Post on 26-Jan-2023
1
An Unrecognised Representation of Alexander the Great in Several Alexandrian
Coins of Hadrian
By Andrew Chugg MA (Cantab)
Published in The Celator, Vol 15, No 2, February 2001
Introduction
In early August AD130 Hadrian and his retinue arrived in Alexandria to begin his
fateful visit to Egypt. At the end of the year he returned to the city a shattered man,
following the drowning of his favourite, Antinous, in the Nile at the end of October.
Among the most tangible surviving relics of these visits are several commemorative
coin types issued by the Alexandrian mint.
That they do indeed commemorate Hadrian’s arrival is strongly suggested by the
personification or ‘Genius’ of Alexandria depicted greeting the emperor on their
reverses. It is confirmed by the legend ‘LIE’1, which dates the coins to the time of the
emperor’s visits.
Numismatists have generally assumed that the figure of Alexandria is a young woman
and this is the currently accepted view. In particular, the female gender is assigned by
the British Museum Catalogue of the Coins of Alexandria and the Nomes and an
example (type BMC868) is on display in the Museum with this labelling at the present
time. In the following account it will be seen that the reasoning behind this
identification is superficially reasonable. However, it is the objective of this article to
demonstrate that it is also undoubtedly incorrect. Furthermore, it can be shown that
the personification of Alexandria is in fact an unambiguous but hitherto unrecognised
representation of Alexander the Great.
2
Descriptions
The coins at issue are of three basic types: two in bronze (BMC867/8 and
BMC869/70) and one in silver (BMC669). A number of examples are shown in
Figures 1 to 4. Their reverses are succinctly described in the British Museum
Catalogue2:-
‘The arrival of the Emperor Hadrian at Alexandria is commemorated by three types…
[These] are clearly ADVENTI AVG. ALEXANDRIAE types, though strikingly
differing from the treatment of the same or like subjects on the Roman coinage of
Hadrian. In one type (BMC868) the Emperor is represented in a slowly advancing
chariot drawn by four horses, clad in toga and veiled, his right arm upraised, in his left
aquila (eagle), received by Alexandria, clad in a short chiton (tunic), her head covered
with elephant’s skin, her right arm upraised, in her left hand vexillum (a military
standard). In the other type Alexandria, holding vexillum, presents corn to the
Emperor (BMC669), or holding corn in her left kisses the hand of the Emperor
(BMC870).’
The corn symbolises the vital corn supplies shipped from Alexandria to feed Rome.
The BMC description is followed by other modern works, which reproduce images of
these types3,4. However, one 19th century coin dictionary5 differs on the question of
the sex of Alexandria in seeming to describe BMC870:-
‘The genius of Alexandria, or of Egypt in general, is figured in a brass medal of
Hadrian (struck in Egypt) as a man, wearing on his own head the skin of an
3
elephant’s, and holding in his right hand a bundle of corn ears. He takes with his left
hand that of the emperor, and lifts it to his lips, as if to kiss it, in acknowledgement of
Hadrian’s benefits to the city and country. Round the coin is engraved
ALEXANDREA and in the field LIE (Year XV [of the emperor]).’6
Reasons for Previous Identifications
The elephant-scalp motif also occurs in some other coin types of Hadrian minted at
Rome to commemorate his travels. In these issues Africa is personified as a woman
wearing the elephant spoils and either reclining (Figure 5) or kneeling or standing
before the Emperor (Figures 6 and 7). This Roman personification of Africa as a
woman in an elephant-scalp headdress recurs in some other Roman relics, such as a
silver plate from Boscoreale near Pompeii (Figure 8). It is partly by analogy with
these representations of Africa that the figure in the Alexandrian coins has been
assumed to be female.
There is one feature present in some (but not all) of the Alexandrian coins, which
appears to be blatantly feminine. This is the belt or girdle worn by women just
beneath the breasts (e.g. Figure 9). The same word (Zona or ) is used in Greek
and Latin specifically to describe this item of wardrobe. Just such a belt is quite
clearly represented in the examples of the Alexandrian coins shown in Figures 1
(right) and 3. It is perhaps this cincture, which has clinched the female identification
in previous assessments.
