reading of Juba's name. If this was a well known joke, h may have encouraged plays upon the allemative meanings of luha. ' This la not to claim that it was In any way unusual to depict a crest upon a snake on ancient coins, but that Caesar was careful to include it upon the snake on this occasion simply because it lent itself so well to the necessary word-play. For other crested snakes, see e.g. RRC no. 379, 1·2. by L. Proc1lius in 80; RRC no. 385, 3, by M. Volteius in 78. ID Caes. 8 Clv. 2.23·44; Appian, 8 Civ. 2.44·46; Dio 41.41-42. On the history of Juba ·s relationship with Rome, see D. W. Roller, The World of Juha If mu./ Kleopalra Sele11e: Roy(// Scholar:rhtp tJII Rome s Aji'ican Fmntier (London, 2003), pp. 30-38. 11 There was no danger that Juba would suddenly desert the Pompeian cau~e in favour of Caesar. He was a personal enemy of Caesar's since Caesar had humiliated him by pulling at his beard during a tril,lat Rome in ti3. See Suet Cae.s. 71 . Furthermore, Caesar's choice ofCurio to command his Afncan expedition seems desi~ned tO intlame feelings. since us tribune of the plebs In 50, Curlo had actually proposed that Rome should confiscate the kingdom of Numidia. See Caes. 8 Civ. 2.25; Dio 41.41. •l PI ut. Caes. 55 emphB.Bisea that he celebrated hie triumph tor his victory in Africa as if it had b~n ugaim.lt Juba alone, without wen mentioning the Pompeion commander Metcllus Scipio. Appian, 8 Civ. 2. I 0 I , makes the 1111me point, that the triumph was celebrated fur his victory ayainat the A tncan allies of Scipio, but does note that some ~f the pictures displayed in the triumph featured Roman commanders alao, and that this greatly displeasCd the Roman crowd. u Plut. CueJ·. 56 emphasises that Caesar's celebnttion of a triumph for his dereat of the sons of Pompey in Spain in 45 was the first time that he had celebrated a triumph for a victory agoinst fellow Romans, and was controversial for this reason. 192 DAVIDWOODS celebrating some fonn of generic attack upon, or triumph over, evil is that such a reverse could have been too easily misinterpreted in reference to Caesar's domestic enemies, Pompey the Great in particular. Yet Caesar would not have wanted to ri&k this, which indicates that, in his mind at least, his chosen reverse type was clear in ita attack upon a foreign enemy, Juba, rather than upon the domestic enemy, Pompey. The fact that Caesar chose to represent himself as an elephant about to crush the snake Juba was, first and foremost, a clever play upon both their names. However: • such a representation must also have appealed to that same savagery which had led him to declare to the senate, while consul in 59, that he would trample upon the heada of his enemies.14 lt is not surprising, therefore, that his first reverse type following hia rebellion in 49 makes a similar promise, even if it was carefully directed at a foreign rather than a domestic enemy. 14 Suel Caes. 22.2: frequenti curia iactaret, invitis et gemenlibu.s adversariis adeptum se quae concupisset, proinde ex eo insu/taturum omnium capitibus. 

Caesar the elephant against Juba the snake

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Cork Open Research Archive