[Die Combinations of] Unrelated Obverses and Reverses of Ancient Coins in Jacopo Strada’s Numismatic Works

Jacopo Strada (b. 1505‒1515, d. 1588), an antiquarian from Mantua, was the author of a considerable number of manuscripts and books dealing with Greek coins, coins of the Roman Republic and the Roman emperors to the mid-sixteenth century[1]. According to his own statement, the Diaskeué should provide the complementary coin descriptions to his corpus of drawings of coins of the Roman emperors[2].

I.

In the Diaskeué (fig. 1a), the eleven-volume work with descriptions of coins from antiquity to his own time, Strada presented coin obverses and reverses as if they belong together, when in reality they had actually been combined with other obverses and reverses[3]. Illustrations of these fictitious combinations can also be found in the MaNO (fig. 1b), a corpus of coin drawings from antiquity to the days of Charles V, which includes over 8,500 examples[4].

I limited the selection to the coins of Augustus, since in this case the comparative material was the largest: Coins illustrated in the works of Enea Vico, Antonio Agustín, Sebastiano Erizzo, Hubertus Goltzius and Pirro Ligorio may be compared. Moreover, in his Discorsi of 1592, Antonio Agustin listed the above-mentioned antiquarians, as well as Strada. These scholars and collectors seem to have formed some kind of numismatic circle and exchanged information and coin drawings among them[5]. The work of Sebastiano Erizzo – who played an important role during this sixteenth-century ›boom‹ of numismatic antiquarian literature – has also been included in this study, even though Agustín never mentioned him[6]. Strada also names the above-mentioned antiquarians and coin collectors in the Diaskeué.

II.

The descriptions of unrelated coin obverses and reverses from the reign of Augustus can be found in the second volume of the Diaskeue[7]. The illustrations in the MaNO are however presented in several volumes: e.g. the coins of Caesar (vol. 1), of Octavian and Lepidus (vol. 2) and of Augustus (vols. 4–6). As a rule, in the MaNO obverses and reverses are always shown together. Unfortunately, this original order seems to have been somewhat disturbed by the rebinding initiated by Duke Albrecht in 1571. In total, the material under consideration concerns 16 out of 208 descriptions.

III.

They can be classified as follows:

1. Coin descriptions with incorrect die combinations included in the Diaskeué which are presented in exactly the same way in the MaNO.

2. Coin descriptions with incorrect die combinations included in the Diaskeué, the illustrations of which (usually of the reverse) are also included in the MaNO, even though they are located in different places as well as in different volumes.

3. Coin descriptions with non-existent die combinations included in the Diaskeué, the obverses and reverses of which are however shown in the correct combination in the MaNO.

IV.

In what follows, I shall briefly present these coins and document whether they can be found in the above-mentioned antiquarian works and in which way they are depicted or described therein.

1.1       Coins of the first group include fols. 196r (fig. 2a: male head, legend: M DVRMIVS IIIVIR HONORI)[8] and 197r (fig. 2b: Augustus in elephant biga, legend: AVGVSTVS CAESAR)[9] in the fourth volume of the MaNO. The description is to be found in the second volume of the Diaskeué fol. 156r no. 57. According to Strada the owner was Grand Duke of Tuscany, Francesco I de Medici. This coin is only listed by Strada. Neither Vico, Goltzius, Erizzo, Agostin nor Ligorio illustrate it.

1.2       The second coin is to be found on fols. 188 (fig. 3a: Augustus laureate, legend: S P Q R CAESARI AVGVSTO) and 189 (fig. 3b: two arches with two equestrians, legend: QVOD VIAE MVN SVNT)[10] in the fourth volume of the MaNO. It is described in the second volume of the Diaskeué (fol. 159v no. 74). Strada states that the Doge of Venice (1554–1556), Francesco Venerio, was the owner. Of the contemporary antiquarians, Hubertus Goltzius (figs 4a and b: Caesar Augustus pl. XLVII, b: pl. X)[11] and Sebastiano Erizzo depict this coin while Strada describes and depicts it – Erizzo only the reverse, but from the matching description it is evident that he described the same coin as Strada[12]. Vico only included a description of this coin but provided the matching obverse in his Discorsi[13].