4
Reasons for the New Identification
There is also a personification of Alexandria in the Roman ‘travels’ series (Figure 5)
with exactly the same female figure in an identical pose as for the Africa, but bearing
a different set of attributes. In fact this standard female figure is draped with a varying
set of attributes to symbolise a wide range of cities and provinces of the empire for
various members of this coin series (cf. Egypt in Figure 5). Evidently the basic female
manikin was in no way specific to any particular location. Furthermore, the Roman
personifications bear very little resemblance to the Alexandrian figures, except that
there is one Roman type commemorating Hadrian’s arrival in Mauretania (a province
of Roman Africa), where the personification (Figure 10) appears to be a male figure
bearing a vexillum and wearing the African elephant spoils7. These observations
begin to undermine the validity of projecting the female figure in the Roman types
onto the Alexandrian coins, but the convincing evidence for re-interpreting the
Alexandrian figure comes from two groups of Greek and Roman images of Alexander
the Great:-
a) Elephant-Scalp Images of Alexander
This Group is deeply rooted in Ptolemaic Egypt, being based on the elephant-
scalp tetradrachms of Ptolemy Soter, which he minted between about 320 –
305 BC. The earliest types have prominent ram’s horns (Figure 11), but in
later issues these grew less conspicuous (Figure 12). These horns are attributes
of the Egyptian god Ammon and they refer to Alexander’s deification as the
son of Ammon. The elephant spoils are probably an allusion to Alexander’s
victories in India. The King is shown as the conqueror of elephants just as his
putative ancestor, Heracles, is shown wearing the Nemean lion-scalp in
5
Alexander’s own coinage. The Group is augmented by a number of
fragmentary statuettes of which the most complete is the Dattari statuette8
(Figure 13). It was found at Athribis in the Nile Delta and is probably early
Ptolemaic in date. Finally, there is a massive head now in Copenhagen
(Figure 14), but originally from North Africa (Carthage or Utica)9. This is
dated on stylistic grounds to the Antonine period (i.e. roughly contemporary
with Hadrian). Otto Mørkholm10 has provided an intriguing hypothesis
concerning the origin of the elephant-scalp Alexanders:-
‘[The elephant headdress obverse] definitely belongs to the beginning of
Ptolemy’s governorship [of Egypt] and the years 321 BC and 319 BC have
both been suggested. Perhaps it can best be related to the events of 321. In that
year Ptolemy secured for himself the corpse of Alexander the Great… As
possessor of the human relics of Alexander, Ptolemy could establish a state
cult of the dead conqueror… it is tempting to see in the new coin type a
representation of the very cult statue which Ptolemy must have set up. The
relatively high relief of the coin type serves to underline its sculptural
qualities.’
b) Alexander Wearing the Chiton, Chlamys and Persian Girdle
There are only two well-attested sculptures in this group, but one of these is
the very famous representation of the King on the Alexander Sarcophagus
from Sidon (Figure 15) and the attribution of this set of clothing to Alexander
is backed up by considerable literary evidence from the ancient sources, since
it relates to the controversy over the ‘Persianisation’ of his dress. The second
member of this group is the ‘Demetrio’ Alexander (Figure 16), now in
6
Athens11, but believed to have a 1st century BC Egyptian provenance. There is
also a painting from the ‘Kinch’ tomb at Naoussa in Macedon, which depicts a
Macedonian cavalryman in the same garb (Figure 17), though this is not
specifically an image of Alexander. For the significance of the King’s apparel
in these representations it is only necessary to quote the relevant ancient texts:-
‘Alexander… adopted the diadem, the tunic with the central white stripe12, the
sceptre, the Persian girdle (zonam Persicam), and all the royal regalia that
Darius had used’ Epitoma rerum gestarum Alexandri Magni13
‘And then [Alexander] bound the Persian diadem around his head and put on
the chiton with the central white stripe and the Persian girdle
() and everything else except the trousers and the sleeved
jacket.’ Diodorus14
‘Most of it indeed [Alexander] wore all the time: the purple chlamys and
chiton with a white stripe…’ Ephippus of Olynthus15
Evidently the ‘Persian girdle’ adopted by Alexander specifically resembled the belt
worn beneath the breasts by Greek and Roman women. Just such a belt is worn by
Alexander in the Demetrio statuette and on the Alexander Sarcophagus. In both cases
it appears in combination with a chiton and chlamys and this is true also of the figures
in the Alexandrian coins of Hadrian. In fact there is a strong general resemblance
between, for example, the personification of Alexandria in BMC868 (Figure 3) and
the Demetrio Alexander even down to the style of the boots. Ironically, the woman’s
girdle, which had seemed the strongest reason for supposing Alexandria to be female,
turns out to be the decisive reason for identifying him as a representation of
Alexander.
