volume 20 – number 2 march – april 2017historicalartmedals.com/mca april 2017 e version...

Volume 20 – Number 2 March – April 2017

A New ColleCtiNg ChAlleNge

the Visit of sultAN Abdul Aziz to loNdoN

trACkiNg the bretoN/reford MedAls ANd their ProVeNANCe

A hAshtAg of eAgles

the AlexANder MACoMb MedAl

EditorJohn W. Adams

[email protected]

ProducerNeil Musante

[email protected]

Advanced ResearchTony J. Lopez

[email protected]

PhotographyBob Williams

[email protected]

WebmasterBenjamin Weiss

[email protected]

Editorial AdvisorDave Bowers

[email protected]

MCA OfficersSkyler Liechty, President

[email protected]

Tony J. Lopez, Vice [email protected]

Anne E. Bentley, [email protected]

Barry D. Tayman, Treasurer3115 Nestling Pine CourtEllicott City, MD 21042

[email protected]

MCA Board of DirectorsJohn W. Adams - Dover, MA

[email protected]

David T. Alexander - Patterson, [email protected]

Robert F. Fritsch - Nashua, [email protected]

David L. [email protected]

Neil Musante - Yarmouth Port, [email protected]

Ira Rezak - Stony Brook, [email protected]

John Sallay - Weston, [email protected]

Roger [email protected]

Benjamin Weiss - Wynnewood, [email protected]

Medal Collectors of AmericaMedal Collectors of America was founded in 1998. Its purpose is to foster the collection and study of world, American art and historical medals. Our goal is to encourage research and publication in the medal field, while bringing together all who are interested, through meetings, publications and activities. Our print Advisory is published six times a year and we encourage submission of articles with original research. It is also available electronically. We maintain an exceptional website at www.medalcollectors.org, and encourage everyone to visit the site to learn more about the organization. We hold two meetings a year featuring guest speakers on a wide range of topics relating to medal collecting. One is held in August in conjunction with the American Numismatic Association convention, and the second in January, in conjunction with the New York International Numismatic convention. Meetings are open, and all are encouraged to attend.

Annual Membership Dues:$ 55/year Printed Edition –or– $ 50/year Multiple Years Hard Copy$ 25/year Electronic Edition –or– $ 20/year Multiple Years Electronic$ 75/year combined Printed and Electronic Editions$ 10/year Young Numismatists Electronic Edition (free first year)

The MCA AdvisoryMarch / April 2017

Volume 20, No. 2

In This Issue President’s Message 3Introduction by the Editor 4Letters to the Editor 5

• • • • • • • • New Collecting Challenge 8 by John Adams, John Kraljevich & Tony J. Lopez

A Hashtag of Eagles – a puzzle 15 by Harry Waterson

Medal Commemorating the Visit of Sultan Abdul Aziz to London Revisited 16 by Benjamin Weiss

Tracking the Breton/Reford Medals and their Provenance 24 by Warren Baker

The Alexander Macomb Medal 33 by R.W. Julian

a message from the producer

March / April 2017 3

S kyler Liechty has kindly allowed me to shake up the natural order of things for this issue of The Advisory, by turning over his column for a one time message from

the Producer. Just to be clear about what I do, I take all the material after it has been reviewed and edited by John Adams (our editor) and try to turn it into a reasonably presentable and cohesive publication. In other words I do all the graphic design and layout.

Last week, during our most recent board meeting, it was reported that MCA membership currently stands at about 161 print and electronic subscribers. I find this number to be surprisingly low in comparison to other specialty numismatic organizations and therefore terribly disappointing. Given that medal collecting has long been a mainstream numismatic pursuit, not just in America but around the world, I wonder why our group’s membership has remained so small.

There is no doubt that a large part of my disappointment stems from the fact that I spend an enormous amount of time (probably too much time) putting The Advisory together every two months. With so much time invested, it’s only natural that I would want to see it reach a wider audience. While it is not my place to speak for him, I know that John Adams also devotes a similar amount time to each issue, with the added pressure of having to attract quality material for publication. One thing increased membership would do, would be to help us attract a broader and more diverse group of submissions, making at least one part of John’s job a little easier.

Obviously we don’t do this for fame and fortune, so it begs the question, why should the size of the organization matter to me at all? Perhaps it’s ego, but I don’t think so. More likely it is something like missionary zeal. In assembling The Advisory over the last few years, I have had the enormously rich experience of working with a number of remarkably intelligent, gifted, kind and well informed authors. They are collectors who care enough about their own specialized fields of interest that they are willing to share their knowledge with us. Our publication has delivered some of the best content currently available in the numismatic world today and it is perhaps for this reason that I feel compelled to share it. In the last couple of years, I have learned more about the medallic arts than I would haveever thought possible. Our authors have introduced me to areas of collecting that were barely on my radar, if at all. Lev Tsitrin has me looking for Pisanello aftercasts, Tom Garver, for French narrative medals and plaquettes. Because of Anne Bentley I picked up a Trask anti-smoking token and Ben Weiss has opened up the world of English historical medals to me. I have to confess that I even bought an Admiral Vernon medal (which I’m pretty sure was run over by a truck before I got it), but now at least, I own one and it means a great deal to me. The list is of course much longer, but the point is that I want to find a way for our authors and contributors to reach a much larger audience. Even our “Letters to the Editor” section is fascinating.

To put this in perspective, I note that the ANA has a total membership of about 24,000. As far as I can determine, the ANS has a general membership of about 1300-1400. TAMS has a membership of between 700 to 800, while the Civil War Token Society has about 500 members. Some of the specialty clubs, Numismatic Bibliomania Society, John Reich Society, Gorbrecht Society etc. have memberships in the 300-400 range. Even the American Vecturist Association has about 400 members - maybe more. I suspect that we should have membership in this 300-400 range as well, similar to the other specialty organizations and at least double where we are now.

We have had tremendous advocacy and support from many of our members, including Dave Bowers who offers generous praise at every opportunity, Wayne Homren at the E-Sylum, who is always willing to promote our organization. We get generous cash contributions from members who simply appreciate what membership in our club offers. Yet for all this incredible support, our membership has remained static.

