Posted on by

The Gold Aureus of Diocletian

Revolutionary, formidable and feared, Diocletian is without a doubt one of the most important rulers in the history of the Roman Empire. After decades of turmoil across the Roman world during what is now known as the Crisis of the Third Century, Diocletian rose to prominence after the murder of Numerian. He would rule from AD 284 until 305. His reign was characterized by the creation of what is now known as the ‘Dominate’. This institution essentially lifted the emperor to a god among men – with the emperor donning robes and regalia more befitting of an eastern king than a Roman Emperor, and only accepting visits from a select few individuals.

Diocletian did, however, share his power. He needed a method of smoothing out the nightmarish scenario which had plagued the 3rd Century AD – succession. Time and again a leading military commander had been declared emperor by his troops (Diocletian was no exception), and rose to victory over the current emperor. He would, more often than not, meet his demise under similar circumstances, after a short reign.

The Tetrarchy was conceived as a way to avoid this. The empire would be split in two – east and west. Both would be ruled by an emperor, an ‘Augustus’, as well as a junior emperor, known as a ‘Caesar’. The Caesar’s role was to learn from his Augustus, ready to fill his shoes. The Tetrarchy worked smoothly at first, with Diocletian and his co-emperor in the west, Maximian, abdicating in AD 305 – the first emperors to do so. Their Caesars, Galerius and Constantius Chlorus, stepped up as Augusti. The system was, eventually, doomed to failure with the rise of the Emperor Constantine, but the principle was, in theory, sound.

Silver Argenteus of Diocletian, minted in Ticinum, AD 295. Note the four emperors or ‘Tetrarchs’ standing in front of a Roman camp on the reverse. Diocletian, Silver Argenteus | Baldwin’s

Another of Diocletian’s many reforms was that of the Roman Empire’s currency. For years, the purity of Rome’s silver coinage had been reduced and reduced until, by the time of Gallienus (AD 253-268) it contained barely any precious metal at all. Attempts had been made by the renowned Emperor Aurelian to restore the coinage, but the people of Rome still had no high-grade silver coins in their pockets, as their ancestors had before them. With Diocletian’s reforms, this would change. Diocletian set an edict on the maximum prices goods could be sold for, with severe punishments for those who broke the rules. He revalued the currency, creating a new silver coin: the Argenteus, and he increased the weight of the gold aureus. Diocletian also introduced a new, large, billon coin: the follis. These were, however, issued in far too great numbers in relation to the silver – affecting the reforms and limiting their success.

Diocletian’s portrait on this gold aureus, minted in AD 290, appears less accurate to life than the coinage of emperors before him. It is a distinct move towards the more symbolic portraiture of the 4th Century AD.

This gold aureus was minted in the eastern city of Cyzicus, in AD 290. The style in which it depicts the emperor is a product of the shifting appearance of artistry we begin to see in this period. There is a distinctive move away from the ‘warts and all’ styles of the soldier emperors before him. This move towards a more symbolic ‘emperor figure’ would become much more apparent into the 4th Century AD. The short inscription; Diocletianus Augustus, leaves us no doubt as to the emperor depicted.

The reverse depicts the Emperor Diocletian in his Consular robes, holding a globe and dagger, and celebrates his fourth year of the role.

On the reverse, we can see the emperor for a second time. Despite donning elaborate, richly adorned clothing in real life, on this coin he can be seen in the more traditional attire of a Roman statesman – a toga. He holds a globe, reflecting his position as a supreme ruler, and a parazonium – a large ceremonial dagger, and a symbol of the emperor’s virtuous nature, and his respect for the military from which he came. The coin itself celebrates Diocletian’s fourth year as Consul – the joint highest-ranking position in the Roman Senate, and a title held by the majority of Roman Emperors. Some have suggested the ‘PP Pro Cos’ refers to the Processus Consularis, an event traditionally held by the Consul on his accession to political office. Some have suggested that this gold aureus may have been given as a donative to guests of the auspicious occasion.

A 19th Century engraving depicting the façade of Diocletian’s Palace in Split, Croatia.
A 19th Century engraving depicting the façade of Diocletian’s Palace in Split, Croatia.

