On the Style of the « Aitna Master » from Eastern Sicily more

Offprint from Israel Museum Studies in Archaeology Volume 3 ■ 2004 On the Style of the "Aitna Master" from Eastern Sicily Framjois de Callatay Royal Library of Belgium, Brussels Ecole pratique des Hautes Etudes, Sorbonne, Paris Fig. 1 Tetradrachm of Aitna, ca. 460 BCE, obverse (above) and reverse (below) The tetradrachm of Aitna (fig. I)1 was struck ca. 460 BCE in Sicily in the name of the inhabitants of Aitna, appar- ently the new name given by the tyrant Hieron II to the city of Catana, modern Catania, situated on Sicily's eastern shore. Its main motifs include the head of Silenus to right on the obverse, and Zeus seated on his throne to right on the reverse. Like other coins of its time, there is no signature on the Aitna tetradrachm. Thus we do not know the name of the artist responsible for it. Nevertheless, owing to the coin's outstanding quality, modern art historians and numismatists felt it appropriate to give him a nickname, as is the custom with European painters of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries CE or, to remain in the Greek context, Attic potters, and he was dubbed the "Aitna Master."2 The present article deals with stylistic issues and the extent to which they can, and cannot, shed light on the makers of ancient coins. In the field of numismatics, this is a rather neglected approach. It must be clear from the very start that the study is not going to reduce our uncertainties. However, it opens the door to a more complex under- standing of the way monetary types were engraved. We may start from the basic premise that the engraving of monetary dies needs some degree of professional skill. And to produce as fine a coin as the Aitna tetradrachm, widely regarded as one of the masterpieces of its time, requires, admit- tedly, exceptional skill. It is unlikely that such a capable artist as the Aitna Master would have worked for the Aitnaians only, producing just one pair of dies for an issue of tetradrachms and a few more for fractions (see below). On the contrary, it is most tempting to look elsewhere for coins attributable to this artist, whose name is IMSA 3 -2004:43-52 43 unknown to us, but who must have been renowned in his day. Generally speaking, the number of dies engraved at that time in Sicily was significant but not huge. Since most of the Sicilian coinages of the period have been thoroughly studied, a general conspectus is possible. The following chart lists the issues as well as the number of obverses and reverses for each mint, arranged geographically (clockwise, starting with Messana). The numbers of dies based on surviving coins are followed by estimates (in brackets) of the numbers of dies originally produced, as calculated by the simplified method of G. P. Carter.3 The information has been extracted from Holloway 1987 and Callatay 2003. Chart 1: Number of Dies Used in Sicily (Fifth Century BCE) Mints Period Denominations Obverses Reverses Eastern Sicily Messana ca. 480-462/1 BCE Tetradrachms Didrachms Litrae 119 (= ca. 139) 5 (=5) 33 (= ca. 50) 107 (= ca. 120) 5 {= 5) 38 (= ca. 65) ca. 460-426 BCE Tetradrachms Drachms 58 (= ca. 59) 4 (=4) ,(,1 (_ .... Q-11 60 {= ca. 62) 6 (=6) 66 (= ca. 100) Naxos 1 ctradrachms Drachms Litrae 4 (=4) 20 (= ca.22) I (= L) 5(= 5) 28 (=ca.30) Catana ca. 466-450 BCE Tetradrachms 13 Leontinoi ca. 485-466 BCE ca. 475-460 BCE Tetradrachms Didrachms 5 ? ?s ? Syracuse ca. 485-470 BCE Tetradrachms Didrachms Drachms Obols 139 (- ca. 148) 1 (= 1) 5(- 5) 15 (= 100+) 203 (= ca.225) 6 (- ca. 7) 6 (=6) 18 (= 100+) ca. 466-435 BCE Tetradrachms Didrachms Litrae 74 (= 74) 4 (= ca. 7) 34(=ca. 85) 143 (= ca. 145) 4 (=ca. 7) 36 (= ca. 90) Central Sicily Camarina ca. 46CM50 BCE Litrae 57 (= ca. 65) 83 (= ca. 100) Gela ca. 480-470 BCE Tetradrachms Drachms 19 (= 19) K-l) 49 (= ca. 55) 2(=ca.3) ca. 465-450 BCE Tetradrachms I.itrae 1.4 (= 14) 62 (= ca. 87) 21 (= ca. 25) 85 (= ca. 130) Akragas