7
Given that the Copenhagen head is probably almost contemporary with Hadrian and
that the Demetrio Alexander has a 1st century BC Egyptian provenance, it is highly
improbable that the designer of the Alexandrian coins of Hadrian could have been
unaware of the associations between Alexander the Great and the attributes he chose
to use in his designs. Even if such curious ignorance were conceivable, then it would
still be extraordinarily unlikely that he should accidentally have merged two such
distinctive groups of attributes in his designs. These are the reasons that it is possible
to be confident that the designer was deliberately producing an image of Alexander
the Great.
The Significance of this Identification
A new representation of Alexander from the ancient world supported by a relatively
firm identification is of significance in itself, since the canon of undisputed images of
Alexander is still of modest size and is likely to remain so. However, there are several
further implications of this identification, which tend to emphasise the importance of
the Hadrian Alexander.
Firstly, the new Alexander provides a link between two previously isolated groups of
images of Alexander. This tends to bolster the authenticity of the members of both
groups and may be especially helpful in the cases of marginal candidates such as the
Dattari statuette.
The new image also adds a novel attribute to the Alexander canon in the form of the
vexillum or military standard. Whereas the corn-sheaf is clearly a reference to
8
Alexandria rather than to Alexander, the vexillum presumably alludes to the military
leadership of the bearer. It may have been inherited from the archetype of the
Demetrio Alexander, since the latter appears originally to have held some staff-like
object in his right hand. This is most readily evident by comparing the stance of the
Demetrio Alexander with that of the Alexander Aigiochos, which also comes from
Alexandria and is now in the British Museum (see Figure 18).
There is a second elephant-scalp coin among the types minted in Roman Alexandria.
This is a billon tetradrachm produced in large numbers under Nero16 (Figure 19). The
head on the reverse of this coin has also been identified as a female personification of
Alexandria, apparently by a backwards extension of the reasoning for the Hadrian
types. However, in the light of the present analysis it should properly be recognised as
a second representation of Alexander in the guise of the Genius of Alexandria.
The new identification tends to support Mørkholm’s hypothesis that the elephant-
scalp types of Ptolemy were based on an archetypal funerary statue of Alexander
commissioned for his tomb, since Hadrian’s designer was probably inspired by an
archetypal elephant-scalp statue of Alexander in combination with the archetype of
the Demetrio statuette.
The coins of Hadrian (and Nero) would appear to be the first explicit representation of
Alexander in the guise of the Genius of Alexandria to be identified. Ammianus
Marcellinus17 refers to a temple of the Genius of Alexandria in a passage describing
the antagonism between the Patriarch Georgius and the Alexandrian mob in about
361AD:-
9
‘And, among other matters, it was said that [Georgius] maliciously informed
Constantius also of this, namely, that all the edifices standing on the soil of the said
city [Alexandria] had been built by its founder, Alexander, at great public cost, and
ought justly to be a source of profit to the treasury. To these evil deeds he added still
another, which soon after drove him headlong to destruction. As he was returning
from the emperor’s court and passed by the splendid temple of the Genius [speciosum
Genii templum], attended as usual by a large crowd, he turned his eyes straight at the
temple, and said: “How long shall this tomb [sepulcrum] stand?” On hearing this,
many were struck as if by a thunderbolt, and fearing that he might try to overthrow
that building also, they devised secret plots to destroy him in whatever way they
could.’
It has been pointed out by D G Hogarth18 and Lily Ross Taylor19 that Georgius’
reference to the Temple of the Genius as a tomb is highly suggestive of the famous
Soma Mausoleum of Alexander that contained the King’s body. Nevertheless P M
Fraser20 has rejected this identification on the grounds that it is the Agathos Daimon,
rather than Alexander, who is properly recognised as the Genius of Alexandria.