So just what does membership in Medal Collectors of America offer? We all know about The Advisory which appears six times a year. It is one of the very few magazines in our industry that is 100% content driven - in other words, no advertisements. Our website is a fountain of information. Twice a year we hold meetings which include presentations by some of the leading researchers in our field. Meetings are held in January and August in conjunction with The New York International Coin Show and the American Numismatic Association annual convention. We offer two prestigious awards: The Georgia Stamm Chamberlain award presented to promising newcomers doing research on medals and the Carl Carlson award, our highest honor, given for lifetime achievement in research and publication in the field. We are currently working with designer Eugene Daub to create a club medal that will be used for these awards in the future. And finally, one of the greatest benefits is the opportunity to acquire the silver and bronze annual club medal. We are incredibly proud of this contribution to the medallic arts, and grateful to the artist who has supported us in this effort for the last six years, Alex Shagin. His work on the 2017 medal is featured on page 7 of this issue.

This year it would be great if we could bring membership up to the level where most of us think it should be. And here is where I ask for your help with that effort. We will be sending a blank membership application along with a letter of introduction to Medal Collector’s of America. I’d simply ask each one of you to use the letter and application to bring in one new member this year. Better yet, make copies, that you can take to a show and give to anyone you think might or should be interested. I’ll bet that in just a matter of a few weeks we can double our membership. Thank you Skyler for allowing me this space to air my feelings and thank you to our members for the newcomers that you will bring into the Club.

Neil Musante

introduction by the editor

4 March / April 2017

O n February 2nd, the House of Kunker auctioned a jewel of American history - the gold medal awarded to Alexander Macomb for his successful defense

of Plattsburgh in 1814. Its condition was described as “vorzugliche-Stempleganz,” which translates to something very high in the MS range. The medal came in an ornate frame and was accompanied by authenticating documents, if any such were needed. At 200,000 euros hammer price, the piece was knocked down to a European buyer.

On February 17th, Heritage auctioned off a fine consignment of Betts medals that had been encased in PCGS finery. Prices were weak and this follows a November Stacks Bowers auction of Betts medals, where the medals were also slabbed and the prices were also weak. Combined, these two events demonstrate that the market for medals is treacherously thin and that encapsulation is not the answer to attracting more interest. The task of building interest in our specialty runs not to the grading services but to current collectors.

In this issue, Webmaster Ben Weiss introduces us to the Corporation of the City of London medals in general and the medal of Sultan Abdul Aziz in particular. After exhaustive research, Ben is able to demonstrate that all prior writers on the subject had gotten the iconography wrong, after which he sets matters aright – a really neat piece of work.

In his analysis of the Robert Reford collection, Warren Baker does the impossible. He tracks down how each and every medal came into the collection, as well as where each piece went after it was sold. His effort necessarily spanned over 100 years of Canadian numismatics and brings us into touch with most of the prominent figures in the hobby over this period. “Tour de force” is gross understatement.

Ye editor chips in with an article on the Comitia Americana medals. This series is rich in history but, given the rarity of several individual medals, virtually impossible to collect. No longer. There is a way it can be done, but this wisdom is revealed only to you, our readers.

Many of the articles in recent issues have been of epic quality. With the bar being set high, other members may be slow to submit a contribution. We also need submissions on goings-on in the market place – auctions, eBay and whatever. Of particular interest are insights into the art and science of photographing medals. How does one trade off between capturing detail without losing the dimensions of color and surface? Our readers have much to share; we are waiting for more of you to step forward.

There is much more in the pipeline for our May-June issue. We are blessed by the quality of the material that comes in and blessed to have an audience that appreciates the material when it comes out.


lettersFrom: Neil MusanteSent: Saturday, April 1, 2017 2:10 PMTo: Adams, JohnSubject: Correction

Hi John

The correct attribution for the medal image in last month’s article “Jacques and Leopold Wiener’s 1852 Tribute to C. R. A. Van Bommel, Bishop of Liège” was inadvertently omitted. The medal image was courtesy of Ben Weiss, The Weiss collection BW247. Apologies to Mike and Ben for my error. - Neil

[Ron Thompson also submitted the following comments to the March 5th of The E-Sylum. These wonderful and reasonably priced medals were also mentioned in our Jan-Feb issue. The “descriptive booklet” cited is actually an earlier, outstanding work by Elvira Clain-Stefanelli, then Curator of the Smithsonian Numismatic Collections.Ed.]

Hi Wayne (Homren),

The series of antique-finished pewter America’s First Medals were minted by the San Francisco mint as part of the build up to the Bi-Centennial Celebration. An outstandingly researched and written discussion of everything about these medals was issued by John W, Adams and Anne E. Bentley in their Comitia Americana and Related Medals in 2007. As for particulars the mint printed announcement says in part the following:

“These medals will be enclosed in a see-through plastic capsule inserted in a case surrounded by red flocking. The case is

From: Ron ThompsonSent: Friday, March 03, 2017 12:14 PMTo: Adams, JohnSubject: Latest MCA Advisory

Hi John,

I always look forward to getting my MCA Advisory. After I remove the outer wrapping I place it just out of reach on my dining table in front of where I enjoy me breakfast. I don’t immediately read it but leave it there just in sight for several days or a week or so to savor and anticipate the thought of the articles and the enjoyment to come. No quick ravishment for me! When I finally pick it up I slowly page through looking at all the articles and artwork, admiring the layout, care and colorful artistry and professional quality. It is a lot like getting a wonderfully bound leather edition of short stories. I may not actually read anything then; again postponing the pleasure to come. Remember the Whitman Samplers? The articles are like the chocolates, which wonderful one do I choose first? Eventually, I indulge myself usually starting at the front with the Message from the President, Introduction by the Editor and Letters. Over the next week or two I will enjoy reading each article. I always learn something new and I am amazed that each issue always seems better than the last. Thank you.

This issue, so far, I really enjoyed the discussion on the state of the coin market/grading. As a retired CPA I can particularly relate to David Bowers’ comments and suggestions to raise the

standards of the professionals with a certification requirement. While that probably won’t happen, at least not in the near future and may not be needed, the desire for professional and trustworthy dealers/grading services/auction houses is understandable. Most CPAs are considered professional and trustworthy. This is in no small part due to their being trained, tested in the CPA examination and held to detailed professional standards in ethics and conflicts of interest by the AICPA and their peers. I can still remember in our case studies some 50 years ago, more vaguely now with each new year, where we discussed what was and what wasn’t a conflict of interest or ethical and why. Perhaps our hobby publications, particularly the big groups like the ANA & ANS, should have columns in each issue of their publications addressing some particular ethical or conflict of interest issue to provide guidance to all and to set and promote the standards expected.