ca. 470-405 BCE Decadrachms Tetradrachms Didrachms Hemidrachms 30 litrae (gold) 24v litrae (gold) 3 29 2 ca. 25 2 5 i > ? > > Selinus ca. 466-415 BCE Tetradrachms 14 (= 14) 35 (= ca. 36) Himera ca. 480-470 BCE Didrachms Drachms 15 (= 15) 5{= 5) 78 (= ca. 120) 11 (= ca. 13) ca. 472-409 BCE Tetradrachms 9(= 9) IS (= 15) ca. 450 BCE Didrachms 3(= 3) 3 (=3) 44 1". de Callatay: Aitna Master Holloway provides averages for the numbers of obverse tetradrachm dies produced by different Sicilian cities. Most averages fall around five per five-year period, meaning one obverse die per year - a not too impressive result indeed. The most spectacular exception is for the so-called "mass coinage" produced in Syracuse (Period III: ca. 485-478 BCE), with "49 tetradrachm (obverse) dies per five-year period,"6 which means ca. 10 obverse dies per year for tetradrachms.7 To focus on the same engraver could produce four or five obverses in one month, and there is no reason to doubt that he would have also been responsible for the reverses.10 As for medieval times, it took Jean Blancpain two days to engrave seven pairs of dies in Bruges, though, admittedly, these types would have been easier to produce than the earlier types.11 In July 1825, Carl Wilhclm Becker, the famous German counterfeiter, needed only 18 hours to finish one of his most difficult and spectacular forgeries: Chart 2: Average Number of Dies Used Yearly in Sicily (Fifth Century BCE) Mints Period Obverses Reverses Total dies Yearly average Messana ca. 480-426 BCE ca. 350 ca. 358 ca. 758 ca. 13.1 dies Naxos ca. 460-430 BCE ca. 27 ca. 36 ca. 63 ca.2.1 dies Syracuse8 ca. 485-450 BCE ca. 320 ca. 480 ca. 800 ca. 22.9 dies Camarina ca. 460-450 BCE ca.65 ca. 100 ca. 165 ca. 16.5 dies Gela ca. 480-450 BCE ca. 127 ca. 213 ca. 340 ca. 11.3 dies Selinus ca. 466-415 BCE ca. 14 ca. 36 ca. 50 ca. 1.0 die Himera ca. 480-409 BCE ca. 32 ca. 151 ca. 183 ca. 2.6 dies tetradrachms is understandable in terms of economic history but, when dealing with die-cutting, we have to take into account all denominations. Chart 2 summarizes the data in Chart 1, calculating the average number of dies produced yearly in each city (numbers for obverse and reverse dies have been extrapolated through statistical methods from original numbers of dies represented at least by one specimen in the sample). The question is, how long did it take to engrave a die? Commentators of the last century, sometimes influenced by modern artistic practice,''1 thought that it took many weeks or even months. The evidence at our disposal, however, does not accord with this assumption. For example, regarding Greek times, the tetradrachms of Mithridatcs Eupator, the dates of which include the months as well as the years, indicate that the obverse of the decadrachm of Akragas (fig. 2).12 G. F. Hill, clearly surprised by how quickly Becker finished the job, commented: "The completion in eighteen hours of such a die as the obverse of the Agrigcntinc decadrachm is almost incred- ible; but the figures are explicit" (Hill 1924: 48). Even if we accept the low, in my opinion, estimate of two weeks per die as an average, this means that an engraver fully occupied could cut 26 dies in one year. This exceeds the highest estimate for a given mint - that for Syracuse, with an average of 22.9 dies per year (though obols do not appear in that count). In other words, no mint was active enough to provide permanent employment for a single engraver. Conversely, if a die-cutter wished to work without interruption, he would have been forced to work for several mints. Fig. 2 Modern forgery of a decadrachm of Akragas (obverse) by Carl Wilhelm Becker (Hilt 1924: pi. 1.15) IMS/13- 2004: 43-52 45 Fig. 3 Tetradrachm of Naxos, ca. 460 BCE, obverse and reverse Or, to play a moment longer with these numbers, the sum of the figures in Chart 2 gives a grand total of 2,359 dies struck in 281 years, amounting to an average of 8.4 dies annually per