From Caesar to Augustus (c. 49 BC–AD 14)

Rowan, Clare

doi:10.1017/9781139775311

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to preserve the memory of the triumph of Octavian over the legendary figure of Antony, between 28 B.C. and 14 A.D., Octavian and his general Agrippa issued numerous Nîmes bronze coins with Augustus and Agrippa's back-to-back heads and the IMP-DIVI-F legend on the obverse and a crocodile chained to the palm, flanked on the reverse by the COL-NEM legend (Blanchet and Dieudonné, 1912, Sear, 2014, Rowan, 2018 (fig. 5).…”

Section: The Early Appearancementioning

confidence: 99%

Significance of the Egyptian Crocodile on the Roman Imperial Coinage

Moussa¹

2021

International Journal of Heritage, Tourism and Hospitality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No other creature in ancient Egypt was perhaps as feared, revered and frequently depicted as the crocodile. It was one of the first animals to be early portrayed. It also appeared in ancient texts from the Old Kingdom onwards to symbolize the conflict between good and evil. It was mainly worshipped as Sobek, regarded as both a protector and a demon. This is because there were two types of crocodiles, represented in arts, both lived in Egypt. The Crocodylus Suchus and Crocodylus Niloticus. One of them was considered totally sacred, yet the other one was hated and even eaten by others. The Ptolemaic kings paid great attention to the crocodile cult, for the Romans it was the regular symbol of Egypt and its fertile Nile, especially on coins. This study analyzes some selected coins to assess the various representations of the Egyptian crocodile on coins produced during the Roman Imperial. The findings of the research analysis will highlight the significance of the crocodile as a subject sometimes appeared in the field of numismatic studies, to make it possible to answer some questions concerning interpretations and issues related to its various representations on the Roman coinage.

show abstract

Section: The Early Appearancementioning

confidence: 99%

Significance of the Egyptian Crocodile on the Roman Imperial Coinage

Moussa¹

2021

International Journal of Heritage, Tourism and Hospitality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Constantine was the usher of a new empire; his iconic victory against Maxentius at the Melvian Bridge of the River Tiber paralleled Julius Caesar's Rubicon (cf. Rowan 2018). After crossing these rivers (Tiber and Rubicon) as consequent of gaining ground against their opponents, both emperors went to acquire persona defined by magnanimity and majesty.…”

Section: Politics: Imperial Influence and Ecumenical Orthodoxymentioning

confidence: 99%

Nicaea as political orthodoxy: Imperial Christianity versus episcopal polities

Rukuni¹,

Oliver²

2019

HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fourth-century Christianity and the Council of Nicaea have continually been read as a Constantinian narrative. The dominancy of imperial Christianity has been a consequent feature of the established narrative regarding the events within early Christianity. There is a case for a revisionist enquiry regarding the influence of the emperor in the formation of orthodoxy. The role of bishops and its political characterisation had definitive implications upon Christianity as it would seem. Recent revisions on Constantine by Leithart and Barnes incited the enquiry. The enquiry was made possible through document analysis; this mainly took the form of a literature study. The orthodoxy that emerged at Nicaea in 325 CE was reflective of the political–orthodoxy trajectory that Christianity took beyond the 4th century. Between imperial intervention and clerical polities, one was a definitive dynamic to the then emergent Christianity. The influence of the emperor, which was an apparently definitive feature characterising the era, was compositely relevant as a catalyst in the formation of the Christianity that emerged during the 4th century. The implication that centuries before the Council of Nicaea Christianity had been characterised by significant phases of socio-cultural dynamics relegates the influence of the emperor. The emperor Constantine and his association with the Council of Nicaea characterised an era of imperial ecclesiastical politics in Christianity, and so did the Jewish–Christian Schism and a monarchical episcopate that shaped the orthodox matrix of the church. This research deduced that the function of imperial intervention should be analysed in conjunction with diverse factors characterising the Christianity emergent at Nicaea, particularly ecclesiastical polities.

show abstract