As mentioned earlier, Diocletian is remarkable in being the first Roman Emperor to abdicate voluntarily. In AD 305, satisfied with his sweeping reforms and relative peace and security after the decades of turmoil, he famously retired to his private palace on the Dalmatian coast (near modern-day Split, in Croatia) to tend to his cabbages.

Coin Information

  • Ruler:                   Diocletian (AD 284-305)
  • Denom.:              Aureus
  • Obverse:             DIOCLETIANVS AVGVSTVS, laureate head of Diocletian facing right.
  • Reverse:              CONSVL IIII P P PROCOS, Diocletian standing left, togate, holding parazonium and globe.
  • Metal:                  Gold
  • Mint:                    Cyzicus
  • Weight:                5.26g
  • Reference:          RIC 285

Find out more about Ancient Roman Coins.

Posted on by

To slab or not to slab, that is the question.

A William Shakespeare 2016 coin representing a Slabbed coin with text reading 'To Slab or Not To Slab'

Our friends across the pond have been slabbing items for years, from Topps rookie cards for Mickey Mantle and Michael Jordan to limited edition sweet wrappers and unopened Pokemon packs. In the world of rare coins, it is still quite a new practice -especially when you consider the age of the artefact- and not one that has been readily adopted worldwide.  

Is there a reason for this? Is there a correct answer to our opening gambit? We spoke to members of the AH Baldwin specialist coin team to get their take… 

“Typically, I am against slabbing, the coin is encased in plastic, it is less easy to store and the coin in many instances just becomes a number. Generally British collectors like to be able to hold the coin in their hand. In certain areas slabbing is also very inconsistent, especially so with hammered coins. I have seen many VF hammered gold and silver coins given a Mint State rating and this is because it is American graders who just don’t have enough experience with British coins, after all the American series is much shorter and they don’t really encounter hammered coins. In recent years a very rare James I Ship Ryal was slabbed as MS61 making it one of the finest available for commerce, the grader had not noticed that the coin had been pierced and plugged and as such was damaged. As a result, the coin sold for a very large sum at auction!!” 

NEIL PAISLEY – AH BALDWINS MANAGING DIRECTOR 

“I wouldn’t collect coins in slabs but recognise that in some cases it is essential. I prefer to hold the coin itself.” 

JEREMY CHEEK – NUMISMATIC CONSULTANT

“The trade can become more of a numbers game, with people focusing more on the grade than the actual coin inside”  – Dominic Chorney

“Slabbing by its nature is ambiguous filled with disjunctions. It is an inconsistent way of leapfrogging coins into a tangible commodity and asset. The main issue with slabbing is the inconsistent grades awarded to coins, the lack of a tailored made approach to different types and numismatic era’s, and the lack of evolution of the Sheldon scale, which is where it began. It is simultaneously integral to the modern coin market. Positives and negatives, in ten years’ time most coins will be slabbed from the outset before appearing in online stock or in an auction itinerary. Many collectors prefer slabbed coins, several dealers also have a predilection to securing a slabbed graded coin as a) the market demands it b) authenticity is guaranteed c) the universal language of the grade helps make the coins more appealing to a worldwide audience. A very international mechanism with a strong following.” 

CHRIS TYRIMOS – BRITISH NUMISMATIST 

“I have no problem with slabbing coins. They can simply provide a level of protection. Proof quality coins can be easily damaged, and encapsuled coins are protected from this. In terms of ancient coins, however, collectors often like to handle their coins (carefully), and are inspired by the history around them. Encapsulating a two-thousand-year-old piece of history in plastic can upset some collectors. However, this can easily be reverse by breaking open the slab (carefully). Capsules and grading also turn collectable coins into more of an investment commodity. They can be bought and sold by almost anybody, regardless of their level of knowledge of the subject. The trade can become more of a ‘numbers game’, with people focusing more on the slab grade than the actual coin inside. This being said, I have no problem with graded coins or raw coins, and I’d be lying if I didn’t say I often feel more comfortable handling a coin in a slab, purely because I know I’m not going to accidentally damage it.” 

