Illvstrivm Imagines
Rome: Apud Iacobum Mazochium Roman[a]e Achademiae bibliopo., 15 November, 1517.
Price: $11,500.00
Octavo: 16.2 x 11.3 cm. CXX lvs. Collation: A4, BB4, C-Z4, AA-GG4
FIRST EDITION.
Bound in early 20th c. brown morocco (wear at extremities, small abrasion on spine), gilt turn-ins, marbled endpapers. Internally a nice copy, lightly washed, bound a bit tight, light soiling to title, verso of final leaf a little dusty. Illustrated with 204 medallion portraits (white on black) within elaborate architectural borders adorned with acanthus leaves, flowers, gryphons, and cherubs holding cornucopiae; there are at least 10 distinct woodcut borders that are repeated. Mazzocchi’s printer's device appears on the final leaf (Zappella 403). Provenance: Bibliotheca Sant’Angeli, Cremona (early stamp on leaf A3). Cortlandt Bishop (leather book label on front pastedown).
FIRST EDITION of “the first published book to present systematically material remains of Antiquity”(Madigan). Printed by Jacopo Mazzocchi (active 1506-1527), with text attributed to Andrea Fulvio -both prominent Renaissance antiquarians. The woodcuts are possibly the work of Ugo da Carpi (1480-1532) or Giovanni Palumba (active ca. 1500-1520). The dedication, written by Mazzocchi, is addressed to the papal secretary and noted humanist Jacopo Sadoleto (1477-1547). The printing privilege (dated 30 Nov. 1517) granted to Mazzocchi by Pope Leo X (1475-1521) is printed on leaf A2r.
The full title, on final leaf of text, explicitly refers to Fulvio’s participation in the project: “per diuersos doctissimos viros: sed pro maiori parte per Andream Fuluium diligentissimum Antiquarium aquo emendatu[m] correptumq[ue], est totum opus.” The colophon refers to Mazzocchi’s role as publisher for the Roman Academy: “Roman[a]e Achademiæ Bibliopo[lam].”
“Andrea Fulvio’s Illustrium imagines (1517) was recognized repeatedly in the sixteenth century as the first published book to present systematically material remains of Antiquity, in this case in the form of coins, predominantly Roman… The zeal to collect and understand the fragmentary remains of Classical Antiquity is one of the defining features of the Renaissance, and forms a foundational element in the development of all later disciplines (archaeology, art history) which concern themselves with the historical significance of material culture. The first publication to focus on a genre of that material culture is therefore a central document for assessing the state of the enterprise to understand the past through its material remains. The relationship of the work of antiquarians to the development of historical studies in the Renaissance have been broadly laid out. But it still remains to determine what specific knowledge about the past (both the textual history and the material history) they brought to the enterprise of understanding Antiquity, and perhaps more importantly, what methodology they constructed for examining objects. Arguably Andrea Fulvio’s ‘Illustrium imagines’ can lay claim to the position of the first published text to focus on material culture, having been published in Rome in 1517 by Jacobo Mazzocchi.
“Fulvio was known to his contemporaries as one of the leading authorities in the study of Rome’s physical remains. He collaborated with the painter Raphael on a project, under papal patronage, to produce a reconstruction of the entirety of the ancient city of Rome. Although the death of Raphael brought that plan to naught, the knowledge he acquired of the ancient city was put to good use in his study of the topography of ancient Rome, ‘Antiquitates urbis’, appearing in 1527 and subsequently republished in Italian translation. Fulvio also had his hand in epigraphical studies of Rome. His publisher, Mazzocchi, produced the first publication of the inscriptions of the city, ‘Epigrammata antiquae urbis’, in 1517, with a corrected edition in 1521.
“The attribution of the ‘imagines’ to Fulvio is itself a problem, as no author’s name appeared on the title page. Fulvio was named in the book’s colophon, supporting the modern scholarly assessment that while the work was in some respects a collaboration between Fulvio and Mazzocchi, the weight of the intellectual labor must have fallen to the former. In later printings the colophon was modified to emphasize Fulvio’s contributions. Fortunately, there is the authority of Agustín, who, at the end of a century that saw an enormous production of texts on numismatics and epigraphy, as well as antiquities generally, would still see fit to acknowledge the primacy of Fulvio’s ‘imagines’ among numismatic studies. His view was corroborated by the antiquarian Antoine Le Pois. That said, an accurate description of Fulvio’s text requires some greater precision to understand its importance for the study of material culture…
“In the dedication to the book, Mazzocchi asserted the value of the coins from which the images are taken, but gave no further indication of the source(s) of the coins represented, that is, what collection or collections he and Fulvio had access to… To appreciate the task before Fulvio in constructing a history of the Roman state through its coins, the circumstances under which he could have compiled both the knowledge and the examples need to be considered as well. As Fulvio had a small collection of inscriptions, he likely also possessed some coins gathered in his constant inspection of the ruins of the city. But the scale of the book project would require him to have gained access to the large collections of the elite…
“It is usually conceded that Fulvio’s collection of illustrious individuals of the Roman Republic and Empire necessarily employed a good number of imaginary portraits. Unlike the earlier histories with illustrations of important figures, ‘Illustrium imagines’ generally presented coin images that are at least plausible as Roman coins, roughly based upon the style of male and female figures that do appear on such coins. Which specific images in Fulvio reflect real coins, and in what measure has never been systematically established. The evidence to determine this is the correspondence of two elements of the represented coins to actual Roman coins: the portrait renderings themselves, and the coin legends that are the essential element in identifying those individuals represented.
