Translation of an article by M. Fraenkel in Zeitschrift für Numismatic, vol XVIII (1892).
The image of Drusilla, favourite sister of the emperor Caligula, was - according to Cohen Vol. 1, 2nd edition, p. 248 - struck on coins from the Asia Minor cities of Smyrna and Mytilene, but also of Pergamon.

The Smyrna coin has the laureate head of Caligula on the obverse, with the legend ΓAION KAICAΡA ΓEΡMANIKON EΠI AOYIOΛA and the reverse shows the legend ΔΡOYCIΛΛAN CMYΡNAIΩN MHNOΦANHC and Drusilla as Demeter seated left. holding poppies, corn-ears and sceptre. (RPC I, 2472; BMC 272). Waddington Fastes des provinces asiatiques, no. 79; Mionnet III, p. 221, no. 123 and a slight variation as no. 1233.

Coins supposedly from Pergamon are described as being exactly the same as the Smyrna coin, with the same image and legends, except of course for the city name in the reverse legend. The obverse legend is also described as being the same as the Smyrna issue, but with the image itself varying between the head of Caligula and a standing figure, sometimes holding a scroll, sometimes raising a turreted female.

Such Pergamese coins are described by Mionnet II, p. 596, no. 550, citing Gusseme and Mionnet Supp. V, p. 430, no. 943, citing Sestini's Hedervar listings II, p. 116, no. 40 and Hedervar Museum's own catalog no. 7394. All the literature mentioning these Pergamon coins are listed in Borghesi, Oeuvres II, p. 139.

Not only because of the claim that the coins - from two different mints - have identical images, but above all the fact that the same magistrate Menophanes is given in the legends of both made Eckhel (D.n. II, no. 555) suspicious and his eye for clarity saw the solution straight away - namely that the Pergamese coins just could not be right.

Borghesi supported the authority of Sestini, who claimed to have seen the Pergamene coins, and based on the number of the alleged specimens, attempted to overturn Eckhel's doubts. He tried to remove the stumbling block basing the issues on an alliance between Pergamum and Smyrna, the coins being struck in the one single town in which Menophanes was active as magistrate. This means of information did not turn out to be very convincing.

In his excellent Fastes des provinces asiatiques, Waddington, in his discussion of the pro-consulate of Aviola (no. 79), quickly dismissed the matter: Mionnet and others had attributed Smyrnaean coins to Pergamon in error, as the name of the magistrate proves. However, there was still the assertion that ΠEΡΓAM had apparently been read on the coins. Thus only a tracking down of the coins could provide certainty as to whether Borghesi was right in his claim, or whether Eckhel was on the right track by rejecting them.

The fact that I am in a position to bring us the final decision is thanks to the curators of the coin collections in Gotha and Copenhagen, in which Sestini claims to have seen the Pergamese coins with Drusilla as Demeter. I would like to take this opportunity of thanking Messrs W. Pertsch and Ludwig Müller for the friendly and enthusiastic way in which they gave me information.

Mr. Pertsch in Gotha wrote "The coin you described is indeed in our collection, but it is a fake, or better said, has been falsified, i.e. it was originally a genuine Roman As of Caligula with a Vesta reverse, on which Greek legends have been cut and corn-ears added to the hand of the seated figure. This is not just my opinion, it is also that of Prof. v. Sallet, to whom I showed the coin. The name ΓEΡMANIKON is not present on the coin, by the way."

Concerning the coin in Copenhagen, in his review of Ramus's Catalogus Numorum Veterum (the predecessor of today's SNG Copenhagen), Sestini in Lettera critica al estensore del libro intitolato: Catalogus Numorum Veterum... claimed that Ramus had misread the Sardes coin in Part I, p. 279, no. 12. which is described (in Latin) as
Augustus, or more likely Tiberius
ΣAΡΔIANΩN ΣEBAΣTω KA.., emperor, togate, standing left, raising turreted female.
ΣEBAΣTH IOYΛIOΣ KΛE.., woman, probably Livia seated, holding patera and flower". (Note: this is Tiberius, RIC I 2991; BMC 98; SNG Copenhagen 515; GRPC Lydia 355-356).

Sestini claimed that it was a misread coin of Hedervar Museum no. 7394 and should read ΓAIOΣ KAIΣAΡ ΓEΡMANIKOΣ / MHNOΦANHΣ ΔΡOYΣ EΠI AOYIOΛA ΠEΡΓAM.

In this case, Sestini was not deceived by a forgery, but blinded by his own preconceived ideas. Mr. Müller, curator of the Copenhagen collection wrote, "Sestini was absolutely wrong. The legends on the coin described by Ramus in Part I, p. 279, no. 12 are very different from those on Hedervar 7394 and Ramus's reading is correct. On the enclosed plaster cast you can clearly read .. AΡΔIANΩN ΣEBA.. The rest of the legends are clearly legible on the actual coin, which is undoubtedly genuine and unaltered in all respects"

Finally, Mr lmhoof-Blumer in Winterthur was so kind to inform me that no coins from Pergamum are known of Caligula and Drusilla. We can therefore confidently assume that Sestini was misled in the Hedervar Museum either by a forgery or by his own imagination, and we should not believe in such almost identical coins of the two cities until a genuine Pergamene specimen has been seen and documented by an impeccable witness.

M. Fränkel: "Die Münzen von Pergamon mit dem Bilde der Drusilla", translated by Dane Kurth.
Back to the Caligula page