Keep them chocolates coming!

Ron Thompson

approximately 3½" by 2¾" with the Great Seal appearing on the cover. It is not only a holder for America’s first medals but also a self-display case which both sides of the medal can be viewed.

The first two medals of the series are being offered as a unit at $10.00 and may not be purchased separately. Each individual may purchase a maximum of five units and orders should be received no later than May 31, 1974. Anyone who purchases the current offering will receive an order card when the next items in the series become available.

The ten-medal series will be completed by July 4, 1976, and the first two medals are available:”

Somewhere along the way the presentation holder with cardboard slip cover was offered with the detailed descriptive booklet and an eleventh medal – the Department of the Treasury 1789 medal that is at the center for $5.00. For medal collectors on a tight budget this pewter series was/is a great way to share some of the excitement of that period. I got a set with presentation holder for $55. As with most mint products the after-market prices dropped, partially because it was a pewter series and partially it was a medal series versus coins. I saw completes sets selling for $10-$20 25+ years later. In comparison, the Adams & Bentley “the reference” on the series initially sold for $135 in 2007 and you need reasonably deep pockets for any of the actual medals, so it would be a great buy for a teacher or parent to get their little people interested in history!

Ron Thompson

Cover inspired by the Dainel MorganComitia Americana Medal

letters continued . . .


From: Jeremy BostwickSent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 To: Anne E. BentleySubject: MCA membership

Dear Anne

I became a member last May, and I wasn’t sure if my mailing address had been updated from when I joined. I moved over the summer...

Also, I have a website for my business with some ancient coins and medals, and wanted to know if I could include a link

to the MCA page for anybody who comes upon my site and is interested in joining.

Lastly, is there a membership number which I have for the MCA?

Best,

Jeremy BostwickNumismagram

From: Anne E. BentleySent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017To: Jeremy BostwickCc: [email protected]: Re: MCA membership

Hi Jeremy -

Thanks for being so proactive! I’ll update your mailing address in our master file when I get my computer fixed this weekend. I only send renewal notices via USPS when folks don’t give us an email or they forget to update when they change. Until then, Barry has the printout that would say when you have to renew if you’re not sure about that. The Jan-Feb 2017 MCA Advisory is either at the press or on its way to being printed and will be out soon.

From: Warren Lloyd Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2017 7:39 PMTo: Adams, JohnSubject: MCA Medals

John - In the current MCA Advisory mintage figures for past MCA Medals in silver and bronze are listed. Hopefully, 2017 mintages will forge ahead and set new highs. Once again I have ordered both medals and look forward to receiving them. This has become a nice series, and compliments again to all involved.

Warren

I can’t speak for the Board in re your adding a link to our MCA website on your own business website, so am copying this to President Skyler Liechty, et al.

Best wishes, Anne

From: Skyler LiechtySent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 To: Anne E. BentleySubject: Re: MCA membership

Anne,

Thank you for following up on this email.

The IRS does not list anything specifically about a Member promoting the club on their website. While the same is not true the other way. We should avoid promoting dealers on our website even member dealers.

If our new member is this enthusiastic about MCA. I feel we should not only “let” him link to our page but we should thank him for it. A web presence is so extremely important.

Best, Skyler

What was going on in the world of medals in 1697?


Last Call for the 2017 MCA Club Medal!

Support your organization and help us to continue the medal program by ordering today!

The cut-off date for ordering the 2017 MCA Club Medal is May 15, 2017The cost of the bronze medal is $45.00The cost of the silver medal is $225.00

Orders can be sent to Skyler Liechty at [email protected] Musante at [email protected] or

any of the club officers

Checks should be made out to Medal Collectors of America, and mailed to:

Barry Taymen3115 Nestling Pine CourtEllicott City, MD 21042

OR

Payment can be sent via Paypal to [email protected]

T he 2017 MCA club medal is the sixth in a series of medallic sculptures created by MCA member Gerry Muhl and artist Alex Shagin. The medal marks the 525th anniversary of Columbus’ great voyage of exploration

and discovery. Columbus’ three ships are shown riding high on the crest of a massive wave. They are an allegorical expression of today’s more modern forms of exploration as we “reach up to the stars.”

Moving from the old to the new, the reverse shows two black holes spinning around each other, eventually to merge with such violence that space and time are warped, creating gravitational waves projecting through time, one point three billion years to be exact. Gravitational waves were first discussed in 1893, but were not actually observed until September 2015, almost exactly 100 years after Albert Einstein predicted them in his general theory of relativity. This great “discovery” has opened an entirely new field in observational astronomy called Gravitational-wave astronomy. Like our scientific counterparts, Alex’s timely medal simply challenges us to “Discover More.” (see the back cover)


T he eleven Comitia Americana medals are fundamental history combined with exhilarating aesthetics. Any collector of historical medals would want to complete

a set, but this is not possible: two of the eleven are high R-6’s and three are out-and-out R-8’s. Back when Thomas Jefferson was tasked by the Continental Congress to acquire 300 sets of Comitia Americanas, he got distracted and failed to execute. Had these medals actually been made, it seems likely that this series would be today the most popular collectible in all of United States numismatics. Alas, Jefferson failed and, whereas some originals are readily obtainable, a complete set is an ideal that can only be approached but never realized.

Clearly, one can put together an entire set of Comitia Americana medals by mixing original strikes and later copies. Though expedient, this option suffers from a seeming lack of homogeneity. The mixing of these two disparate elements, though not easily if at all apparent to the naked eye, has motivated only a handful of collectors to give it a try.

A more appealing alternative, in our opinion, would be to set as a target only those Comitia Americana medals made in the United States or from dies intended for use in the United States. One simple target would be one each of ten medals (Major John Stewart was never made in or for the United States). Compared to “original” Comitia Americana medals where Stewart, Lee and Wayne are R-8’s, this would be an achievable challenge.