“The collections on which Fulvio drew for his examples of Roman coins were nowhere indicated. However in the ‘Antiquitates urbis’ Fulvio did make reference to the rich coin collection of Andrea della Valle; that presumably was one to which he had access. There is also some evidence that Fulvio had access to a coin collection that by the nineteenth century was in the hands of the Borghesi family. Agustín reported that most of the coins used by Fulvio were silver, with some bronze, but beyond that no information about them is preserved. The illustrator of Fulvio’s book played a critical role in the accuracy of the rendering of the coins, including their legends. His name was not given, though Ugo da Carpi and more recently, and extensively argued, Giovanni Palumba have been identified as the visual artist in question. He presumably received information about the original coins he rendered through Fulvio, either with direct access to the selected coins, or through an intermediary like drawings, rubbings, impressions or casts. As there are few clearly identifiable typographical errors in the coin legends, this suggests that Fulvio was diligent that the texts and presumably the images were as he wanted them.
“The coin legends, while vital in identifying both the standard of accuracy attained in the book and determining which real Roman coins were used as models, themselves required a sophisticated level of analysis by Fulvio. But they posed special problems for antiquarians wishing to understand them. The names used for emperors in the legends often do not correspond as a simple equation to the more common names for emperors that appear in the primary texts upon which he (or any other antiquarian) would have been able to draw. Further, the coin legends make extensive use of abbreviations, with which Fulvio would need to have gained a fluency in order to understand what he was looking at. The full comprehension of the legends was necessary to extract the historical information from the coins that went beyond what the primary sources could provide. That mastery of such abbreviations was by this time within the grasp of Fulvio and his collaborators is demonstrated by the list of Latin abbreviations for understanding ancient inscriptions, derived from the Roman grammarian Valerius Probus, that was inserted by Mazzocchi at the beginning of their ‘Epigrammata antiquae urbis’, and which Fulvio presumably would have had a hand in compiling…
“As the first book to present the visual evidence of a corpus of ancient objects, the ‘Illustrium imagines’ would have opened entirely new possibilities, probably unforeseen, for the intellectual engagement with objects… But the book’s material and its arrangement gave considerable leeway to the role of the reader in determining the information extracted from the text. Except that the entries are arranged roughly chronologically (with concessions to genealogy), the book is not a history in a restricted, narrative sense. Each pairing of image and epitaph is consumable in isolation, or with recourse to several others adjacent; but there is little to compel the user to read through the text on a continuum. The reader is free to select from the text according to impulses external to it.
“The book’s organization and design reflect its intended audience and defined in part how it was used and came to be regarded over the course of the sixteenth century. Fulvio’s personal preparation for producing the book, his associations within the humanistic circles of Rome, and his access to the needed specimens of ancient coins together provide a basis for considering the choices made and the methods employed in arriving at the substance of the book. Many of the identifications, correct or mistaken, that appear in the text were surely well established by the time of its publication. Others are likely to reflect Fulvio’s own thinking, as effected by his interests in the subject matter and inclinations with respect to working method.”(Madigan, “Andrea Fulvio’s ‘Illustrium imagines’ and the Beginnings of Classical Archaeology” (Brill, October 2022).
Ascarelli, Annali tipografici di Giacomo Mazzocchi, no. 116; Ascarelli, Cinquecentine romane, p. 110; Panzer 8, p. 259, No. 121; Brunet, Manuel du libraire, II, 1423; EDIT 16 CNCE 19989; Graesse, Trésor de livres rares et précieux, II, 646; Sander, Livre à figures italien, 2978; Catalogo ragionato dei libri d'arte e d'antichità posseduti dal conte Cicognara, 2851; Adams F-1156; Mortimer, Harvard College Library. Catalogue of books and manuscripts. Italian 16th century books, no. 203