Seite - 816 - in Jacopo Strada and Cultural Patronage at the Imperial Court - The Antique as Innovation, Band 2

Chapter 15816 Beginning with the obverse of the coins, he succinctly described the Emperor’s profiles, indicating the direction of the face, the dress and (laurel) crown and other attributes, if any, and he transcribed the inscription. But he did not refer to written sources describing the appearance of the emperors, though in many cases these were available, and neither did he comment on the expression of their faces. Both as an artist and as a courtier Strada realized that these images were official representations, designed to project a positive, but not necessarily truthful image of the ruler. When he turned to the reverses, however, Strada’s approach was much less discrete, and he was much quicker prepared to interpret what he saw in the light of his historical knowledge. Though the descriptions have a similar structure as those of the obverses, the objects depicted are often not merely described, but also identified—especially when they represent triumphs or games organized, and public works or monuments realized during the reign of the Emperor depicted on the obverse. In his preface to the Dιασκευη Strada gives an exhaus- tive list of the types of military and civil institutions and of the monuments documented in such coins. He moreover claims that he conferred these im- ages with the remains of the original constructions, if still extant. Though he does not cite the relevant sources, it is obvious that his identifications were based both on ancient texts and on the authors of the later antiquarian tradition, such as Flavio Biondo’s Roma Instaurata. As in the Epitome, the im- ages documenting monumental buildings are exhaustively described, in far greater detail than was warranted by the image on the actual coin. That in these descriptions Strada, instead of documenting an individual coin type, reconstructs the monument depicted on it, is corroborated by the related drawings in his numismatic albums. Thus Strada’s drawing of a coin type of Trajan showing the Circus Maximus, roughly five times the size of the actual object, shows many worked-out details which are not found, and could not have been shown in the coin [Figs. 15.19–15.20]. The same holds for Strada’s drawing of a reverse of a coin of Trajan which is traditionally interpreted as (a section of) the famous bridge across the Danube built by that Emperor [Fig. 15.21]. Though in his description in the Dιασκευη, Strada mentions that possibility, he himself interprets it as a ‘portus’, a harbour, naval arsenal or boathouse. His corresponding drawing [Fig. 15.22] owes much to contemporary representations of the principal element of a theatre for a Naumachia or mock sea-battle, such as those included in Pirro Ligorio’s Antei- quae Urbis Imago [Fig. 15.23]. Strada’s suggestion that the object represented on the coin is not a bridge at all is not implausible and in any case demon- strates the ingenuity and creativity of his approach.27 27 Cf. Jansen 1993(a), pp. 219, note 22.