The culture of die engravers

I would like to read an article, book, or book section on the culture of Roman die engravers. What I mean by that is how engraving was formalized as a trade, and to what extent it was related to other artistic trades such as gem carving and manuscript design. I suspect there was a strong relationship between numismatic die engraving and gem carving. But I see so much correspondence between late antique manuscript art and the images on late Roman bronze coinage that I am intrigued by the possibility that these artists had some kind of shared occupational background. How were artistic patterns disseminated to die engravers throughout the empire? What training did an engraver have? Were die engravers slaves like other mint workers, or did they have higher social status?

Perhaps we do not know enough to speculate on these matters, but I would be grateful to know what we can know about them. Can someone point me toward a cointalk thread or print resource that might answer some of these questions?

Just so I am not all take and no give, here is a passage from a 1951 article that suggests that Alexandrian die engravers worked from “pattern books,” but since the discussion is from the 1950s, I do not know if current scholarship has confirmed or rejected such a suggestion.

“Professors Sir John Beazley and Bernard Ashmole have both advised me that there must have been 'pattern books' or some form of models of mythological designs available in antiquity, though there is no evidence of their exact nature. These would pass freely amongst artists and craftsmen, who could select the particular design most suitable for their purpose, and possibly introduce variations to adapt it to their field. It is probable that new artists were employed at Alexandria to design the dies for this 'pictorial' series, since the handling in the work of the two whose technique can be compared, as shown in the first article, is quite unlike anything that had appeared previously at that mint. The new artists may have come from Asia Minor, but the only ground for suggesting this is the preference manifested for subjects with an Asiatic context: the patterns were the common property of the Greek world. ... It may be noted that the new men seem to have been engaged only on the reverse dies: the obverses were of the style normal at Alexandria, and the same obverse dies were used in some cases for the pictorial reverses and for the commoner ones.” (102)

Pictorial Coin-Types at the Roman Mint of Alexandria: A Second Supplement; Author(s): J. G. Milne; Source: The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology Vol. 37 (Dec., 1951), pp. 100-102

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Gavin Richardson, I'm guessing that you're looking into a "black hole" that will yield nothing positive. There must be a relationship between coin engravers & gem engravers. But have you ever wondered why some of the greatest Roman cameo carvers didn't sign their work, like the example pictured below, or why they remain unknown today? I'm sure their techniques were carefully guarded from those who wanted to learn the craft. Who needs the competition? How many of the great Renaissance medalists revealed their techniques, even the artists who signed their work. Those are just my thoughts.

 

Very interesting question @Gavin Richardson ! I don't know if there any answers but it's fun to speculate. Another question I have pondered is how the mints changed their style during the reign of Diocletian to the new iconography. This would be particularly evident at Alexandria, which switched from the old style billon tetradrachms to folles in the course of a year or less, with a completely new design, along with the change in imperial status to proskynesis.

 

Most collectors think that Alexandrian coins have something different. Matter of special artistic design or eye appeal ?! . Even in matter of metal composition, they had something special. The Potin coins, being a particular Alexandrian alloy for coin Tets ( Lead, tin, copper and silver ).

 

Lead? So no licking my Alexandrian tets then? But they just look so good!

 

Not exactly what you're looking for, but a lot of good info here.

 

I would love to know more about the culture of the engravers. There just doesn't seem to be much. Perhaps one of the best sources is the scanty information we have on the moneyer's revolt under Aurelian. Nothing really about how the coins were actually made, however. The FORVM article on Aurelian gives a very nice overview:

http://www.forumancientcoins.com/lateromancoinage/aurelian.html

 

Immensely regrettable that this is a topic we'll probably never know too much about. Mattingly speculated that the increased artistry of the coinage under Nero was due to him having imported Greek sculptors into the Roman mints -- I can only defer to the master, of course, but this view rather presupposes that the jump in quality between Claudius and Nero was enough of a discontinuity as to require explanation. To my mind some rather fine work was done under Claudius (although, of course, much of his output was highly mediocre).

You also hear of that one die-cutter (whose notname escapes me) whose individual productions under Hadrian and Aelius can apparently be distinguished by their high quality.

 

i remember discussing briefly with another coin peep when i'd made a comment of how i thought later coinage of the empire had degenerated compared to the earlier coins. but i was reminded that indeed the art of pictures and such of the later byzantines was pretty much in sync with portraits and art on the coins of that time..

 

Trebellianus, I believe you are referring to the "Alphaeus Master", also known as "Antoninianos of Aphrodisias" the celator who made the dies for the famous Hadrian sestertius that sold for over $2,000,000 about 10 years ago. See photos below.