If one wanted to set the bar higher, the Challenge would include one example of each production technique used by the U.S. Mint for each medal, including:

– Dies made in France but deployed in the U.S. (Gates and Barré’s Morgan dies) – Gunmetal dies (Washing Before Boston, John Paul Jones, John Eager Howard and William Washington). – Dies engraved by the U.S. Mint (Washington Before Boston, Anthony Wayne, De Fleury, John Paul Jones, Henry Lee, William Washington, John Eager Howard and Nathanael Greene) – Electrotypes made by the U.S. Mint (Wayne and Greene) – One-sided medals as well as two sided (Lee)

This is a higher bar indeed, as it contains a fair sprinkling of R-7’s and, much more fun, the need to develop the expertise to distinguish between gunmetal dies and engraved dies, electrotypes and engraved dies and Gates/Morgan medals made in France versus those made from the same dies in the United States. This is not a challenge; rather, it is an education.

A complete listing of Comitia Americana medals made in the United States in the 19th century would include:

1) Washington Before Boston, gunmetal dies 2) Washington Before Boston, copy dies engraved 1886 3) Horatio Gates, dies engraved in France and brought to Philadelphia in 1801 4) Anthony Wayne electrotypes made by Franklin Peale and others 1842 forward 5) Anthony Wayne engraved copy dies 1889 forward 6) De Fleury copy dies 1880 forward 7) John Paul Jones gunmetal dies 8) John Paul Jones engraved copy dies 9) Henry Lee uniface: obverse from die engraved by Joseph Wright in 1789, reverse blank 10) Henry Lee 1789 obverse paired with reverse engraved by Charles Barber in 1874 11) Henry Lee Mystery Die obverse paired with a new reverse. Only joined electrotypes and/or casts of this pairing are known 12) Daniel Morgan from dies executed by Barré in 1839 13) William Washington gunmetal dies 14) William Washington engraved copy dies 15) John Eager Howard gunmetal dies 16) John Eager Howard engraved copy dies 17) Nathanael Greene electrotypes made by Franklin Peale and others 1842 forward 18) Nathanael Greene copy dies engraved 1890

The truth is that only one or two or three of our boldest numismatists has ever collected or studied Comitia Americana medals made from gunmetal dies; no one admits to collecting or studying electrotypes of Comitia Americana medals; no one has ever given a hoot whether a Gates medal was made in France or the United States. Thus, collectors who accept this “New Collecting Challenge” will be pioneers, correcting or adding to much that we now write – you will pioneer and you will have fun.

Category 1Dies made in France and Used in the United States

The dies for the Horatio Gates medal were executed by Nicolas-Marie Gatteaux, with an example in gold struck at the Paris Mint in 1787, followed by production in stages thereafter. Aaron Burr was importuned by the Gates family for more medals and, somehow, he got his hands on the dies and brought them to the United States Mint in 1801. The authors of Comitia Americana and Related Medals theorize that those in Die State 1 (see page 62) were struck in France and those in Die States 2 and 3 were struck in the United States. A crisper separation can be made from the color and surface – French made pieces are tan to brown, whereas those made in the United States have been bronzed, a process that yields a color containing various degrees of red. The Die Register of the United States Mint lists a new reverse for the Gates die made in 1880; presumably examples of this die exist, but none have ever been reported.

By John W. Adams, John Kraljevich and Tony J. Lopez

a New ColleCtiNg ChalleNge


The gold medal awarded to Daniel Morgan passed down to his heir, Morgan Neville, from whom it was stolen. Congress authorized that a new one be struck, but the dies could not be located. Not possessing a skilled die engraver itself, the U.S. Mint engaged M. Barré (père) of the Paris Mint to prepare a new set of dies, working from the silver medal borrowed from the Washington set, at that time, owned by Daniel Webster. Monsieur Barré did such a faithful job of copying that the easiest way to distinguish his work is from the lack of a die break in the exergue of the obverse, as seen on all originals.

These copy dies lasted at least until 1885, when Charles Barber commented that they were in poor shape (Julian, page 120). The 14 examples struck from 1885 to 1900 may have been from new copy dies made at the U.S. Mint, but no such dies are recorded in the Die Register.

Gates at Saratoga, Struck in France Gates at Saratoga struck in the United States

French strike, tip of vest is attached United States strike, tip of vest is detaching

Obverse of French original

Obverse exergue of French strike showing die break

Obverse of U.S. strike

Obverse exergue of U.S. strike, showing no die break


In the 1860s, the United States Mint wanted to make its own Comitia Americana medals but lacked an engraver sufficiently skilled to create new dies. The solution was so-called “gunmetal dies,” made by heating a block of gunmetal (a brass alloy of copper noted for its hardness) to the softening point and then impressing an example of an original medal into the mass (we have no idea how the medal was then removed). The result was a die that did not have the endurance of a die made out of die steel, but which could reproduce medals that looked for all the world like originals. We have read that only the devices were hubbed, with the letters removed from the medal acting as a matrix and then added back by hand to the production die. In our experience, this is not the case; rather, the entire medal was hubbed, making it quite difficult to distinguish from an original.

The most distinguishing characteristic of medals made from gunmetal dies is that their surfaces are not proof-like or mirrored but, rather possessing a matte-like finish. By definition the detail is less than on a medal produced from the conventional process although, without an original for direct comparison, such differences are extremely difficult to see. One expert holds that gunmetal dies cause blotchy surfaces, especially on the highest points, and medals made by these dies evince crumbling at the rim. We have found such characteristics to be occasional and not universal, causing us to fall back on the lack of a mirrored finish as the surest “tell” – this plus the fact that medals from the Paris Mint tend to be tan to brown in color whereas the U.S. product has typically been bronzed, adding various degrees of red to the mix.

Washington Before Boston, engraved die obverse and gunmetal die obverse

(shown 20% enlarged)

Washington Before Boston, engraved die reverse and gunmetal die reverse

(shown 20% enlarged)

Category 2Gunmetal dies


Whereas the U.S. Mint borrowed the Morgan medal from the Washington-Webster set in order to assist Monsieur Barré in making his dies, it could not very well borrow from this source in order to make a gunmetal die, because the process was destructive of the medal. This meant having to order originals from the Paris Mint to use in making new dies and, in turn, the

only Comitia Americana dies that could be located were those for Washington Before Boston, John Paul Jones, William Washington and John Eager Howard. In doing research for The Medals of the United States Mint, Bob Julian found these four gunmetal dies, completing a story which would appear to tie together very nicely.