DOMINIC CHORNEY – ANCIENT COIN SPECIALIST 

“I’m not against third party coin grading. It can be a good way for an unbiased evaluation of the coin condition. However, we do have 2,000+ years of coin history and slabbing is not appropriate for all of them. For me, the ancient coins cannot be graded the same way we grade modern coins, they require a more individual approach.” 

EMA SIKIC – BALDWINS SALES EXECUTIVE 

So, there you have it, the Baldwin’s team are not necessarily against slabbing but probably wouldn’t do it with items from their own collection or recommend it to collectors with particularly rare coins. At the end of the day, they are a tangible bunch who like to be able to feel the coin and value it with hand and eye unobscured by plastic casing. 

We’d love to know what side of the debate you stand on, did you agree with our experts? Vote in our online poll and let us know… 

Cast your vote

Further Information on this subject

Posted on by

Italian noble families on coins – Part 1

In this blog series, we will explore the most famous Italian noble families of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and their coins. We will look at how did they rose to power, what are their heraldic symbols and some of the coins we have in our collection. In this part we will be looking at Visconti and Sforza families, as well as Este family that had connections to many European ruling houses.

Visconti of Milan

The Visconti were the most powerful family in Milan until the early Renaissance period. Their rise to power started in the late 11th century with Ottone Visconti who is said to have had a close relationship with the Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV. The founder of the Visconti lordship of Milan was the archbishop named Ottone as well, who took control of the city from the rival Della Torre family in 1277 AD, establishing Visconti power. They ruled Milan from 1277 to 1447 AD, initially as Lords and later as Dukes, from 1395 AD, when Gian Galeazzo Visconti sought to expand his interests in Northern Italy and Tuscany.

The Visconti coat of arms quite memorable in heraldry and adorns the historical buildings all around Milan. It depicts the so-called biscione, an animal variously interpreted as grass snake, viper or basilisk devouring a human, a male youth. The biscione remained associated with the Duchy of Milan even after the Visconti main line ceased to exist.

Coat of arms of the Visconti

Visconti rule in Milan ended with the death of Filippo Maria Visconti in 1447 AD. His daughter Bianca Maria married into the Sforza family, so he was succeeded by his son-in-law Francesco I Sforza, who established the rule of the Sforza dynasty in Milan.

A silver Grosso of Filippo Maria Visconti, the last Visconti ruler of Milan

Sforza of Milan

As the heirs of Visconti, Sforza family came to power in Milan in 1447 AD and ruled the Duchy of Milan until 1535 AD, when the last member of the main branch died. The Sforza coat of arms incorporated the Visconti biscione and an Imperial eagle. They also ruled Pesaro, Bari, Cotignola and Caravaggio. The founder of the dynasty was Muzio Attendolo Sforza, who was the father of the first Sforza ruler of Milan, Francesco I Sforza. Through marriage, they sought to align themselves with Borgia family, albeit unsuccessfully since the Borgias were quick to annul the marriage when the need for the alliance ceased. The Sforza court was notable for its patronage of artists, even taking Leonardo Da Vinci into their service. Ludovico Sforza (1494-99 AD) was the famed patron of Leonardo and many other artists,

marking the richest period of the Milanese Renaissance. Ludovico is known as the man who commissioned The Last Supper, one of Da Vinci’s most famous works.

The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci, commissioned by Ludovico Sforza in the Convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan.

One of the most notable members of the family and the most notorious was Galeazzo Maria Sforza (1468-76 AD), the 5th Duke of Milan. He was known as the ruthless tyrant towards his subjects, even ousting his own mother from Milan, which they ruled jointly in his first years as the Duke. He was an abuser and torturer, which ultimately led to his assassination in 1476 AD, when he was executed by three high-ranking officials of his court in St. Stephen’s church, the day after Christmas.

A silver Testone of Galeazzo Maria Sforza, the tyrant ruler of Milan.

Este of Ferrara, Modena and Reggio

Villa d’Este in Tivoli, one of the masterpieces of Renaissance architecture and landscaping.

The family of Este are one of the most prolific noble families, with ties all over Europe. The house of Este is divided in two main branches: the elder branch and the younger branch. The elder branch, known as the Younger House of Welf (Guelph), produced the Dukes of Bavaria, Dukes of Saxony and Dukes of Brunswick – Lüneburg. The latter became styled as the Electors of Hanover and it is from them that the British Hanoverian monarchs were descended.