mint. If we were to add to this figure, as approximate as it may be, estimates for the missing mints of Catana and Leontinoi, which are both more likely to be below as opposed to above this average, and of Akragas, it would appear that the total annual production of dies in Sicily by the mid-fifth century BCE was in the range of 88.4 - not enough to keep four engravers constantly busy at a hypothetical rate of two weeks per die. While these calculations should not be taken to imply that all Sicilian coin dies were cut by only three or four men (88.4 / 26 = 3.4 - though I doubt the number of engravers was ever very large), they should encourage us not to be too reluctant to recognize the same die-cutter at different mints. It is indeed all the more likely that die-cutters were skilled, rare, and highly sought after professionals, who worked for different employers at a time when mints were not active on a regular basis. Nevertheless, modern scholars have preferred to ignore this basic assumption, and have thus, as a rule, failed to attribute to the same hand dies of different mints. Examples of such attributions are few and far between. Regarding Sicily, they have mainly been proposed for a later period (last third of the fifth century BCE), when dies were signed. Only when the same name, such as Eumenou, appears on coins of different cities have most scholars felt confident enough to point to the same artist. Besides signatures, purely stylistic considerations, coupled with geographic proximity, have also been used as criteria to link a single die-cutter to more than one mint, as has been done successfully with the tetradrachms of Lysimachus.13 To the Aitna Master, scholars since G. E. Rizzo in 193814 have unanimously ascribed, on the basis of stylistic criteria, another jewel of Greek art: the much praised tetradrachms of Naxos (fig. 3),15 showing the head of Dionysus on the obverse, and a drunk and ithyphallic Silenus on the reverse, all struck with the same pair of dies. Naxos, on the eastern coast of Sicily in the vicinity of modern Taormina, is not only very close to Aitna but also, both coinages arc contemporary (ca. 460 BCE) and depict Silenus - hence the name used for a time by Rizzo, "il maestro del silcno,"16 which joined the already known appellation, Aitna 46 F. de Callatay: Aitna Master Master.1' However, scholars have failed to add other convincing cases to this minimal corpus. Erich Boehringer noted stylistic parallels between the Aitna tetradrachm and the Syracusan decadrachms, the so-called Demareteia, but his proposal was refuted by Rizzo; and the suggestion, made by Charles Seltman, that a rare issue of tetradrachms of Catana should also he attributed to the Aitna Master failed to receive any real support.18 We arc thus left with only two pairs of dies for tetracrachms and some more for fractions (see below) attributable to the Aitna Master, an unlikely situation for an artist of his caliber. To com- plicate matters further, we must also ask: Was the Aitna Master only the artist who conceived the types, or was he, in addition, the engraver who actually cut the dies? It is often assumed in numismatic Literature that the same hand was responsible for both the designing and the engraving. Again, this is in keeping with practices in most modern states, according to which famous artists are asked to submit design proposals, including three-dimensional versions (cither dies or, more commonly, large-scale plaster models). But there is no reason to assume that this was the rule in ancient times. Conversely, is it conceivable that such a weighty responsi- bility as the design of a city's or kingdom's coin would have been left to skilled but uninspired artisans?19 The Aitna Master The following is an attempt to go further along the way with the Aitna Master. I shall restrict the comparison to the two pairs of dies for tetradrachms produced for Aitna and Naxos. Both display images of Silenus - on the