John Eager Howard, obverse from gunmetal die(shown enlarged)

William Washington, obverse from gunmetal die(shown enlarged)

Lt. Col. de Fleury, obverse from engraved copy die(shown enlarged)

John Eager Howard, reverse from gunmetal die(shown enlarged)

William Washington, reverse from gunmetal die(shown enlarged)

Lt. Col. de Fleury, reverse from engraved copy die(shown enlarged)

Boston (1886), Wayne (1887), and Greene (1890). Whereas the copies are quite faithful, these dies are all readily recognizable by the regularity of the lettering in the legends.

From 1874 on, the United States Mint began to engrave Comitia Americana medal dies. The first was a simple one – Charles Barber’s reverse of the Henry Lee medal. This was followed by pairs of dies for Fleury (1880), Howard (1881), Washington Before

Category 3Dies engraved by the United States Mint


In 1843, descendants of Nathanael Greene asked the Mint for copies of their ancestor’s medal (see Comitia Americana and Related Medals, page 159). Director Patterson maintained that the Mint did not have the dies, but he engaged the versatile Benjamin Franklin Peale to make electrotype copies. Priced at $2.00 each, one must assume that these pieces were worthy facsimiles.

High quality electrotypes of the Anthony Wayne medal also exist; Julian tells us that the Mint borrowed the Wayne medal in gold from the family in 1842 and made electrotypes from this master (page 117).

Category 4Electrotypes made at the United States Mint

Be it emphasized that the U.S. Mint was not the only entity engaged in making electrotypes in the mid nineteenth century. Dealers and specialty firms advertised these products actively so that, today, one cannot be certain of the origin of any given specimen. We like to romanticize with a given specimen in hand that “It is a Peale!” but, in truth, it could be a Jones or a Smith. Because electrotypes vary considerably in quality, we have assigned a range of values in the “Table of Rarity and Value” below.

Anthony Wayne, electrotype obverse(shown enlarged)

Nathanael Greene, electrotype obverse(shown enlarged)

Anthony Wayne, electrotype reverse(shown enlarged)

Nathanael Greene, electrotype reverse(shown enlarged)


The Lee medal was originally engraved by Joseph Wright circa 1793. Apparently, the reverse failed totally in hardening and the obverse developed a crack in this same process. Per Julian, the injured obverse was on hand in the Mint’s 1841 inventory. It was put to use making uniface medals in 1874. A reverse by Charles Barber was added a few years later and two sided medals were made from that time forth. Replacement dies were made in 1898.

The Lee Mystery Die is perhaps the greatest of many mysteries associated with the challenge. In Comitia Americana and Related Medals, the authors theorize the obverse was prepared in order to strike the gold medal, in which case a reverse would have been required as well. Both obverse and reverse bespeak the work of an uninspired engraver, perhaps Robert Scot. Against this theory,

neither obverse nor reverse die was listed in the 1841 inventory and the reverse is similar to and, therefore, probably contemporary with the one mated with the cracked original obverse in the late 1870’s or made by the same hand. Given that Barber worked for the U.S. Mint well into the 20th century, one of we authors will guess that the Mystery Die obverse and its mate are the Lee dies recorded as being made in 1898. Another of we authors guesses that the Mystery Obverse and its mate were made to temporize until material demand for the Lee medal materialized.

Whichever, electros and casts are known from this die pairing, but no struck medals. Perhaps, one or both of these dies cracked in hardening as did, ironically, their predecessors more than a century before.

Category 5 One sided and two sided

Henry Lee, original obverse(shown enlarged)

Henry Lee, Mystery Die obverse(shown enlarged)

Henry Lee,1874 Barber reverse(shown enlarged)

Henry Lee, Mystery Die reverse(shown enlarged)


table of rarity aNd Cost

ITEM RARITY COSTWashington Before Boston –gunmetal dies R-6 $1500Washington Before Boston –engraved copy dies R-4 $1500Horatio Gates – engraved dies, later state, bronze R-4 $5000Horatio Gates –engraved dies, later state, white metal R-6 $3000Anthony Wayne – electrotype R-5 $500-$2000Anthony Wayne – engraved copy dies R-6 $4000Lt. Col.De Fleury – engraved copy dies R-6 $3500John Paul Jones – gunmetal dies R-6 $1200John Paul Jones – engraved copy dies R-5 $1500Henry Lee – uniface, original obverse R-7 $5000Henry Lee –original obverse, copy die reverse R-6 $4000Henry Lee – Mystery Dies R-7 $2500Daniel Morgan – Barre dies R-5 $3000William Washington – gunmetal dies R-5 $1200William Washington – engraved copy dies R-6 $1500John Eager Howard – gunmetal dies R-6 $1200John Eager Howard – engraved copy dies R-7 $2500Nathanael Greene – electrotype R-5 $500-$2000Nathanael Greene – engraved copy dies R-7 $5000The total “bill” is roughly $50,000 – a small fraction of what a set of originals would cost, if such a set indeed exists.

disCussioN of rarity aNd Cost

There has never been a formal census of United States Comitia Americana, so the tabulation below represents experience, not science. It is possible that some, such as the electrotypes and several of the R-7’s from copy dies, may prove to be more numerous now that some light has been shed upon them.

Whereas most of the medals are bronze or bronzed, Horatio Gates in white metal is reasonably common. Examples in silver, which do exist in a few cases, are extremely rare and their value will be determined by the beholder.

The Challenge of putting together a set of these medals is a vigorous one. Any person taking up the Challenge will learn some of the American history of which Comitia Americana is an integral part and will also learn some interesting numismatics. Hopefully, the subject will attract enough collectors to flesh out the many unknowns without attracting so many as to disturb the friendly price structure that now exists.


A Hashtag of EaglesConstructed by Harry Waterson

This is a Tic-Tac-Toe puzzle with an assist from Hollywood Squares. The object is to identify the 3 eagles all sculpted by the same medallist. These 3 associated eagles are all in one straight line: up, down or diagonal. For extra credit identify

the medallists and their medals. Score 3 points for the correct threesome, and 1 point for each medallist correctly identified and 1 more for each medal identified. The answers will be printed in the June issue.

10 points = Good 15 points = Excellent 20 points = Genius 21 points = You are a cataloguer!

1.

4.

7.

2.

5.

8.

3.

6.

9.