1.3       Of the third coin, both obverse and reverse are included in the fourth volume of MaNO on fols. 258r (fig. 5a: Augustus looking right, legend: CAESAR AVGVST) and 259r (fig. 5b: Imperator on platform, in front three officers presenting a child, legend: IMP XIIII)[14]. The description can be found in volume 2 of the Diaskeué on fol. 164r no. 96. Strada mentions as owner his mentor in antiquarian-numismatic scholarship, the Lyon antiquarian Guillaume du Choul (1496–1560), advisor to the French king and bailiff of the Dauphiné[15]. With the exception of Goltzius, no other antiquarian illustrates this coin. Goltzius depicts the reverse as it is in Strada, i.e. with three officers standing before the emperor rather than one officer as can be seen on the coin, on which the drawing is based (figs 6a and b)[16].

1.4       The fourth and last coin is illustrated on fols. 204r (fig. 7a: Augustus looking right, legend: CAESAR AVGVSTVS) and 203r (fig. 7b: Diana Venetrix, legend: IMP XI)[17] in the fifth volume of the MaNO, with obverse and reverse exchanged. The description can be found in the second volume of the Diaskeué, fol. 169v no. 122, where the Bishop of Tarragona and member of the Rota, Antonio Agustín, is named as owner. Except for Vico (reverse only), no other antiquarian includes it in his work[18].

The second group includes six coin descriptions:

2.1       The first can be found on folio 272r (fig. 8a: Augustus looking right, legend: CAESAR DIVI F)[19] in the first volume of the MaNO and on folio 213r (fig. 8b: quadriga with palm branch, legend: C MARIVS C F PRO IIIVIR)[20] in the fourth volume. The description is included in the second volume of the Diaskeué on fol. 148r no. 15. Strada names Antonio Agustín as the owner. Enea Vico[21] and Hubertus Goltzius[22] obviously used the same source as Strada, which is confirmed by a similar error in the coin legend, i.e. C MARIVS C F PRQ III VIR instead of C MARIVS C F TRO IIIVIR on the original coin, Goltzius with the matching obverse[23]. Agustín and Erizzo do not present this coin; Ligorio however illustrates the coin with the correct obverse and reverse[24].

2.2       The second coin from this group is to be found on fol. 128r (fig. 9a: Augustus looking right, legend: IMP CAESAR) in the fourth volume and fol. 77r (fig. 9b: albogalerus between two shields, legend: P STOLO IIIVIR)^[25] in the fifth volume of the MaNO. The description may be found in the second volume of the Diaskeué fol. 157r, no. 60. Achille Maffei, a Roman collector and antiquarian, is said to be the owner. Apart from Enea Vico (illustration of the reverse only)^[26], Goltzius and Agustín depict it with the corresponding correct obverse^[27].

2.3       Of the third coin, only the reverse is shown on fol. 82r (fig. 10: two togati, one resting on a shield, placing a star on the other statue, which is holding a Victoria and spear, legend: L LENTVLVS FLAMEN MARTIALIS)[28] in the second volume of the MaNO. The description of the entire coin is found in the Diaskeué 2, fol. 154v no. 48. Allegedly, this coin was in Strada’s own collection. Enea Vico depicts only the reverse[29]. Goltzius and Ligorio reproduce it with the correct obverse in their works[30], Agustín and Erizzo omit it.

 

2.4       The fourth coin image – also merely depicting the reverse – is to be found on fol. 21r (fig. 11a: quadriga with statuettes, legend: CAESAR AVGVSTVS; b: denarius of Augustus)[31] in the fourth volume of the MaNO. The coin is described in the second volume of the Diaskeué, fol. 154v no. 49. The description of the obverse says: Augustus looking right, no legend is given. Again, Strada is named as the owner. Vico also reproduces it with the missing abbreviation S C in the legend[32]; i.e. he obviously copied the coin from Strada. None of the above-mentioned antiquarians reproduced it.

2.5       The fifth coin reverse – actually it is the obverse – can be seen on fol. 57r in volume four of the MaNO (fig. 12a: Apollo with diadem and quiver, legend: C MARIVS PRO IIIVIR)[33]. The description is in the second volume of the Diaskeué, fol. 155r no. 50. The obverse is described as follows: Augustus looking right, legend CAESAR AVGVSTVS. This piece also came from Strada’s own collection. It was reproduced as a reverse by Vico[34]. The only other antiquarian to depict this coin is Goltzius (fig. 12b: Caesar Augustus pl. XXXI). He, as well, conceived it as a reverse and combined it with another obverse[35]. The portrait is correctly recognized as that of Diana.