obverse for Aitna and on the reverse for Naxos. And on both we find curved beards (see also below), as well as a particular emphasis on muscular bodies (fig. 4). But our conviction should be based on more than just a general feeling supported by a closeness of types. Two characteristics deserve special attention. First, in both cases, the beard on the obverse is not stopped by the circle of border dots. This is apparent on the many Naxian tetradrachms, as well as on the many corresponding drachms (fig. 5).20 As for the Aitna tetradrachm, on the only surviving exemplar the lip of the beard is not visible, since the coin was struck off-flan. However, we are fortunate enough to have small silver litrae of both Aitna and Catana (fig. 6),21 which also feature the head of Silenus, and on which the tip of the beard clearly extends beyond the circle of border dots. The dies of all these issues are likely to have been produced by the Aitna Master himself. This feature is noteworthy even if not strictly unicjue. A clear interruption of the border dots also occurs on some tetradrachm dies from Leontinoi (fig. 7).22 Here, the laurel wreath of Apollo breaks the circle on the obverse. These tetradrachms, too, have been dated to roughly the same period as the Aitna and Naxian tetradrachms. Fig. 4 Details of the Aitna (left) and Naxian (right) tetradrachms showing emphasized musculature Fig. 5 Drachm of Naxos, ca. 460 BCE, obverse and reverse Fig. 6 Silver litra of Catana. ca. 460 BCE, obverse and reverse 1MSA 3 - 2004: 43-52 47 Fig. 7 Tettadrachm of Leontinoi, ca. 450 BCE, obverse and detail A second special feature of the Aitna and Naxian tetradrachms is the truncation of the neck (fig. 8). Instead of a straight or slightly curved cut, as found on all other contemporary coins, we have here a more sophisticated line of truncation. These two features attest to the audacity and self-confidence of the Aitna Master, who did not hesitate to break with the artistic conventions of his time. The conjunction of these two remarkable devices points firmly to a single artist, responsible for the design of the types. But was he also responsible for the engraving? Dotted borders The way the dotted borders were engraved is certainly worthy of examination (fig. 9). The tetradrachm of Aitna is particularly instruc- tive, for on it we note a perfectly circular line (traced with a compass) visible below the dots. This line is interrupted above the head of Silenus, where it starts and finishes. Moreover, the dots are not too close to one another. These characteristics are also found on the tetradrachms of Naxos, but arc not shared by other issues, such as most of the coins of Messana and the coins of Syracuse, on which the dots are closer, concealing the circular line. Beards and hair The general similarity of the beards on the Aitna and Naxian tetradrachms is striking enough. But closer examination, beyond the general contours or movement of the beards, reveals a technical feature easily overlooked: the lines representing the hairs of the beard are often divided in two, particularly at their ends (like real split ends), creating a pattern of small transversal or diagonal lines (fig. 10). This is quite rare. It appears on some obverses used in Catana, but not before 455 BCE (fig. II).23 Another characteristic of the Naxian tetradrachm is the way the hair of Dionysus has been pulled back in a chignon. This device, absent on the Aitna coin, may also be seen on some dies of Catana and Syracuse (fig. 12).24 However, observed in several mints of the Eastern Sicilian coast at around the same time (ca. 460 BCE), this highly recognizable device is more likely to reflect an iconographical mode than a technical singularity that might reveal the personality of a particular engraver. The eye of the Aitna Silenus (fig. 13, left) is formed by two curved lines, representing the eyelids. The edge of the iris is shown by two curved vertical lines, whereas