The younger branch of the house of Este is the Italian side which included rulers of Ferrara, Modena and Reggio. They were descendants of Fulco d’Este and were known as Margraves of Este from the 12th century onwards. The came to lordships of Ferrara, Modena and Reggio in the 13th century, as well as becoming hereditary papal vicars in the 14th century. They were based in the city of Este until 1240 AD, when they made Ferrara their capital. Under their rule, the city blossomed into a cultural centre, renowned for music and prominent patronage of arts.

At the very end of the 16th century, Estensi lost Ferrara. Among the several Dukes of Modena who followed in the 17th century, Francesco I (1629–58 AD) was the most important. He came to the throne during the turbulent period of the Thirty Years’ War and chose alliances that he thought would help him restore Ferrara. He was initially allied to Spain, then to France. He died tragically from malaria, on the battlefield, fighting against the Spaniards. Photo: https://www.baldwin.co.uk/product/italy-modena-francesco-i-deste-1-2-lira-1657/

A silver ½ Lira of Francesco I d’Este, Duke of Modena and Reggio.

Written by Ema Sikic (ema@baldwin.co.uk).

Bibliography

  • Hale, J. R. (1981), A concise encyclopaedia of the Italian Renaissance, Thames & Hudson
Posted on by

The Gold Aureus of Julius Caesar

Gold coins were relatively unusual during this period of Roman history. The monetary system of the Republic was centred around the silver denarius, a small silver coin which was worth around a day’s wage for a Roman soldier. Gold coins were usually only issued during times of emergency. At this time, the gold aureus was believed to have been worth around 25 denarii. Caesar, upon returning to Rome following years of military campaigns across the known world, needed to mint the vast quantities of booty into coins. This was, primarily, to pay his soldiers, who by this point had gone without full pay for years. After the colossal sums promised to his troops, which were reportedly 5000 denarii to each of his legionary soldiers, huge sums of money were required. The quickest way to realise these sums was to strike gold. 

As well as being an essential means of payment, these coins were also a valuable political tool. They were minted to coincide with an enormous triumph through the streets of Rome in Caesar’s honour. This event took place in April of 46 BC and consisted of four days of parades and celebrations, paying tribute to Caesar’s conquests in Gaul, Egypt and Africa. The apparently short space of time in which these coins were produced is reflected in the array of different artistic styles of portrait. The goddess, Vesta, was a favourite of Caesar’s, and it seems appropriate that her portrait would adorn this series of gold coins. Surrounded by Caesar’s name and titles, some have suggested that the goddess is in fact portrayed with some of the dictator’s facial features. Some styles, including this piece, do appear somewhat manlier in nature than others. 

Julius Caesar, Gold Aureus Mint of Rome, early 46 BC – Obverse: Portrait of Vesta facing right. Reverse: Emblems of the Pontificate.

The reverse depicts the emblems of the Pontificate; a lituus, jug and a ceremonial axe. Caesar held the title of Pontifex Maximus, the chief priest of Rome. This was a title held for life, and one he was clearly proud of, as these priestly implements appear on many of his coins.  

This gold aureus is a magnificent reminder of a key period in Roman history, and an excellent opportunity to own the most valuable coin minted by Caesar himself. 

Posted on by

The Second reign Gold Angels of Edward IV (1471-83) : An introduction

Edward IV born on the 28th April 1442 at the port city of Rouen in the northern French region of Normandy, to Richard Duke of York and Cecily Neville. Crowned June 28th 1461 at Westminster Abbey aged just nineteen, wedded to an Elizabeth Woodville. Died 9th April of 1483 aged thirty nine. The first King of the House of York securing his claim to the throne by vanquishing the Lancastrians during the Battle of Towton on the 29th March 1461, often dubbed the bloodiest battle in the Wars of the Roses. This essentially culminated in Edward IV displacing Henry VI, crowned shortly afterwards.

