[ 186 ] 
F. Corfini principally founds his notion, may be in- 
tirely depended upon ; and, in fine, that the argu- 
ments he makes ufe of on this occaiion, to (43) 
evince the truth of his fcheme, however they may 
be oppofed by F. Froelich, and the medal before me 
mutually ftrengthen and fupport one another. 
6. I muft not forget to remark, that F. Corfini 
thinks, without a proper foundation, that the piece 
of Monnefes published by Dr. Vaillant may be con- 
fidered either as a Parthian or (44) an Armenian coin. 
This, I fay, he takes, without a proper foundation, 
to be the cafe. For the medals of the Armenian 
kings, fuch as that he has obliged the learned world 
with a draught of, and a mod: excellent differtation 
upon, difcover a tafle far different from that which 
is exhibited by Dr. Vaillant’s coin. The air of die 
face, the curls into which the hair is formed, and in 
fine every thing elfe vifible upon the former, except 
the fymbols on the reverfes, bear little refemblance to 
what is prefented to our view by the latter. As for the 
titles, impreffed on thefe medals, they are far from 
being of the fame kind ; the Armenian princes in 
this particular approaching nearer the fucceffors of 
Seleucus (45”), and contenting themfelves with more 
plain and fimple titles than that lofty one affedled by 
Monnefes, according to Dr. Vaillant, in common 
with the other Parthian kings. Tq which I may 
add, that my coin fets this point beyond difpute, by 
the Parthian characters it has fo apparently preferved j 
all the Armenian medals I have hitherto met with, 
(43) Corfin. ubi fup. 
(44) Corfin. ubi fup. p. 2. 
(45) Erafm. Froel. ubi fup. p. 72. 
about 