 

Thanks for these posts everyone. It’s been a busy workday so I haven’t had time to respond more generously to each comment. But rest assured that I am saving these up for further reflection. Perhaps in a few days I can sit down and elaborate more on what I am learning on this topic and how it relates to some of the responses here. Keep them coming!

 

The man himself! Thanks for digging this up -- absolutely beautiful work. Just a shame about the lettering on the obverse(!)

 

Alexandria was very special from the time of Augustus until Diocletian ended the 'deal'. Egypt was the private reserve of the emperor. Senators were not allowed to visit there without permission and the money of Alexandria did not circulate anywhere else in the empire. People did not notice the differences in the coins so much since few had experience with both.

One thing I would like to know: Did denarii of Septimius Severus from the mint at Alexandria circulate in Egypt or were they made there and exported to places where the army needed to be paid? I have not seen hoard evidence that answers this question. Anyone?

 

Great post, @Gavin Richardson ! I've often thought about the artisans who sculpted the profiles on the Greek, Roman Republic, and Seleucid coins. Who were they? Were they honored and respected for their beautiful work? Their craftsmanship reminds me of cameos.

 

Yes. I read one article that stated that Greek coin die engravers “moonlighted” as ring engravers too. The skills of coin, ring, and gem engraving have to be related.

 

This online grouping of essays seems to be moderately interesting and may have bits of useful information contained within:

Bearers of Meaning: The Ottilia Buerger Collection of Ancient and Byzantine Coins
https://www2.lawrence.edu/dept/art/BUERGER/INTRO/CONTENTS.HTML

The datastream.pdf file below is the article Artists, Engravers, and Style in Greek Coinage by J. F. Healy, University of London, and might contain some info.

 

Along the lines with Doug's musings on Alexandrian mint products being exported (or not), I was surprised a while back to read in a couple of online places that the Cappadocian drachms of Trajan were (possibly) minted in Rome for use out East. I didn't know a coin with Greek inscriptions would be minted in Rome for "export." But logistically it makes a lot of sense.



Something else I've wondered about: a lot of denarii of Antoninus Pius, M. Aurelius, Verus, and Commodus (and their ladies) look "Eastern" or semi-Barbaric to me. The portraits have a wide side-view "Antioch eye," the lettering is a bit crude, etc. And yet they don't look full-blown "barbaric" to me. And the silver looks too good for a "limes" issue. I'm sure many of you on the Forum have an example or two.

This is not a particularly great example, since the extensive wear & damage make it perhaps look cruder than it really is, but I had the photo at hand:



Many eBay sellers from Serbia, the Ukraine, etc. sell these. I realize that "eBay" and "Bulgarian forgers" will immediately come to mind, raising the hackles of many on the Forum. But there are so many of these, in such a vast array of types, and with a great deal of what looks to be genuine wear, that I find these an odd thing to counterfeit. Some of the Ukrainian-Latvian sellers will even note if some of the coins they are selling are "billon" or "limes." Furthermore, I found a reference or two in more scholarly works (I found from fishing around Google Books excerpts - I don't have the references at hand now) note the huge number of Antonine silver coming from these areas in hoards.

I wonder if there weren't some sort of (official? semi-official? Barbarian?) Balkan mint operating around that time, with local celators preparing the dies? This sort of set-up might also have something to do with the extensive "limes" coinage that provokes so much debate (and in the same general areas of Europe, I think).

Let me hasten to add that I am not an expert, and this is just the idle speculations of a rank amateur.

 

I'm sure the answers you're looking for were probably lost in the Library of Alexandria fires and other manuscript collections that were destroyed. The best we can do now is conjecture based off our understanding of their culture and the quality of work. I would think they weren't held as slaves; but their trade craft may have been kept in secrecy or under pseudonyms. Imagine how valuable a kidnapped Celator could be.

The Minoan gem engravers were doing it before it was cool; 1000 years before The Sicilians and 800 years before coins. This example rivals, if not surpasses, anything produced by Euainetos. I wonder if the Classical Greeks new what their Mycenaean ancestors were capable of or if the knowledge was lost in the Bronze Age Collapse. It would have probably created a cult following.

Keep in mind this bead is only 34 mm wide. Agate is much more difficult to engrave as compared to something as malleable as silver/gold.

The Pylos Combat Agate , circa 1450 BC




- Michael

 

iamtiberius, I remember when this magnificent gem was discovered several years ago. Attached below is a line drawing of the gem which is probably easier for most people to visualize. This tomb yielded many important treasures. The man in the tomb was named the "Griffin Warrior" because of the beautiful gold ring he was wearing, which had a superbly engraved griffin on its face. See attachment.