Many studies dealing with Roman imperial art take into consideration Roman imperial coin types. The importance of these types in interpreting the meaning of extant works of art is generally accepted, but neither the extent nor the limits of numismatic contribution to the study of art history of the imperial period has yet been clearly defined.
That many official reliefs, statues and paintings of the empire influenced coin types is now a matter of common knowledge. It has been recognized by both archaeologists and numismatists. How far this influence went and which types can be considered direct derivatives from sculpture or paintings is still uncertain although Regling, Strack and others emphasized the changes which are to be expected in the passage of certain motifs from sculpture and paintings to coins: abbreviations, liberty in representing the attributes, etc.
Author(s): Annalina Caló Levi
Series: Numismatic Notes and Monographs, 123
Publisher: The American Numismatic Society
Year: 1952
Language: English
Pages: 86
City: New York
PREFACE ix
ABBREVIATIONS FOR FREQUENTLY CITED REFERENCES xi
INTRODUCTION
I. THE FIRST PERIOD: FEROM AUGUSTUS THROUGH M. AURELIUS AND L. VERUS
A. PARTHOS ... ROMAN[O]RUM ... SIGNA RE[DDERE] MIHI ... COEGI 6
B. Arcus Ad Isia and Judaea Capta Coins 9
C. Domitian's Tetrapylon and Germania Capta Coins 12
D. Some Trajanic Sculptures and Related Coin Types 14
E. The Period of M. Aurelius and L. Verus 21
F. Conclusions 23
THE BARBARIAN AS AN ATTRIBUTE 25
THE SECOND AND THIRD PERIODS: THE TRADITIONAL TYPES 41
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 49