As King he had gained a reputation for being politically savvy, known as an accomplished statesman and equally a capable soldier. The War of the Roses, his dislocated relationship with the Earl of Warwick (Richard Neville – his chief ally, cousin and de facto mentor), Warwick’s defection and the Battle of Barnet, the role of Margaret of Anjou, the push for marriage with Elizabeth Woodville despite her hailing from a family of Lancastrian sympathisers, Henry VI’s murder at the Tower and all the associated intrigue; when blended together are inextricable factors in the field of vision when Edward IV is considered. A tumultuous, mildly progressive and dramatic double reign spanning 1461-70, then reinstated from 1471-83. Equally it was during his reign that Caxton introduced the English printing press, Kent born William Caxton travelled to Germany to witness firsthand the developments of the Gutenberg press; on returning home he pioneered the first printed English book, the ‘Dictes or sayingis of the Philosophres [1477] and the poems of Chaucer.

Numismatically, a rich innovative period especially in the realm of hammered Gold. In his first regnal years we witness the introduction of two new denominations, the Ryal (or Rose Noble) having a value of 10 shillings and the first Angels, struck up carrying the value of six shillings and eight pence, to replace the old Noble which ceased in production by 1464. The initial Angels were somewhat inspired by the French Angelot that had been issued since the mid 14th century, archangel Michael slaying the dragon being the recognized or universal motif of these new coins. They were referred to as Angel-Nobles at first, the ecclesiastical design made them immediately recognisable.

In his second reign, the area of focus here, only the Angel and its half were the sole Gold denominations issued, this paid tribute to the success of both coins, perhaps most importantly the former held up the essential measure of six shillings and eight pence, integral to commerce. They were offered in Tower mint with seven accompanying mint mark combinations or as a Bristol mint, sporting a B in the reverse waves, exclusively to the mintmark small annulet (1472-73), a recognised rarity. None were struck at the Ecclesiastical mints of Durham or York, Tower mint types can be narrowed down to the following mintmarks, short cross fitchee (1471), large annulet (1471-72), pellet in annulet (1473-7), cross and four pellets (1473-77), pierced cross (1473-77), pierced cross and pellet (1477-80) and lastly Heraldic cinquefoil (1480-83).

Gold Angels, with their inception in Edward IV’s first reign continued to be issued right the way up to Charles I’s time, with Nicholas Briot’s pattern Angel being the great rarity known, three in private hands; more common examples presenting at auction or dealers trays as 10 shilling Angels, Royal touchpieces. The journey of the Angel saw a monetary fluctuation from 6s 8d right up to 11s, an important coin heavily collected in the hammered Gold English series, still enjoying a broad appeal today. The iconic and timeless design helped separate it from other contemporary pieces, distancing itself from the representation of the King in ship, with its lofty nautical evocations that had been in the popular consciousness since the second period Nobles of Edward III in 1344-46.

Find herewith two excellent and distinguished examples, both carrying the pierced cross and pellet mintmarks issued between 1477-80. The Gold used was at a fineness of 23ct (0.995 fine) at a nominal weight of 5.184 grams to the Angel of six shillings and eight pence (6s 8d).

Edward IV, Second Reign (1471-83), Gold Angel, MS 62
Edward IV (1471-83) Second Reign, Gold Angel, MS 63

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

  • Schneider, ‘The Herbert Schneider collection, Volume 1, English Gold Coins 1257-1603’ Woodhead, P, Spink 1996 (SCBI 47)
  • ‘Coins of England’ Pre Decimals edition, 2020, Spink
  • Kings and Queens : The Concise guide, Cavendish, R. D&C 2007
  • ‘The coinages of Edward IV and of henry VI (restored) C .E. Blunt and C. A. Whitton, BNJ 25 (1945) pp 4-59
Posted on by

Coins of the Mughal Empire

From 16th to the 18th century the Mughal Empire commanded impressive wealth and resources on the Indian subcontinent, almost unprecedented in their glory. Growing European presence and its increasing demand for Indian raw and finished products created great wealth in the Mughal courts. Mughal elite provided patronage of painting, literature, and architecture, especially during the reign of Shah Jahan. Mughals created many masterpieces of jewellery, painting and especially architectural wonders such as Agra Fort, Red Fort, Shalamar Gardens, and the Taj Mahal.