2.6       The reverse of the last coin in this category is reproduced on fol. 71r (fig. 13: clypeus with gems, legend: IMP CAESAR DIVI F)[36] in the second volume of MaNO. The matching description is listed in the second volume of the Diaskeué, fol. 168r no. 115. The obverse is described as follows: Augustus with helmet, looking right, without legend. Strada is mentioned as the coin’s owner. In Vico only the reverse of the coin can be found[37]. Erizzo reproduces it with the correct obverse[38]; so do Goltzius[39] and Ligorio[40]. It is not included in Agustín.

 

The third group includes four coins:

3.1       The first piece is included in the fifth volume of the MaNO on fol. 4r (fig. 14a: Augustus looking right, legend: CAESAR AVGVSTVS)[41] and illustrated in the fourth volume of MaNO on fol. 174r (fig. 14b: bust of Diana, legend: P PETRON TVRPILIANVS IIIVIR)[42]. The description is found in volume two of the Diaskeué on fol. 152 no. 34. It is presented as being in Strada’s collection. In the MaNO fols. 174r and 175r (fig. 15a: bust of Diana, legend: P PETRON TVRPILIANVS IIIVIR; b: Augustus in elephant biga, legend: AVGVSTVS CAESAR)[43] are correctly combined, i.e. fol. 174r is here correctly presented as obverse and fol. 175r as reverse. This coin is illustrated in Vico in the edition of 1554 i.e. Omnium Caesarum; he mistook the obverse with the image of Diana for the reverse, exactly as happened in Strada[44]. Goltzius, however, understood both sides of the coin described by Strada as reverses[45]. Agustín and Erizzo did not reproduce this coin. Ligorio depicted it correctly, as it was presented in the MaNO[46].

3.2       Strada confused the reverse with the obverse in the case of the second coin – also included in the fifth volume of the MaNO on fol. 40r (fig. 16a: Augustus looking left, legend: CAESAR AVGVSTVS)[47] and in the fourth volume on fol. 22r (fig. 16b: Antonius and Lepidus, legend: IMP ...)[48]. It is described in the second volume of the Diaskeué, fol. 152r no. 35. Strada was the owner of this coin. In the Diaskeué, the coin on fol. 22r is described as reverse but correctly linked in the MaNO as obverse to the following coin illustration on fol. 23r (fig. 17a: Antonius and Lepidus, legend on drawing: IMP P P DIVI F; fig. 17b: Crocodile in front of palm tree, legend: COL NEM)[49]. Vico depicts this reverse only in the 1554 edition of his book[50]. Sebastiano Erizzo, Hubertus Goltzius, Antonio Agustín and Pirro Ligorio reproduce this coin with obverse and reverse correctly linked as in the MaNO[51].

3.3       Of the third, non-existent coin, only the reverse is shown in the MaNO in the second volume on fol. 106r (fig. 18a: arch of Augustus with quadriga, legend: IMP IX TR POT V S P Q R SIGNIS RECEPTIS)[52]. The description can also be found in the second volume of the Diaskeué on fol. 155r no. 51. The obverse is described but not reproduced in the MaNO: Augustus looking right, no legend is given. Again, Strada names Antonio Agustín as the owner. The correct obverse can be found in the MaNO on fol. 105r (fig. 18b: Augustus looking right, legend on drawing: IMP IX TR PO)[53]. Vico also reproduces the arch[54]. It is not found in the works of Erizzo and Agustín. Goltzius links it to an incorrect obverse[55]. Ligorio depicts the coin in the correct combination of obverse and reverse[56].

3.4       Of the fourth and last, unidentified coin, the obverse is visible in the sixth volume of the MaNO on fol. 41r (fig. 19a: Augustus looking right, legend: DIVVS AVGVSTVS)[57], while the reverse is depicted on fol. 42r (fig. 19b: Augustus and Livia facing each other, legend: M ACILIVS GLABRIO PRO)[58]. The coin is described in the second volume of the Diaskeué on fol. 161r no. 81. It is said to have been in the collection of Enea Vico. The correct obverse is found in volume four on fol. 46r (fig. 20: Augustus looking right crowned by Victoria on a column, legend on drawing: CAESAR DIVI AVGVST F)[59]. No other antiquarian reproduces this coin.

 

V. The following conclusions can be drawn from this presentation:

Firstly, most of the unidentifiable coins can be found in the collection of Jacopo Strada, i.e. in the case of six coins out of 14. Whether these coins were really in his collection, as claimed by Strada, can unfortunately no longer be ascertained, since nothing is known about the present whereabouts of his collections[60].

