Significance: This coin is both an example of and a deviation from the Hellenistic numismatic tradition. A common trend throughout portraiture in the Ancient Mediterranean was to portray kings and queens, or husbands and wives, with similar characteristics; for example, both Menkaure and his queen share similar facial characteristics. This trend continues on Ptolemaic coins, where, for example, Ptolemy II of Egypt appears with his wife Arsinoe II in a jugate portrait, and they have a similar long nose and protruding chin. This concept of husband and wife sharing physical characteristics is meant to connote a togetherness and oneness between the two individuals. Thus, in this tetracrachm, Mark Antony and Cleopatra are understood to be two members of one political union, who are working in conjunction as both leaders and as lovers. However, one important difference separates this coin from the traditional Hellenistic canon. Usually, as evidenced by the jugate coins of the earlier Ptolemies, the man takes the leading role in the portraiture; he appears in front of his wife, and his physical characteristics are superimposed on her. However, on this coin, there is a mixture of both of these ideas. Cleopatra is represented with many of Mark Antony's facial characteristics, but she appears on the obverse on the coin, while Mark Antony appears on the reverse. This reversal of position is indicative of Cleopatra's power and influence in Egypt. Similarly, because coins were a means by which information could be disseminated in the Ancient Mediterranean, this coin could both be used by Cleopatra to indicate her influence in Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean, but could also be used by Octavian to show his countrymen what he perceived as the declining morality of Mark Antony, and his increasing disloyalty to the Roman state. This sentiment could also be mirrored by the choice to have the coins inscribed in Greek, the primary language of the Eastern Mediterranean and of Ptolemaic Egypt, rather than the Latin of Rome.

While this statue may appear to be cast as one large piece of bronze, the head, arms, legs, upper and lower torso were all crafted individually. This allowed for increased attention to be paid to each portion of the work. L’Arringatore, also called “The Orator”, is an important example of the blending of Etruscan and Roman culture. Due to the inscription in Etruscan letters, we can confidently say that Aulus Metellus was originally born as an Etruscan. He is wearing high boots in addition to a toga draped across the body, both styles being indicative of an elite Roman citizen. His extended right arm is being held out in the adlocutio gesture. This was commonly used by magistrates and orators as a way of quieting down a crowd so that they may give an address. These actions and clothing demonstrate that Aulus Metellus earned Roman citizenship and was able to work to become a magistrate. This was possible due to the gradual absorption of the Etruscan world by the Romans. As the Roman Republic went on, it continued to expand and encompass more land. The people could choose to become part of the Roman Republic and carried over many of their traditions. The Etruscans were widely regarded for their work in Bronze and Gold. This statue was created utilizing many Etruscan techniques, which would greatly influence future Roman artwork. The head of the statue was created in the Veristic style. The emphasis on the wrinkles of the face provide a much more realistic portrayal of a person. It captures their age and experience, while also adding a sense of individuality to the work. Furthermore, the more wrinkles one had, the more virtues they were said to possess. While the detail on the face of the statue is exquisite, the clothing of the statue is equally as impressive. The folds of the toga are clearly defined, and this work is often used by art historians to study the evolution of the toga and its various styles.

Significance:
The Delos Pseudo-Athlete is a prime example of cultural syncretism at a time of shifting cultural dominance in the Mediterranean. The statue was found next to a copy of the Diadoumenos, originally created by Polykleitos, which is a statue of a young, athletic man, with a body type nearly identical to that of the Pseudo-Athlete. The "verism" of the statue's head, juxtaposed with the youthful body of the statue, are both characteristics of Roman portrait statues, while the heroic nudity of the statue is a Greek ideal. Similarly, the head of the statue tilting left and upward evokes Alexandrian and Hellenistic sculpture. Roman portrait statues of the Late Republican period are labelled with the modern term "veristic," or "truthful," which is used to describe the perceived realism of the portraits' faces; at times, however, these representations may over-exaggerate the facial imperfections of the sitter. Verism may have gained wide use in Rome via Hellenistic representations of philosophers and politicians, through the tradition of Roman ancestor masks, or, as Charles Brian Rose claims, as a way from Romans to differentiate their portraiture from the portraits of the people they conquered in this time period. Verism also became an avenue through which the sitter could promote their station in the Roman political track, or the cursus honorum. In the Republic, the ideal Senator would progress through a sequence of political offices, and thus, his age would connote his political experience and dedication to the Roman state. The apparent mismatch between the old age of the head and the youthful strength of his body is a testament to the Roman idea of the head as a locus for individuality; many Roman copies of Greek bronze statues, for example, are simply heads or herms. Squire claims that this formulaic body type and the Roman process of extracting heads from statues are related processes that indicate the Roman belief that the head was the most individualizing feature of the human body.