Early Empire and currency

The foundation of the Mughal Empire is dated to 1526 AD. The founder was Ẓahir al-Din Muḥammad Babur a warrior chieftain and descendant from famous conquerors Genghis Khan and Timur. He was aided by the neighbouring Safavid and Ottoman Empires to defeat the Sultan of Delhi and establish the Mughal dynasty. First ruler of note was his grandson, Akbar the Great (1556–1605), who established the administrative structure of Empire that will last for centuries to come.

The silver denomination minted under Akbar, the grandson of Babur (the warrior-founder of Mughals).

The Mughal Empire was created by military conquest; however, Akbar did not suppress the peoples he came to rule. He incorporated their elites into the imperial structure and practiced religious tolerance across his vast territories. He also created agricultural tax system which became the foundation of Mughal wealth. The taxes were paid in regulated silver currency – Mughals adopted and standardized the rupee (silver) and dam (copper).

A silver rupee from the reign of Muhammad Shah (1719 – 1748).

The ratio of dam to rupee was initially 48 to one, in the start of Akbar’s reign. The dam’s value continued rising until the 17th century when it became 38 dam to one rupee. This was because more industrial uses of copper and its alloys where being developed, such as the need for bronze in cannons and manufacture of brass utensils. Eventually, by 1660s, the value of dam versus rupee was 16 to one. It is important to note that the Mughals minted coins with high purity of about 96% or more.

Later emperors and trading networks

A gold mohur of emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir (1658-1707).

The 17th century was marked by three greatest Mughal emperors: Jahangir (1605 -1627), Shah Jahan (1628–1658), and Aurangzeb (1658–1707). The reigns of Jahangir and Shah Jahan are known for political stability, strong economic activity and excellence in arts and architecture. The last major emperor of Mughals was Aurangzeb Alamgir (1658-1707). His mother was Mumtaz Mahal, a Persian empress consort of Shah Jahan. She was his favourite wife – it is for her that the emperor Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal as her resting place.

The beauty of the monument is thought to represent Mumtaz Mahal’s beauty and undying love her spouse had for her. During the reign of Aurangzeb, the Empire achieved its maximum geographical reach. He fully implemented Islamic Law (Sharia) across the entire country. During his reign, the demand for Indian agricultural and industrial exports was high. In the 16th and 17th centuries European and non-European trading organizations were established and started expanding rapidly in the subcontinent. The trading networks grew both in-land and coastally, increasing the internal surplus of precious metals.

Decline of the Mughals and British rule

A gold mohur of Shah Alam I (1707-1712)

At Aurangzeb’s death, many parts of the Empire were in open revolt. The decline was imminent as the country descended into conflicts and power grabs. His son, Shah Alam I (1707-1712, also known as Bahadur Shah) attempted reforms of administration and change of religious policies, but the dissolution was already taking hold. In 1719 alone, four emperors ascended the throne. After years of infighting and conflicts between different kingdoms and states, the East India Company (EIC) started overtaking what was left of the Mughal territories and trade connections. First, they established nominally Mughal protectorates in Delhi and Bengal, however, the role of Mughal emperors was downsized to a mere formality.

After the defeat of the last Mughal ruler Bahadur Shah Zafar in 1858, East India Company deposed him and exiled him. With the Government of India Act 1858 the British Crown assumed control of EIC territories. In 1876 the British Queen Victoria assumed the title of Empress of India.

This article was written by Ema Sikic (ema@baldwin.co.uk).

Literature

  • Asher, C. B.; Talbot, C. (2006), India Before Europe, Cambridge University Press
  • Gilbert, M. J. (2017), South Asia in World History, Oxford University Press
  • Richards, J. F. (1995), The Mughal Empire, Cambridge University Press
  • Richards, J. F. (2003), The Unending Frontier: An Environmental History of the Early Modern World, University of California Press
  • Tracy, J. D. (1997), The Political Economy of Merchant Empires: State Power and World Trade, 1350–1750, Cambridge University Press

Posted on by

The Unique Gold Pattern Triple Unite of Charles I (1625-49)

On Thursday the 26th of September 2006 Baldwin’s Auctions held a sale in the Council Chamber of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy, a stones throw from the then Adelphi Terrace premises, a short walk from our Strand office today.

