|
Greek city of Himera in Sicily
Bronze Hemilitron 24mm (18.14 grams) Struck circa 430-420 B.C.
Reference: HGC 2, 463 Rare R2; Sear 1105; B.M.C. 2.,p.39,27-30; CNS I, p. 25, nos. 1-1/2
Certification: NGC Ancients XF Strike: 4/5 Surface: 4/5 4375810-012
Gorgon’s head facing.
Six pellets.
You are bidding on the exact item pictured, provided with a Certificate of Authenticity and Lifetime Guarantee of Authenticity.
  The aegis or aigis, as stated in the Iliad, is carried by Athena and Zeus, but its nature is uncertain. It had been interpreted as an animal skin or a shield, sometimes bearing the head of a Gorgon. There may be a connection with a deity named Aex or Aix, a daughter of Helios and a nurse of Zeus or alternatively a mistress of Zeus (Pseudo-Hyginus, Astronomica 2. 13). The aegis of Athena is referred to in several places in the Iliad. It produced a sound as from a myriad roaring dragons (Iliad, 4.17) and was borne by Athena in battle “… and among them went bright-eyed Athene, holding the precious aegis which is ageless and immortal: a hundred tassels of pure gold hang fluttering from it, tight-woven each of them, and each the worth of a hundred oxen.”
Medusa, the gorgon, was beheaded by the hero Perseus, who thereafter used her head, which retained its ability to turn onlookers to stone, as a weapon until he gave it to the goddess Athena to place on her shield. In classical antiquity the image of the head of Medusa appeared in the evil-averting device known as the Gorgoneion. Gorgons were a popular image in Greek mythology, appearing in the earliest of written records of Ancient Greek religious beliefs such as those of Homer, which may date to as early as 1194–1184 BC. Because of their legendary and powerful gaze that could turn one to stone, images of the Gorgons were put upon objects and buildings for protection.
The modern concept of doing something “under someone’s aegis” means doing something under the protection of a powerful, knowledgeable, or benevolent source. The word aegis is identified with protection by a strong force with its roots in Greek mythology and adopted by the Romans; there are parallels in Norse mythology and in Egyptian mythology as well, where the Greek word aegis is applied by extension.
 In Ancient Greece, the Gorgoneion was originally a horror-creating apotropaic pendant showing the Gorgon’s head. It was assimilated by the Olympian deities Zeus and Athena: both are said to have worn it as a protective pendant. It was assumed, among other godlike attributes, as a royal aegis, by rulers of the Hellenistic age, as shown, for instance, on the Alexander Mosaic and the Gonzaga Cameo.
Homer refers to the Gorgon on four occasions, each time alluding to the head alone, as if the creature had no body. Jane Ellen Harrison notes that “Medusa is a head and nothing more…a mask with a body later appended”. Up to the 5th century BC, the head was depicted as particularly ugly, with a protruding tongue, boar tusks, puffy cheeks, her eyeballs staring fixedly on the viewer and the snakes twisting all around her.
The direct frontal stare, “seemingly looking out from its own iconographical context and directly challenging the viewer”, was highly unusual in ancient Greek art. In some instances a beard (probably standing for streaks of blood) was appended to her chin, making her appear as an orgiastic deity akin to Dionysus.
Gorgoneia that decorate the shields of warriors on mid-5th century Greek vases are considerably less grotesque and menacing. By that time, the Gorgon had lost her tusks and the snakes were rather stylized. The Hellenistic marble known as the Medusa Rondanini illustrates the Gorgon’s eventual transformation into a beautiful woman.
Himera (Greek: Ἱμέρα), was an important ancient Greek city of Sicily, situated on the north coast of the island, at the mouth of the river of the same name (the modern Grande), between Panormus (modern Palermo) and Cephaloedium (modern Cefalù). Its remains lie within the borders of the modern comune of Termini Imerese.
It was the first Greek settlement on this part of the island and was a strategic outpost just outside the eastern boundary of the Carthaginian-controlled west. Thucydides says it was the only Greek city on this coast of Sicily, which must however be understood with reference only to independent cities; Mylae, which was also on the north coast, and certainly of Greek origin, being a dependency of Zancle (modern Messina). All authorities agree that Himera was a colony of Zancle, but Thucydides tells us that, with the emigrants from Zancle, who were of Chalcidic origin, were mingled a number of Syracusan exiles, the consequence of which was, that, though the institutions (νόμιμα) of the new city were Chalcidic, its dialect had a mixture of Doric.
The foundation of Himera is placed subsequent to that of Mylae (as, from their relative positions, might naturally have been expected) both by Strabo and Scymnus Chius: its date is not mentioned by Thucydides, but Diodorus tells us that it had existed 240 years at the time of its destruction by the Carthaginians, which would fix its first settlement in 648 BCE. We have very little information as to its early history: an obscure notice in Aristotle, from which it appears to have at one time fallen under the dominion of the tyrant Phalaris, being the only mention we find of it, until about 490 BCE, when it afforded a temporary refuge to Scythes, tyrant of Zancle, after his expulsion from the latter city. Not long after this event, Himera fell itself under the yoke of a despot named Terillus, who sought to fortify his power by contracting a close alliance with Anaxilas, at that time ruler both of Rhegium (modern Reggio di Calabria) and Zancle. But Terillus was unable to resist the power of Theron, despot of Agrigentum (modern Agrigento), and, being expelled by him from Himera, had recourse to the assistance of the Carthaginians, a circumstance which became the immediate occasion of the first great expedition of that people to Sicily, 480 BCE.
Because of extensive remains, no doubt can therefore exist with regard to the site of Thermae, which would be, indeed, sufficiently marked by the hot springs themselves; but the exact position of the more ancient city of Himera was a subject of controversy until recent times. The opinion of Cluverius, which has been followed by almost all subsequent writers into the 19th century, would place it on the left bank of the river which flows by Termini on the west, and is thence commonly known as the Fiume di Termini, though called in the upper part of its course Fiume San Leonardo. On this supposition the inhabitants merely removed from one bank of the river to the other; and this would readily explain the passages in which Himera and Thermae appear to be regarded as identical, and where the river Himera (which unquestionably gave name to the older city) is represented at the same time as flowing by Thermae. On the other hand, there is great difficulty in supposing that the Fiume San Leonardo can be the river Himera; and all our data with regard to the latter would seem to support which the view of Fazello, who identifies it with the Fiume Grande, the mouth of which is distant just 8 miles from Termini. This is the view adopted by most modern scholarship. This distance can hardly be said to be too great to be reconciled with Cicero’s expression, that the new settlement was established non longe ab oppido antique; while the addition that it was in the same territory would seem to imply that it was not very near the old site. It may be added, that, in this case, the new site would have had the recommendation in the eyes of the Carthaginians of being nearer to their own settlements of Solus and Panormus, and, consequently, more within their command. But Fazello’s view derives a strong confirmation from the circumstance, stated by him, that the site which he indicates, marked by the Torre di Bonfornello on the seacoast (on the left bank of the Fiume Grande, close to its mouth), though presenting no ruins, abounded in ancient relics, such as vases and bronzes; and numerous sepulchres had also been brought to light. On the other hand, neither Cluverius nor any other writer has noticed the existence of any ancient remains on the west bank of the Himera; nor does it appear that the site so fixed is one adapted for a city of importance.
|
