IMP. CAES. LVCIO. SEPTIMIO. M. FIL. SEVE­RO...

IMP. CAES. LVCIO. SEPTIMIO. M. FIL. SEVE­RO. PIO. PERTINACI. AVG. PATRI. PATRIAE. PARTHICO. ARABICO. ET. / PARTHICO. ADI­ABENICO. PONTIF. MAXIMO. TRIBVNIC. POTEST. XI IMP. XI. COS. III. PROCOS. ET. / IMP. CAES. M. AVRELIO. L. FIL. ANTONINO. AVG. PIO. FELICI. TRIBVNIC. POTEST. VI. COS. PROCOS. P. P. OPTIMIS. FORTISSIMIS. QVE. PRINCIPIBVS. / OB REM PVBLICAM RESTITVTAM IMPERIVM QVE POPVLI RO­MANI PROPAGATVM / INSIGNIBVS VIRT­VTIBVS EORVM DOMI FORIS QVE S P Q R.

Engraving, 1547, signed and dated lower right: ANT[ONIVS] LAFRERI / SEQVANVS EXCVD[EBAT] ROMAE / ∞ - D - XL - VII.

Example in the first state of three described by Rubach, first of two for Alberti, before Pietro de Nobili's address.

According to Huelsen this is a copy of an earlier print published by Antonio Salamanca.

Magnificent proof, printed on contemporary laid paper without watermark, trimmed to copperplate, with contemporary margins added at bottom and top, traces of vertical paper crease in right side, otherwise in excellent condition.

“The imposing three-arched Arch of Septimius Severus dates from AD 203, as can be seen from the inscription. Made of travertine and brick, the arch is covered with marble and adorned with four composite columns. Originally on the attic of the monument stood a bronze quadriga and statuary groups, also in bronze. In the sixteenth century it was partly buried, as handed down by Sebastiano Serlio: “This arch at the present time is buried up to the top of the pedestals, but a part was hollowed out to measure it, ne however the base of the pedestal could be measured, for being buried among many ruins difficult to move” This being so, Serlio cannot have provided exact measurements for this as for the other ancient arches that were in the same condition. It should be noted that Lafréry was among the first to edit the Arch of Septimius Severus a few days after the lower part of the monument had been cleared, but he was uninterested in the measurements” (translation from C. Marigliani, Lo splendore di Roma nell’Arte incisoria del Cinquecento).

The work belongs to the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, the earliest iconography of ancient Rome.

The Speculum originated in the publishing activities of Antonio Salamanca and Antonio Lafreri (Lafrery). During their Roman publishing careers, the two editors-who worked together between 1553 and 1563-started the production of prints of architecture, statuary, and city views related to ancient and modern Rome. The prints could be purchased individually by tourists and collectors, but they were also purchased in larger groups that were often bound together in an album. In 1573, Lafreri commissioned a frontispiece for this purpose, where the title Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae appears for the first time. Upon Lafreri's death, two-thirds of the existing copperplates went to the Duchetti family (Claudio and Stefano), while another third was distributed among several publishers. Claudio Duchetti continued the publishing activity, implementing the Speculum plates with copies of those "lost" in the hereditary division, which he had engraved by the Milanese Amborgio Brambilla. Upon Claudio's death (1585) the plates were sold - after a brief period of publication by the heirs, particularly in the figure of Giacomo Gherardi - to Giovanni Orlandi, who in 1614 sold his printing house to the Flemish publisher Hendrick van Schoel. Stefano Duchetti, on the other hand, sold his own plates to the publisher Paolo Graziani, who partnered with Pietro de Nobili; the stock flowed into the De Rossi typography passing through the hands of publishers such as Marcello Clodio, Claudio Arbotti and Giovan Battista de Cavalleris. The remaining third of plates in the Lafreri division was divided and split among different publishers, some of them French: curious to see how some plates were reprinted in Paris by Francois Jollain in the mid-17th century. Different way had some plates printed by Antonio Salamanca in his early period; through his son Francesco, they goes to Nicolas van Aelst's. Other editors who contributed to the Speculum were the brothers Michele and Francesco Tramezzino (authors of numerous plates that flowed in part to the Lafreri printing house), Tommaso Barlacchi, and Mario Cartaro, who was the executor of Lafreri's will, and printed some derivative plates. All the best engravers of the time - such as Nicola Beatrizet (Beatricetto), Enea Vico, Etienne Duperac, Ambrogio Brambilla, and others  - were called to Rome and employed for the intaglio of the works.

All these publishers-engravers and merchants-the proliferation of intaglio workshops and artisans helped to create the myth of the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, the oldest and most important iconography of Rome. The first scholar to attempt to systematically analyze the print production of 16th-century Roman printers was Christian Hülsen, with his Das Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae des Antonio Lafreri of 1921. In more recent times, very important have been the studies of Peter Parshall (2006) Alessia Alberti (2010), Birte Rubach and Clemente Marigliani (2016). 

Bibliografia

C. Hülsen, Das Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae des Antonio Lafreri (1921), n. 13/a; B. Rubach, Ant. Lafreri Formis Romae (2016), n. 270, I/III; A. Alberti, L’indice di Antonio Lafrery (2010), n. 44, I/II; Marigliani, Lo splendore di Roma nell’Arte incisoria del Cinquecento (2016), n. III.7; S. Serlio (1562), p. 106.