Deultum. Coin for Macrinus (217-218). Perseus bearing the head of Medusa frees Andromeda from the cliff where she guarded by a sea serpent. |
I have thought that cumulatively essays on the topics that I couldn't use in coursework, since students ever increasingly demand questions with answers that can be proved but lack the languages that enable even framing them, might be illuminative by throwing into relief questions that are not less important because they are unanswerable. Too few histories were written, none that I know of came out of ateliers (Lucian tells us very little of all that he might have known, doubtless thinking it unliterary, artisan lore), and working handbooks were not what was copied. If there was a Cennino Cennini (again, just Google him) of the Imperial Age, we don't know of him, even as a name, and he might have been too concerned with prestige to tell us everything, either.
What the surviving pictures tell us in this case as in most others is that recognizability and artistic competence were what mattered—certainly not originality. For example, when the Roman colonia of Deultum (rudimentary references are at the bottom of the post) used the composition with Perseus rescuing Andromeda, using 8 reverse dies, from the reign of Macrinus to that of Philip I 'the Arab', it relied on its familiarity, without a label. Though, constrained to a coin, it looks like a pas de deux performed in a telephone booth, it not only identifies Perseus by his carrying the head of Medusa and the heroism of the rescue by including the sea monster at the bottom, it is the relation of one figure to the other that is essential. This composition is an ideal starting point for this blog, being manageable.
Now look: the little one, the rapid sketch which is all the more effective from a distance as part of a wall for being done that way, is itself perfectly recognizable as representing the same original. Then remember: what if Pompeii hadn't been buried, safely, in AD 79? How many more Andromedas, large and small, existed in antiquity? In a thousand years what fraction of our wall-paper, of our postcard collections, of our coffee-table books and art calendars will survive? Even vellum codices have had the help of monastery libraries (and Umberto Eco was so astute in burning that library he created for a wonderful recreation of a Benedictine monastery). Of course, we cannot demonstrate how many there "must" have been (and we ought always to look out for that telltale "must" in an argument!).
The sculpture studios that made the Perseus and Anrdomeda and other comparable pictorial reliefs had evolved this special emotionless style, in several generations, of archaistic, neo-Severe, neo-post-Phidian, and dreamily Hellenistic elements, skillfully combined. It seems to have remained popular until newer pretty styles were devised for Hadrian and the Antonines. They might take elements from any or all media. Obviously, not only Rome (but Rome not least) loved it, and so did some Renaissance and NeoClassical and Victorian craftsmen and their patrons. It was their purpose not to copy, not to reproduce anything but only to use it: consider, finally, Wedgwood: the magical combination of charm and inanity. The pictorial relief of the Perseus and Andromeda certainly is not independent of the painting of Nikias, but neither is it faithful to its mood, and the Pompeii paintings, even the sketches, cannot have relied on any such work. Together they attest to the currency of the composition, but the idiosyncrasies of rocks and drapery, for instance, are proper to the pictorial-relief workshops.
Now, the Deultum coins, the first of them dating about two centuries later, were, as Dimitar Draganov emphasized (p. 160), unique to that mint. They can't have been copied from Pompeii, of course, or (I should think) from a pictorial relief. The famous Nikias might still have been on view in Athens (the Herulians hadn't come yet), unless, of course, it was in Rome (but Pliny only singles it out as 'large'). The coins are so good that it is tempting to think that Deultum may have possessed a work in this composition (but not 'must have', and who can tell in what medium?) of their own.
This what I meant by unanswerable questions. Deultum was unquestionably a prosperous port and city, a privileged colonia. The site has been carefully excavated (work still in progress) and well studied. Yet if anyone in Deultum wrote its history, no one made copies of it, let alone got it into a curriculum.
Questions such as why Deultum alone issued Perseus and Andromeda coins, a subject so far as I know ONLY of artistic importance, are among those that the mute stones do not speak of.
These questions, however, are worth keeping in mind, because all this specific, concrete ignorance has some bearing on our reading of the facts that we do possess. The inscribed copper plate of AD 82, of T. Avidius Quietus found on the Esquiline in Rome is the very best piece of written evidence that we have for Deultum (Draganov, pp. 25-26).
This and all such essays here are posted subject to further evidence.
Basic references:
For Nikias: J. J. Pollitt, The Art of Ancient Greece, Sources and Documents, CUP, 1990 (earlier edition, Prentice-Hall)
For Deultum and her coins: Dimitar Draganov, The Coinage of Deultum, Sofia, Bobokov Bros. Foundation, 2007 (the SNG fascicle has no continuous text, and the monograph by Jurukova is out of date).
For Perseus and Andromeda: Nina Hristova, Perseus and Andromeda. One moving motif in the roman province coinage. – Studi sull’oriente cristiano, 9, 2005, 75-80
Now, the Deultum coins, the first of them dating about two centuries later, were, as Dimitar Draganov emphasized (p. 160), unique to that mint. They can't have been copied from Pompeii, of course, or (I should think) from a pictorial relief. The famous Nikias might still have been on view in Athens (the Herulians hadn't come yet), unless, of course, it was in Rome (but Pliny only singles it out as 'large'). The coins are so good that it is tempting to think that Deultum may have possessed a work in this composition (but not 'must have', and who can tell in what medium?) of their own.
This what I meant by unanswerable questions. Deultum was unquestionably a prosperous port and city, a privileged colonia. The site has been carefully excavated (work still in progress) and well studied. Yet if anyone in Deultum wrote its history, no one made copies of it, let alone got it into a curriculum.
Questions such as why Deultum alone issued Perseus and Andromeda coins, a subject so far as I know ONLY of artistic importance, are among those that the mute stones do not speak of.
These questions, however, are worth keeping in mind, because all this specific, concrete ignorance has some bearing on our reading of the facts that we do possess. The inscribed copper plate of AD 82, of T. Avidius Quietus found on the Esquiline in Rome is the very best piece of written evidence that we have for Deultum (Draganov, pp. 25-26).
This and all such essays here are posted subject to further evidence.
Basic references:
For Nikias: J. J. Pollitt, The Art of Ancient Greece, Sources and Documents, CUP, 1990 (earlier edition, Prentice-Hall)
For Deultum and her coins: Dimitar Draganov, The Coinage of Deultum, Sofia, Bobokov Bros. Foundation, 2007 (the SNG fascicle has no continuous text, and the monograph by Jurukova is out of date).
For Perseus and Andromeda: Nina Hristova, Perseus and Andromeda. One moving motif in the roman province coinage. – Studi sull’oriente cristiano, 9, 2005, 75-80
No comments:
Post a Comment