Zeus : a study in ancient religion - Warburg Institute

lanus and lupiter on coins 331
(j;)
lanus and lupiter on coins.
It is, moreover, borne out by numismatic evidence. The Roman
ers from c. 338 B.C. onwards^ both in its original form as a pound of
bronze (figs. 216—218)- and in its subsequent reductions (figs. 219
230)^ had for obverse design the head of lanus, while the corresponding
semi's, both early (figs. 231, 232)^ and late (figs. 233—236)',
had that of lupiter. Similarly in the Romano-Campanian series of
the half-century c. 290 to c. 240 B.C. silver didrachms (figs. 237
239)'' and drachms, struck at Capua (.'') in the name of Rome'',
showed a beardless head of lanus on the obverse, and on the
reverse lupiter with thunderbolt and sceptre in a four-horse chariot
driven by Victory. Thus within and without Rome itself lanus was
associated with lupiter as senior with junior deity.
J. J.
Scaliger cj. promerito, F. Lindemann cj. promeritoni, E. Bahiens cj. promedion
(=promelion)) praecipuum, praeter caeteros meritum aut promedium, hoc est participat
(E. Thewrewk de Ponor cj. participatum, J. J. Scaliger cj. participem, C. O. Miiller cj.
jiro fj.opiif} hoc est particula); ut (aut cod. W.) pro indiviso dicimus. I take promerios to
be cognate with the Greek irp6yuoj and the Umbrian proniuni ( = Latin primiim) :
for the
suffix cp. G. Goetz Corpus glossanoruin Latinorum Lipsiae i888 ii. 124, 34 Lticerius,
Tifvs, and such names as Nti/nentis, Valerius.
Mr J. Whatmough, whom I consulted on the matter, proposes lett as vocative
(dieu>Ieu>Iou>Iu-piter) and would be rid of rhotacism. On this showing the original
(corrupted in Varro's text by Grecism and rhotacism) might have run :
io, leu Loidosie, io.
omnia vera da patula, Camese.
duenos Ceros es,
lanos Ian es ;
duenos lanos,
vel vetesom promesios recom.
' See now H. A. Grueber in the Bril. Mus. Cat. Koi?i. Coins Rep. i p. xix ff.
- Fig. 216 is from a specimen in my collection (weight 265'35 grammes). Figs. •217
and 218 are from specimens in the Fitzwilliam Museum (weights 256"75 and 25575 grammes
respectively).
' Fig. 2i9 = F. J. Haeberlin Aes grave Frankfurt a. M. 1910 p. 105 Tafelband pi.
43i 7 (weight I34"98 grammes). Fig. iio = Brit. Mus. Cat. Kovt. Coins Rep. i. 17 pi. 10, 2
(weight io6'594 grammes). Fig. 221 is from a specimen in the Fitzwilliam Museum
(weight 76* 1 5 grammes). Fig. 222 = Brit. Mus. Cat. Ro/n. Coins Rep. i. 18 pi. 10, 3
(weight 67'456 grammes). Figs. 223—230 are from specimens of mine (weights 53'i5,
35'8, i8'36, i2"66, ir'64, 8T3 and ii'75, i2'69 grammes).
* Fig. 231 is from a specimen of mine (weight i39'65 grammes). Fig. 232 is from one
in the Fitzwilliam Museum (weight 112 "9 grammes).
' Figs. 233—236 are from specimens in my collection (weights 1776, 16-14, 7'4'2> 3 '4
grammes). Cp. Brit. Mus. Cat. Rom. Coins Rep. i. 18 pi. 10, 4 (weight 45-877 grammes),
ib. i. 31 pi. 12, 10 (weight 20-412 grammes), ih. i. 54 pi. 16, 3 (weight 14-645 grammes),
ib. i. 96 pi. 22, 4 (weight 10-692 grammes), ib. i. 152 pi. 28, 7
ib. i. 300 pi. 37, 9 (weight 6-221 grammes).
(weight 7-841 grammes),
^ Figs. 237—239 are from specimens in my collection (weights 6*51, 6-15, 5-98
grammes).
" H. A. Grueber in the Brit. Mus. Cat. Rom. Coins Rep. ii. 116 ff. See also G. F.
Hill Historical Roman Coins London 1909 pp. 25, 35.