Medal CoMMeMorating the Visit of sultan abdul aziz to london, reVisited

by Benjamin Weiss

I t is not unusual for errors to appear in the literature and to remain there for generations, constantly being repeated, largely because of the universally well-

respected reputation of the original source of the information. Such is the case for the medal commemorating the visit of Abdul Aziz (Abdülaziz), Sultan of Turkey, to London in 1867, one of the most sought-after pieces from the series of medals struck by the Corporation of the City of London.

This group of medals, commonly called The City of London Medals, constitutes a collection struck by The Corporation of the City of London to celebrate the accomplishment of the city’s most notable public works, or to commemorate episodes of national and civic importance, such as visits of prominent personages to London in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

The medals in this series, some 30 in all, were issued from 1832 to 1902 and serve as some of the most outstanding and enduring chroniclers of events that occurred during this period of British history. The standard reference book, published in London in 1894, is Numismata Londinensia by Charles Welch. This book includes those medals issued from 1831 to 1893. In it, all the medals are photographed, and, as the text was written largely contemporaneously with the period examined, the events prompting their issue are described in great detail.

Subsequent to the publication of Numismata Londinensia, a few other medals have been issued by the Corporation of London. Those medals issued from 1831 to 1973 are described in Coins and Medals, November 1977, where their mintage figures are provided (most of the medals were struck in numbers between 350 and 450; a notable exception is the lead, glass-enclosed piece commemorating the Removal of Temple Bar from the City of London, which is

extremely rare). Descriptions and other interesting historical notes are included in excellent compendia published more recently. (See British Historical Medals by Laurence Brown, and British Commemorative Medals and Their Values by Christopher Eimer.)

The City of London Medals are largely of high relief, struck mostly

in bronze (two are also in silver), and are of exceptional quality, as they were executed by some of the finest medallists of the period, including several members of the Wyon

family (Benjamin, Joseph Shephard, Alfred Benjamin, and

William Wyon, probably the most celebrated of the Wyon family of

medallists), the sculptor George C. Adams, the Belgian medallist Charles Wiener, the British

medallist Frank Bowcher, and the fine Austrian medallist Anton

Scharff. Most were issued in custom leather boxes, stamped in gold lettering, sometimes with explanatory text printed on the silk interior. Several were issued

as a double set so that both sides of the medal could be seen at the

same time. Such double sets are now rarely encountered. (For images and

description of all these medals, see the author’s website, linked at

endnote 1.)

An example of one such double set commemorating the opening of the New Council Chamber of the Guildhall is

shown here.

The obverse (shown on the right in figure 1-b) depicts the Interior of the Council Chamber surrounded by scroll work, with a wreath of oak and the arms of the City.

The reverse (shown on the left in figure 1-b) shows the City, supported on right by Commerce, on left by Magistracy, addressing a council attended by Liberty, Liberality and Learning (seated).

Figure 1a. OPENING OF THE NEW COUNCIL CHAMBER, GUILDHALL (Closed case - shown reduced)

Figure 1-b. OPENING OF THE NEW COUNCIL CHAMBER, GUILDHALL (Open case) By Joseph Shepherd and Alfred Benjamin Wyon, England,

1884, Bronze, 76 mm. Reference: Welch 19; BHM 349/3177; Eimer 1705; Taylor 206a; Weiss

BW296 (Weiss Collection - shown reduced)


The exergue depicts the Cap of Maintenance above an oak wreath and City sword and Mace entwined with a ribband bearing the City motto: DOMINE DIRIGE NOS (Lord, Direct Us).

Another in this series, the subject of this discourse, is the medal commemorating the visit of Sultan Abdul Aziz to London in 1867 (Figure 2).

On the obverse is a bust of Sultan Abdul Aziz wearing a fez, the inscription reading ABDULAZIZ OTHOMANORUM

IMPERATOR LONDINIUM INVISIT MDCCCLXVII (Abdul Aziz Emperor of the Ottomans Visited London 1867).

On the reverse is Londinia (City of London), standing before a burning altar decorated with the city shield and inscribed WELCOME, clasping hand of Ottoman Empire (Turkey); behind are St. Paul’s Cathedral to the left and the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed (Blue Mosque) at Constantinople (Istanbul) on the right.

The medal was issued housed in a leather-covered, silk-lined presentation case (Figure 3).

This medal is noteworthy not only for the historic event itself but, from the standpoint of medal collectors, for the error in how it is most often described, a mistake that has been restated in the medallic literature for more than one hundred years. This error is in the identification of one of the buildings on the reverse of the medal. While the building on the left of the standing figures is generally and correctly identified as St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, the mosque to the right of the standing figures has been misattributed as being one of the most famous buildings in Istanbul, the Hagia Sophia (also known as the Sancta Sophia

or St. Sophia). It is not. As this article will show, the building is, rather, another important mosque in Istanbul, the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed (the spelling of Ahmed has changed through the years: Achmet is an antiquated English spelling, the one used on the case of this medal; the old Turkish is Ahmed; another spelling is Ahmet). This mosque is noted for its predominantly blue Iznik tilework — whence it derives the name ‘The Blue Mosque.’ The mosque was completed in 1616 by Sultan Ahmed I, and is famous for being the first mosque in Turkey to

have six minarets. Facing Hagia Sophia, from which it borrows certain stylistic elements, the Blue Mosque combines the two great influences of Byzantine and Ottoman religious architecture.

When one corrects information that has been so well established for over a century, one is compelled to be certain of the facts. The evidence that the building depicted on the reverse of this medal is, indeed, the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed at Istanbul rather than the Hagia Sophia, is derived from different sources. The first piece of evidence comes from an examination of the image of the buildings themselves, that is, a comparison of the image on the medal with that of the photographs of the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed (Figure 4) with that of the Hagia

Sophia (Figure 5).

Though superficially similar, on close examination the two buildings show obvious differences in their structure. As can be seen, the lower domes of the mosque shown on the medal correspond more closely to those in the photograph of the Blue Mosque (Figure 4) rather than to those of the Hagia Sophia (Figure 5). (See also Figure 6).