the pupil is noted by a dot. The eyebrow is rather thick. This differs from the eye of the Naxian Dionysos (fig. 13, center and right),25 which is less elaborated, being without an indication of iris or pupil, as exemplified by the two specimens in Brussels. As small as they are on coins, eyes could be engraved in many ways. A good example of this arc the Syracusan dies bearing the name of the renowed artist Kimon, who used the same style for both front (tetradrachms) and profile (decadrachms) representations (fig. 14). Thus it would seem that the difference between the eyes on the Aitna and Naxian tetradrachms points to different engravers for each of the types. 48 F. dc Callatay: Aitna Master Fig. 8 Truncation of neck: Aitna (left) and Naxos (right) Fig. 9 Dotted border: Aitna (left) and Naxos (right) Fig. 10 Striation of beards: Aitna (left) and Naxos (right) Fig. 12 Chignons: Naxos (left), Catana, ca. 450-425 BCE (center), and Syracuse, ca. 474-450 BCE (right) Fig. 13 Eyes: Aitna (left) and two Naxian tetradrachms (center and right) Fig. 14 Details of a tetradrachm, ca. 412-400 BCE (left; Kraay and Hirmer 1966: 122), and a decadrachm, ca. 405 BCE (right; Kraay and Hirmer 1966: 118), of Syracuse by Kimon Fig. 15 Lettering: Aitna (above) and Naxos (below) 50 F. dc Calktay: Aitna Master I .ftUTS An interesting and so far unexplored technical aspect of ancient Greek coins is hovv the letters of the legend were built or engraved.26 Dotted extremities, so common in the Hellenistic period, are rarely seen in the fifth century BCE. Nonetheless, the Aitna tetradrachm, along with the Demareteia of Syracuse, are exceptions, with, at least, a clearly dotted last letter (»«). But there is no trace of such dotted letters for Naxos (fig. 15). Conclusion The various details examined here are not conclusive. There is indeed evidence that the same engraver made both the Aitna and the Naxian dies (dotted borders, beards); but how are we to account for the differences between such basic details as the shape of the eyes and the letters? It is likely that a single artist, called the "Aitna Master" by modern scholars, designed two of the most spectacular monetary types in Sicily in the mid-fifth century BCE. But as it is less certain that the two pairs of dies from which the coins were struck were cut by the same engraver, it cannot be taken for granted that the individual responsible for designing the type was the engraver as well. * Photos: © Royal Library of Belgium, Brussels, by Y. Landrail) (except for figs. 2 and 14). 1 Brussels, Royal Library of'Belgium, Collection Lucien de Hirsch 269. The coin was on display at the Israel Museum from May to December 2004 in the exhibition The Coin of Coins: A World Premiere. For a description of the coin and its history, see Callatay and Gitler 2004. 2 C. Scltman (1936,131-34) was the first to use the nickname "Aitna Master." 3 Carter 1983. 4 On the 29 tetradrachms of that issue found in rhe Randazzo Hoard 1980 (nos. 48-76), we may dis- tinguish eight obverses and 10 reverses; see Arnold- Biucchi 1990,22 and 51-53. ' Study to appear by C. Boehringer. On the 14 terradrachms of that issue found in the Randazzo Hoard 1980 (nos. 77-90), we may distinguish nine obverses and 11 reverses; see Arnold-Biucchi 1990, 24 and 53-54. 6 Hofloway 1987,14. 7 According to the adapted chronology proposed by Arnold-Biucchi (1990, 47), the Syracusan Group I II (rhe "massive coinage") was issued in ca. 485- 470 BCE and not in ca. 485-478 BCE as believed by Boehringer. Consequently, it looks twice less "massive" than it was thought to be before. 8 Without the obols, which have been excluded from this count. 