If, as Jochen says, the moneyer reinforces the "claims of the Julian
gens," I
still wonder why Virgil opts for a different tradition than the one circulating--literally--in the form of the coinage of Augustus' adoptive father. Virgil too was about furthering the claims of the Julian
gens, and offering some pro-Augustan propaganda (though I think the
Aeneid is much more complex than that).
As to the prospect that Virgil meant to include the
Palladium with the
penates, I suppose it's possible, but I don't find it convincing. In Book 2 Sinon makes it pretty clear that the
Trojan Horse has been left to
replace the
Palladium, and there's no indication that the
Greeks have returned the
Palladium too, along with the gift of the
Horse. In short, Virgil does not restore the
Palladium to the Trojans to have it in place to be taken away later. Plus, Virgil is anachronistically attributing
Roman penates/hearthgods to the ancient Trojans as a way of suggesting/fabricating an aetiology of
penates veneration in
Rome by
all Romans. There's only one
Palladium, in contrast.
Maybe the aetiology of
penates veneration in
Rome is my ultimate answer, but I
still find it remarkable that Virgil would alter such a common image which was consciously promulgated by the father of the
man for whom the epic was written. In short, why is he messing with Julius Caesar's iconography? Wouldn't that annoy
Augustus?
Rhetor