Figure 2. RECEPTION OF

ABDUL AZIZ, SULTAN OF TURKEY, TO THE CITY OF LONDON

By Joseph Shepherd & Alfred Benjamin Wyon, Turkey, 1867, Bronze, 76 mmReference: Welch 10; BHM 270/2872; Eimer 1591; Eldem 235; Weiss BW295

(Weiss Collection)

Figure 3. Case containing the medal of the Visit of Abdul Aziz, Sultan of Turkey, to the Corporation of

London (Weiss Collection - shown reduced)


The dome immediately below the main dome has step-like features on the mosque shown on the medal as well as on the photograph of the Blue Mosque (Figure 6). No step-like features are apparent on any of the domes of the Hagia Sophia. Further, unlike Hagia Sophia, whose secondary domes are far below the main dome, the Blue Mosque has multiple domes immediately beneath the main dome, just as is depicted on the medal.

More obviously, one can see that the medal has two balconies on the minaret behind the dome, similar to that on the Blue Mosque, which has two or three balconies on each minaret (See Figures 4 and 6); none of the minarets on the Hagia Sophia has more than one balcony (Figure 5). [A ‘Minaret’ (Arabic: “beacon”), a feature of Islamic religious architecture, is the tower from which the faithful are called to prayer five times each day by a muezzin, or crier. Such a tower is always connected with a mosque and has one or more balconies or open galleries. A ‘gallery’ is a balcony that encircles the upper sections from which the muezzin may give the call to prayer.]

Second, and most compelling, is the very inscription on the inside of the original case in which the medal was housed (Figure 7). As can be seen, it states the following: THE CITY OF LONDON RECEIVING TURKEY WITH EMBLEMS OF HOSPITALITY AND FESTIVE WELCOME. IN THE BACKGROUND ARE REPRESENTED, ON THE ONE SIDE, ST. PAUL’S CATHEDRAL, AND ON THE OTHER, THE MOSQUE OF SULTAN ACHMET AT CONSTANTANOPLE.

One can assume that the esteemed Wyons were well aware of the building they engraved on this medal.

Finally, and equally convincing, is the fact that a Edhem Eldem, an eminent scholar and faculty member in the Department

of History at Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey, who has written extensively on the history of the Ottoman Empire, provided unimpeachable confirmation that the building shown on this medal is clearly not the Hagia Sophia but rather closely resembles that of the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed. Professor Eldem suggested further that the mosque shown on the reverse of this medal “is a highly stylized depiction by Wyon, who probably worked with some kind of derivative image.” He goes on to state: “So, in that sense, I would say that this is a sort of generic Ottoman mosque representation, probably inspired by an image of the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed.” (Edhem Eldem, personal communication). Indeed, in his book on the history of Ottoman orders, medals and decorations (Eldem, 2004), Eldem describes the reverse of the Abdul Aziz medal correctly as “the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed in Istanbul”.

Despite all this evidence to the contrary, the misattribution of the building on the medal of the visit of Sultan Abdul Aziz to the City of London, which appears to have been originated as early as 1894 with the publication of Numismata Londinensia, continues to this day in the general medallic literature.

Numismata Londinensia (page 69) describes the reverse of the medal as follows: “Behind to the left St Paul’s Cathedral and to the right the Mosque of St. Sophia”. Based on this reputable source, such a standard reference work as Christopher Eimer’s wonderful compendium on

British Commemorative Medals and Their Values, published in 2010, also refers to the building as “the mosque of St.

Figure 4. Mosque of Sultan Ahmed (Blue Mosque) in Istanbul, Turkey (from Wikipedia)

Figure 5. The Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, Turkey (from cdn.kastic.org)

Figure 6. Comparison of image of mosque on medal of Abdul Aziz with a photograph of the Mosque of Sultan Ahmed in Istanbul


Sophia”. Auction catalogs are likewise not immune to this error. For example, the recent auction catalog of the venerable auction house Baldwin’s (Auction Number 93, lot 636, May 2015; and Auction Number 98, lot 2545, May 2016) describes the building incorrectly as “the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul”. In fact, every auction catalog this author has seen, irrespective of the auction company, states, incorrectly, that the building depicted on the reverse of this medal is the Hagia Sophia.

Several websites currently on the internet also misattribute this building. Thus, www.The-saleroom.com describes this medal as follows: “in the distance St Paul’s Cathedral and the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul”. Likewise, the fine website of Hedley Betts www.medalsoftheworld.com records: “In the background St. Paul’s Cathedral and the mosque of St. Sophia”. The website www.Emedals.com incorrectly identifies both buildings: “London’s Westminster Abbey to the left, Constantinople’s Hagia Sophia to the right”. Finally, an Ebay auction confidently describes the reverse of the medal of the visit of Abdul Aziz to the City of London as: “Londinia, standing before a burning altar decorated within the City shield and inscribed WELCOME, greets the figure of Turkey. Beyond, St. Paul’s Cathedral, l., and the mosque of St. Sophia, r.”

Obverse of Medal

An examination of the origin of the bust of Sultan Abdul Aziz depicted on the obverse of this medal also led to some interesting findings. This bust apparently was copied from a photograph shown in Figure 8. As pointed out by Öztuncay (2003), this photograph of Sultan Abdülaziz was taken by the studio of Abdullah Frères, in Istanbul, on June 18, 1869, and was used as the model from which the medal by Wyon commemorating Sultan Abdülaziz’s visit to London was made.

This photo raises a question as to the date that the medal was actually struck. Although the visit of Sultan Abdul Aziz took place in 1867 (the date engraved on the medal), the evidence that the photo was taken in 1869 suggests that, although the medal is dated 1867, it must have been engraved and struck after that date, a not-so-uncommon occurrence, although not often so readily documented. To quote Edhem Eldem, “Earlier sources had assumed that the medal was based on a photograph of Abdul Aziz taken in London...However, thanks

to Bahattin Öztuncay’s extensive research, it has been possible to ascertain that the photograph was not only taken in Istanbul, by Abdullah Frères, but also on June 18, 1869, thus proving it

impossible for the medal to have been produced before 1869....This delay in the production of the object is further confirmed by a document, dated May 20, 1869, mentioning that the medal to be minted in London would bear the Imperial Portrait.” (Eldem, p 229)

Another photograph of Abdul Aziz, also taken on his visit to London 1867, is an unlikely source for the image on the medal, as this photo is of the Sultan facing front (Figure 9).

A Brief History of the Ottoman Empire

An admittedly superficial glance at the history of the Ottoman Empire allows us to introduce other medals related to the period of Abdul Aziz and his predecessor Sultan Abdul Medjid (Abdülmecid Khan), and to show, once again, how religion influences history.

