Bronzo con Afrodite/Venere ed Eros/Cupido

[apollonia]

Salve.

Bronzo di Paphus (Cipro) che raffigura sul diritto Cleopatra come Afrodite con in braccio Cesarione come Eros e sul rovescio due cornucopie leget da un nastro (NAC 45).

The Barry Feirstein Collection Part IV
The Roman Republic. Cleopatra VII and Ptolemy XV Caesarion. Bronze, Paphus Cypri circa 47 BC, 15.14 g. Diademed bust of Cleopatra r., as Aphrodite, with Caesarion, as Eros, in her arms; sceptre at far shoulder. Rev. KLEOPATRAS BASILISSHS Two cornucopiae bound with fillet; in field r., ΚΥΠΡ ligate. BMC 2. Svoronos 1874 and pl. LXII, 26. RPC 3901.9 (this coin).
Extremely rare and in exceptional condition for the issue. Minor corrosion on obverse, otherwise very fine / good very fine.

Ex Sternberg sale X, 1981, 221.

Ptolemaic coinage is rife with dynastic content, and that of Cleopatra VII, the last of that empire’s Greek monarchs, is no exception. This bronze has long captured the attention of scholars and collectors for its somewhat mysterious content. We may be sure that Cleopatra is represented by the Aphrodite-Venus bust on the obverse, but the identification of the Eros-Cupid must be inferred. The traditional (and current) view is that the infant is Ptolemy XV “Caesarion”, the son who Cleopatra bore Julius Caesar in the summer of 47 B.C.
Cleopatra’s association with Aphrodite was well known, so her appearance here in the guise of the goddess comes as no surprise; further, the island of Cyprus (identified by the monogram on the reverse) is appropriate as the location of the mint since there was a major temple to Aphrodite at Paphos and it was Caesar who had given Cyprus to Cleopatra in 48 B.C., the year before Caesarion was born. Thus, the production of this coinage on Cyprus in 47 B.C. in celebration of Caesarion’s birth seems correct.
The boy, familiarly known as ‘Caesarion’ (‘son of Caesar’) or ‘Ptolemy XV Caesar’, was commonly named in hieroglyphic titular as ‘Ptolemaios named Caesar’, though the demotic Serapeum stele names him ‘pharaoh Caesar’. What becomes clear from the various forms of his name is that Cleopatra was earmarking her first son as a dual heir to ruler-ship in Rome and Egypt – a fate he may have enjoyed had Caesar lived longer. Instead, Cleopatra departed Rome after Caesar’s murder, before Caesarion was legally confirmed as Caesar’s male heir. Paradoxically that status was assumed by Octavian, the eventual murderer of Caesarion.
The only other candidates for the child on this coin are Cleopatra’s two sons by Mark Antony – Alexander Helios, born in 40 B.C., and Ptolemy Philadelphus, born in 36 B.C. But because the coin bears no date, the case for either of them would be difficult to prove, since it is unlikely that either of these boys would have taken supremacy over Caesar’s son in the dynastic arrangement, even though Antony and Cleopatra were then husband and wife.
Furthering Caesarion’s case is the fact that in 34 B.C., when Antony was in Alexandria celebrating his ‘victory’ in Armenia, Caesarion was honoured above Antony’s two sons in the ‘Donations of Alexandria’: he received the title ‘King of Kings’ (rex regum) and was recognized as heir to Julius Caesar; by comparison, Alexander Helios and Ptolemy Philadelphos each received the title ‘King’, which was attached to specific territories. The argument is stronger still if one accepts Morkholm’s suggestion in ANS Museum Notes 20 (1975) that dual-dated billon tetradrachms of Cleopatra bear the regnal dates of both Cleopatra and Caesarion, since that would support the idea that he was Cleopatra’s principal heir until the final days of their lives.
Estimate: 3000 CHF