Entitled ‘One Hundred Numismatic Rarities’ set out on a slim understated mahogany red auction catalogue, each cover bathed in emblems of heraldry. A near perfect mix of armorial bearings set against a patterned regal backdrop, tapping into the duality of numismatics. This duality being a reverence for tradition and heritage, not just in the form of twee evocations of yesteryear, instead the tradition needs to be role specific, axiomatic, translating into quality. In this instance one hundred rarities across all provinces, succinctly catalogued with well positioned images.

Auctions are underpinned by few essential factors, none more significant than confidence in the calibre of the auction house and the quality of the coins under the hammer. The front cover showcasing the unique Triple Pattern Unite by Vanderdort, the back cover sporting an 1847 frosted proof Gothic Crown of Victoria and a nickel brass 1937 Threepence of Edward VIII.

The unique Pattern Triple Unite had been acquired by private treaty in 1930 by the Baldwin’s family, first mentioned publicly in the proceedings of the Royal Numismatic Society 1932 (R.N.C 1932, Vol 12, 5th series, page 14). The founder Albert had attended a meeting on the 19th May 1932 and displayed it to a group of coins and medals outlining the work of Thomas Simon and Simon De Passe.

The coin later found itself published in a British Numismatic Journal article (Volume 23, 1939, p 363) penned by the venerated C. A. Whitton. In this article Whitton cites Miss Helen Farquhar and her earlier work in 1908, where she had advocated that such a coin should exist, predicated on the evidence that Abraham Vanderdort had been appointed as medalist to Charles I, with a view to issue high relief patterns covering the pound, three-pound and five-pound denominations. Derek F Allen in the Numismatic Chronicle 1941-3 formalised and documented all of Farquhar’s work, the coin then lay dormant not appearing in print or discourse until Wilson and Rasmussen published their ‘English Pattern Trial and Proof Coins in Gold 1547-1968’ at the turn of the millennium.

Listed as unique, rarity 7 (R7) number 20, page 41, weighing 27.2 grams. There is a similar Pattern Triple Unite in the Hunterian museum collection struck with a different obverse die to our example weighing 27.07g, both issued with a mintmark Plume. The other piece that makes up the series is the ‘Pattern Five Unites’ (or Five Pounds) at 47.50g, struck with mintmark Rose, this is the Juxon medal, given to Bishop Juxon by Charles I on the scaffold. William Juxon, Bishop of London at the time (later to become the Archbishop of Canterbury at the point of the restoration) had been a key figure during the interregnum, he had been personally selected by Charles I to read him his last rights before his execution. One specimen is known for the Juxon medal [W&R 18, (R7), p.39] which resides in the British museum collection, all three attributed to Vanderdort.

Crowned draped and cuirassed bust left with falling lace collar, wire line and beaded circle, double-arched crown with frosted caul, diamond and pellet band, mint mark plume without bands (1630-1631), legend CAROLVS DG MAG BRIT FR ET HIB REX. Rev, crowned oval garnished shield of quartered arms, with quartered English and French arms in first and third quarters, Scottish lion in second quarter, Irish harp in fourth quarter, C and R in fields, legend FLORENT CONCORDIA REGNA.
Realised price £210,000 (without the premium).

Abraham Vanderdort hailed from a Dutch family of craftsmen arriving in England at around 1609 during James I’s reign. In 1625 he found appointment with the accession of Charles I to provide Patterns for the coinage of the realm.

Prince Henry, Charles I’s elder brother had previously commissioned him with a payment of fifty pounds, he also had previous dealings with Prince Rudolf of Prague and had been known to the King of Denmark, after painting his portrait. Vanderdort found himself sporadically employed by the Royal court under Charles I, holding specific posts connected to the Arts, later employed for life as one of the grooms of the Privy chamber.

Known for preparing the Catalogue of the Royal Collection at Whitehall which he finished in October 1639 (see, Ashmolean Museum Oxford – MS1514). Shortly after, a tragic end fit for a Marlowe play, Vanderdort had misplaced a portrait miniature, the sheer pressure and potential repercussions had led him to take his life. Later his executors located the miniature after his demise.