9 Sec recently Bouyon 1998, 56; "Ma profession de graveur a la Monnaie de Paris me permet d'estimer le temps passe1 a la creation et ['execution de 1'ensemble du prototype qui servira de modele pour la fabrication des coins de scrie. La technique principale est 1'utilisation du poincon a la main; e'est une realisation difficile. Environ soixante cinq heures (65 hours) de travail ont ete necessaires, en tenant compte des aleas dus au materiel employe a cette epoque." ,0 Callatay 1997, 11-12 and 40. For the months of May and June 89 BCE, which immediately precede the beginning of the First Mithridatic War, we do have 50 tetradrachms struck with eight obverse dies (042-049) and 21 reverse dies. As made clear on plates IV and V, all these dies were made by the same hand. No less than five obverse dies were used inJuly75BCE. 11 See Bompaire and Dumas 2000, 502. 12 Hill 1924,47-48. lj See Marinescu (forthcoming) on the coinage in the name of Lysimachus struck in Byzantium and the Propontic area. 14 Rizzo 1938, 29 and 60-65. Brussels, Royal Library of Belgium, Collection Albericdu Chaste] 43. 16 Rizzo 1938,60-65. 17 Seltman 1936,131-34, 18 Boehringer 1929, 41; Rizzo 1938, 29; Seltman 1952,16-17. 191 am very grateful to Raf Van I .aere who, following a lecture given last year at the Royal Belgian Society of Numismatics, called my attention to this possi- bility. 20 Brussels, Royal Library of Belgium, Collection Lucien de Hirsch 510. IMSA 3 • 2004: 43-52 51 Leu, Si, 16 May 2001, 60. Brussels, Royal Libr ary of Belgium, Collection Lucien de Hirsch 441. Brussels, Royal Library of Belgium, Collection Lucien de Hirsch 335; Arnold-Biucchi 1990, 24. Catana: Brussels, Royal Library of Belgium, Collection Alberic rfu ChasteE 28; Syracuse: Brussels, Royal Library of Belgium, Collection Lucien de Hirsch 570. The inventory number of the second Naxiai] terradrachm in Brussels (fig. 13, right): Royal Library- of Belgium, Collection Lucien dc Hirsch 508- A study is currently in preparation on that issue by the author. Bibliography A rnold-Bmcchi, C. 1990 The Randazzo Hoard 1980 and The Sicilian Chronology in the Early Fifth Century B.C. Numismatic Studies IS. New York. Ashmole, B. 1934 Late Archaic and Early Classical Greek Sculpture in Sicily and South Italy. Proceedings of British Academy 20: 91—125, Bochringer, C. 1968 Hieron's Aitna und das Hieroneion. Jabrbucb furNutnismatik und (.icldgcscbickte 18: o7 9S. 1998 Zur Miinzgesehiebte yon I jeontinoi in klas- siseher Zcit. In Studies in Greek Numistfutiks m Memory of Martin Je.ssop Price, ed- R. Ashton and S. Hurter> 43-53- London. Bochringer, E. 1929 DieMitnzen von Syrdkus. Berlin-Leipzig. Bompaire, M., and Dumas, V. 2000 Nwinkmatique •nsdievuk: Mannaies et document.*; d'vrtvhte franyoise. rurnhout. Bouyott, B. 1998 Etudes de gravurc monetaire: De. Vlt-aliegreajite arehetique a /'Europe dti 17hl such. Moncra 12. Wcttcrcn. Callatay, F. de 199? L'histoire des guerres miihridatiques vug par ks mennaies. \ ,cniv;iiri-l:i-Neiive_ .?0i!3 Return'/ quaiitifntifdes emissions mem?{aires arcbatcjues etclimiques. Wetteren. Callatay, F. de, and Gitler, H. 2004 The Coin of Coins: A World Premiere. Jerusalem Carter, G. F. 1983 A Simplified Method for Calculating the Original Number of Dies from Die Link Statistics. American Numismatic Society. Museum Notes 28: 195-206. Hill, G.F. 1924 Becker: The Counterfeiter. London. Ilolloway, R.R. 1987 The Coinage Production of the Sicilian Greek M ints of the Sixth and Fifth Centuries B.C. In Rythrmsde la production monc'taire de VAntiquitia nos jours, ed. G. Dcpcvrot, T. Haekens, and Gh. Moucharte, 11-20. Louvain-la-Ncuve. Kraay, C. M., and Hirmer,M. 1966 Greek Coins. London. Marinescn, C. A. For the timing Making and Spending Mone\ dto/i^ !>><■ BasJroTiis: The Eysimachi Coinages Minted by Byzantium and CbaJcedon. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. RizKO, G. E. 1938 Sagjri prelrminari su t'<irie delta monsta mils Sici/ia greca r Rome. Seltman, C. 1936 Greek Coins: A History of Metallic Currency and Coinage down to the Fad of the Hellenistic Kingdoms. London. 1952 A Book of Greek Coins. London. Tudeer,L. O.T. 1913 Dis Tetrtidratfmt.rtipriijpirig Nv-1 in d.-r Periods da ii»nicrende.n Kim^t/cn Berlin. S2 F. de Callatay: Aitna Master