Alternatively, Christopher Haas21 has claimed that it is the female personification of
the Tyche of Alexandria that is meant. However, the discovery of explicit
representations of Alexander as the Genius of the city greatly strengthens the view
that Georgius is indeed referring to Alexander’s Mausoleum. If so, this building
survived until at least 361AD. Given that John Chrysostom asserted that Alexander’s
tomb was ‘unknown to his own people’ a few decades later22, the most likely occasion
10
of the destruction of the Soma Mausoleum was the earthquake and tidal wave, which
devastated Alexandria in 365AD23.
With thanks to the staff of Bristol University Library.
Figure 1. BMC669 (left) and BMC870 (right).
Figure 2. Another BMC870
11
Figure 3. BMC868
Figure 4. Another example of BMC870.
Figure 5. Personifications of Egypt, Africa and Alexandria as a reclining woman in a series of coins from Hadrian’s Roman mint.
12
Figure 6. Hadrian and Africa (RESTITVTORI AFRICAE)
Figure 7. Hadrian and Africa (ADVENTVS AVG AFRICAE)
Figure 8. Personification of Africa in a Roman silver plate from Boscoreale.
13
Figure 9. The woman (possibly Olympias?) wears the zona belt.
Figure 10. Mauretania personified as a male figure wearing the elephant headdress
and holding a vexillum (ADVENTVS AVG MAVRETANIAE)
Figure 11. Earliest type of elephant-scalp tetradrachm of Ptolemy.
14
Figure 12. Later elephant-scalp tetradrachm of Ptolemy.
Figure 13. Dattari statuette of Alexander.
16
Figure 16. The Demetrio Alexander
Figure 17. Painting of a Macedonian cavalryman from the Kinch tomb at Naoussa.
17
Figure 18. Statuette of Alexander Aigiochos from Alexandria.
Figure 19. Billon tetradrachm of Nero with the Genius of Alexandria on the reverse.
1 LI for type BMC867 2 R S Poole, Catalogue of the Coins of Alexandria and the Nomes (1892, British Museum), lxxxix, 100-101 & pl. XXVII. 3 Alan K Bowman, Egypt After The Pharaohs (British Museum Press, 1986), 205. 4 Evaristo Breccia, Alexandrea Ad Aegyptum (Bergamo, 1922), 308-9. 5 S W Stevenson, C R Smith & F W Madden, A Dictionary of Roman Coins (George Bell & Sons, 1889), 35.
18
6 The left and right hands are interchanged relative to this description on all specimens known to the author. 7 Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum, Vol. III (1936, British Museum), clxxx. 8 Now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; see, for example, Ariel Herrmann and Cornelius Vermeule, The Search for Alexander: An Exhibition (1980, New York Graphic Society), 123, item 46. 9 Blanche R Brown, ‘Art History in Coins: Portrait Issues of Ptolemy I’, Alessandria e il Mondo Ellenistico-Romano: Studi in Onore di Achille Adriani 2 (1984), 407-8. 10 Otto Mørkholm, Early Hellenistic Coinage (1991, Cambridge University Press), 63-4. 11 National Archaeological Museum in Athens; see Andrew Stewart, Faces of Power: Alexander’s Image & Hellenistic Politics (1993, University of California Press), 338-9 & fig. 144. 12 Darius is depicted wearing the Persian royal white stripe in the Alexander Mosaic from Pompeii. 13 An anonymous 4th century AD text, quoted by Andrew Stewart, Faces of Power: Alexander’s Image & Hellenistic Politics (1993, University of California Press), 356, item T46. 14 Diodorus Siculus, 17.77.5. 15 Ephippus of Olynthus, quoted by Athenaeus, 12.537E-538B. 16 Erik Christiansen, The Roman Coins of Alexandria (1988, Aarhus University Press). 17 Ammianus Marcellinus, Res Gestae, 22.11.7. 18 D G Hogarth, ‘Report on Prospects for Research in Alexandria’, Egypt Exploration Fund 1894-5, note 3 on p. 23. 19 Lily Ross Taylor, Classical Philology 22, 1927, 168, note 3. 20 P M Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (1972, Oxford University Press), note 84 to Ch. 1. 21 Christopher Haas, Alexandria in Late Antiquity (1997, John Hopkins University Press), 287. 22 John Chrysostom, Homily XXVI on the second epistle of St Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, circa AD400. 23 Ammianus Marcellinus, Res Gestae, 26.10.15-19 and Sozomenus, Ecclesiastical History, 6.2.