MARCELLVS Posted May 16, 2005 Report Share Posted May 16, 2005 Maybe somebody can help me> Who was L. Marcius Philippus (portrayed on a coin)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted May 16, 2005 Report Share Posted May 16, 2005 The coin of 56 BC was minted by the man you mention. Moneyer's of that era often glorified a famous ancestor for political/propoganda reasons, much like they would issue coinage reflecting a great conquest or deed. His family was thought to have been descended from Ancus Martius (the Marcia family), the traditional 4th king of Rome (and the image on the obverse of the coin). In addition, the aqueduct shown on the reverse signifies another Marcia ancestor, Q. Marcius Rex, who was responsible for the building of the Aqua Marcia while Praetor in 144 BC. The equestrian mounted above the aqueduct is a representation of the actual statue of Marcius Rex that adorned the aqueduct. I'm not sure the reasoning for the connection to a King of Rome... a political taboo in Roman society... but it certainly shows Phillipus as an important and ancient player in Roman society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatboy Posted May 16, 2005 Report Share Posted May 16, 2005 As far as I can acertain there were three men by the name of L.Marcius Phillipus, who served as consul in the 1st Century BC in the years 91, 56 and 38, the first of whom also served as censor in 86. I'm pretty sure the last two were father and son and they were all probably 3 generations of the same family. The middle Phillipus was married to Atia Balba, mother of none other than Octavian/Augustus. As Octavian's step father Phillipus pretty much raised him, as well as his other step child Octavia, future wife of Mark Antony. I'm sure there is someone on this site who knows exactly who he was though, and probably what his favourite colour was and what he ate for breakfast too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primus Pilus Posted May 16, 2005 Report Share Posted May 16, 2005 Oops, I guess I left out a vital piece of information. The Phillipus we are discussing, the one of 56 BC that Fatboy detailed a bit, was not actually featured on the coin in question in any way other than his name. The images are those of his ancestors described above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.