The three coins from Antonio Agustín’s collection as well can no longer be identified, since his collection was looted by Napoleon’s troops. The illustrations in his 1587 Dialogos probably reproduce coins from Agustín’s own collection. The coins described by Strada are however not among them[61]. Therefore, Strada’s information cannot be verified.

The coins from other collections mentioned by Strada (Medici, Du Choul, Enea Vico, Achille Maffei) can only be identified with difficulty[62].

Enea Vico adopted nearly all the coins presented by Strada, i.e. ten out of 14. Nonetheless, he depicted only the reverses, so that it cannot be determined with certainty whether he used models from Strada. Only in cases of inaccuracies in the reproductions in both Strada and Vico, for example errors in the texts of legends (here nos. 2.1 and 2.4), can we be sure that Strada was used as model by Vico. Strada seems to have entertained a lively exchange with him[63]. Nevertheless, he also regarded him as a great competitor, as he stated in the preface to his Epitome[64].

Goltzius also was happy to use Strada’s coin drawings as his source. Therefore, he depicted three coins in his work as Strada had described them (here nos. 1.2, 1.3, 2.5). His presentation of the coins’ illustrations is clearly oriented on Vico’s model; he was the first numismatist to adopt it^[65].

Erizzo, however, only adopted one coin from Strada (no. 1.2). Neither Vico nor Goltzius or Erizzo specify where they saw the depicted coins.

Agustín and Ligorio did not reproduce any of Strada’s coins with incorrect die combinations. All of them owned collections, of which Ligorio’s was considered the most important at the time, according to Goltzius[66]. Agustin’s was probably one of the largest, containing about 5,500 pieces[67].

Ligorio also visited a great many coin collections in person. Therefore, in his manuscripts he provides owner indications that are different from those given in Strada’s works (e.g. in the case of no. 3.1). Here, Ligorio states a »cavalier Caro« as the owner of a correctly reproduced coin, while Strada names his own collection as repository of his invented coin.

Two of Strada’s inventions were never accepted by other antiquarians (nos. 1.1 and 3.4). The first coin is said to have been in the Medici collection, the other in the possession of Enea Vico. It is therefore quite surprising that Vico did not illustrate a coin from his own collection in his works. This fact could be another indication that Strada’s information about the ownership of coins is not necessarily accurate: As a consequence, for his most imaginative coin inventions, such as the exemplars depicting the assassination of Cicero, the depiction of the temple of Janus with a four-headed Janus on the roof and a ship with elephant prora in his works – in these cases in the Epitome and Diaskeué – he named diverse owners (assassination of Cicero) or referred to his own collection as repository (temple of Janus and elephant prora)[68]. By stating the owner, he provided his inventions with a ›confirmed‹ authenticity. He hardly needed to fear verification and exposure by his contemporaries, since at the time communication channels were very slow and unreliable. Moreover, only a few antiquarians other than himself undertook extended journeys to visit foreign coin collections, as did Hubertus Goltzius, for example[69].

Strada justifies his inventions in the preface of the series with a statement that »suitable coins have not yet been found for all inscriptions – they have not yet been discovered – although they were minted«^[70]. Now he had ›found‹ them. His extensive iconographic knowledge of ancient coins and of their legends enabled him to do so. As a rule, he used really existing coin dies and combined them with each other for the coins presented in his works; as a result, they appeared all the more credible to his contemporaries. Nonetheless, there were some, such as Adolph Occo, who expressed doubts about the authenticity of many coins presented by Strada, even though he adopted several of Strada’s inventions[71]. Further in-depth investigations on volumes 9 (Nero), 11 (Vespasian) 16 (Antoninus Pius) and 17 (Marcus Aurelius) are still to be undertaken. In these volumes, several combinations of non-related obverses and reverses can be found. Many of his inventions are included in sixteenth- and seventeenth-century numismatic works and encyclopaedia, even in Occo’s works[72]. A complete and detailed investigation of the complete set of coin inventions depicted in the MaNO would be very helpful and important for the history of numismatics; unfortunately, due to constraints of time, this further investigation was impossible to achieve as part of our project[73].

In conclusion, Strada’s coin inventions as described in the Diaskeué provide important further evidence that these coin descriptions were not complementary to the illustrations in the MaNO, as he had stated in the preface of his Commentary on Caesar^[74] and in the Index sive catalogus librorum, quos composuit aut componi et scribi curavit aut denique alio modo comparavit^[75], but that these two works constituted two independent pieces of writing.

Translation: Andrea M. Gáldy