The Ottoman Empire, one of the largest and longest lasting empires in history, was inspired and sustained by Islam and its Islamic institutions. It was founded at the end of the thirteenth century in northwestern Anatolia by the Turkish tribal leader Osman Gazi (transliterated as Ottoman). The name of Turkey was derived from the term Turk, which was used to refer to the Anatolian peasant and tribal population.

The early period of Ottoman history was characterized by almost continuous territorial expansion. The Ottomans became a transcontinental empire in 1453, following the conquest of Constantinople, which brought an end to the Byzantine Empire, a region that had been ruled by Christians ever since the Roman Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity in the fourth century.

The Ottoman Empire reached the height of its power during the 16th and 17th centuries under the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, who greatly expanded its territory. Because of its strategic location and control of lands surrounding the Mediterranean, the Ottoman Empire became the center of trade between the Eastern and Western worlds, maintaining this influence for six centuries.

During the reign of Sultan Abdul Medjid (1839-1861), the Ottoman Empire had the third largest naval fleet, behind only France and England. His successor Abdul Aziz expanded and

Figure 7. Inscription on Inside of Case Housing Medal of Visit of Abdul Aziz to London (Weiss Collection)


modernized this navy. Although considered to be Abdul Aziz’s biggest achievement, the increased military expenditures put a strain on the economy. This, in turn, resulted in a decision to increase agricultural taxes to pay foreign creditors, and ultimately led to a series of events, culminating in the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) shortly after his death. Abdul Aziz also expanded the Ottoman railway network, thereby uniting a group of previously unconnected railways. Some years later, this network of railways became the famed Orient Express, traveling at that time from Paris to Constantinople.

During the eighteenth century, the empire fell behind its major European rivals, the Russian Empire and the Hapsburg Dynasty of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and even though it was on the winning side during the Crimean War, the Ottoman Empire suffered greatly.

Its alliance with Germany during the First World War led to its defeat and occupation by the Allied Powers. This, in turn, caused a revolt against the occupying forces and, in 1923, the emergence of the Republic of Turkey, the end of the Ottoman monarchy and the beginning of secular rule.

The Crimean War: The Crimean War (1853-1856), a conflict between Russia and an alliance made up of Britain, France and the Ottoman Empire, greatly influenced the subsequent reign of Abdul Aziz. It began when Russia occupied the Ottoman territories of Moldavia and Wallachia, forcing Turkey to respond by declaring war. In 1854, at the Battle of Sinope in the Black Sea, Russia, under Tsar Nicholas I, destroyed the Turkish fleet of Abdul Medjid, who was at that time the Ottoman Sultan of Turkey. France and Britain then joined the Turks and declared war against Russia. After the allies forced the Russians to evacuate Sevastopol, and Austria threatened to join the allies, Nicholas’ successor Tsar Alexander II surrendered Russia’s claim on the Ottoman Empire at the Treaty of Paris (1856).

An important medal issued to commemorate the ultimate defeat of Russia after France and England came to the defense of the Ottomans during the Crimean War is shown in Figure 10.

On the obverse is a bust of Sultan Abdul Medjid Khan surrounded by eight cartouches bearing the names of commanders and statesmen of the allied powers.

On the reverse is Winged Victory, seated, holding a wreath, inscribing a pyramid with the inscription: VICTOIRE. NAPOLEON. 1854. LA MER NOIRE ET LE DANUBE SERONT

LIBRES (Victory of Napoleon 1854. The Black Sea and the Danube Shall be Free); in the background, the dome and minaret of a mosque; in the foreground, a serpent and an olive tree. Around, LA FRANCE ET L’ANGLETERRE UNIES POUR LA DEFENSE DU DROIT. (France and England United for the Defense of Rights). The exergue reads, DIEU LE VEUT (It is God’s Will).

The immediate cause of the Crimean War was religious in nature, in particular the rights of Christians in the Holy Land, which at that time was controlled by the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans supported the Muslims, the French the Roman Catholics, while Russia supported the Eastern Orthodox Church.

This medal commemorates the allied operations in the Danubian region, leading to the ousting of the Russian army from Moldavia and Wallachia, as well as from the western shores of the Black Sea. The Winged Victory is seen writing history, celebrating the military successes attributed to the French Emperor Napoleon III. (Eldem)

(The Crimean War is also known for the infamous Charge of the Light Brigade and is noted as the war in which the nurse Florence Nightingale made her entrance into history and folklore.)

A further glimpse into the religious history of the period, discussed below, allows us to focus on another Islam-related medal, one of the wonderful architectural medals from Jacques Wiener’s Medals of the Most Remarkable Edifices of Europe.

Arab Muslim conquests: Of the earliest religious wars in the modern period, the Arab Muslim conquests of 632 to 732 stand out. Also termed the Islamic conquests, they began after the death of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad and spread from the Arabian Peninsula to an area stretching from northwest India, across Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, southern Italy, and the Iberian Peninsula, to the Pyrenees. Its general purpose was to

supplant Christianity with Islam. In some form or other these objectives continued through the 18th century and beyond.

Figure 8. Sultan Abdülaziz. (Photo was kindly provided by Bahattin Öztuncay; See also Eldem

pp 228, 229)

Figure 9. Sultan Abdülaziz during his Visit to the United Kingdom in 1867. W&D

Downey- From an album of ‘Royal Portraits’ compiled by Queen Victoria Royal Collection

Trust. United Kingdom. (Image from Wikipedia)


Figure 10. CRIMEAN WAR

COMMEMORATIVE (Battles of the Danube and Black Sea)

By Laurent Joseph Hart, Turkey, 1854, Bronze, 72 mm.Reference: Page-Divo, 125/215; Forrer II, p. 435; Eldem 171; Weiss BW155

(Weiss Collection)

Figure 11. ST SOPHIA AT

CONSTANTINOPLEBy Jacques Wiener, Turkey, 1864, Bronze, 59 mm

Reference: Van Hoydonck 206; Eidlitz 69/419; Reinecke 60; Weiss BW274 (Weiss Collection)

An example of a medal illustrating one result of the conquest of Muslims over Christians is illustrated in Figure 11, depicting the Mosque of St. Sophia at Constantinople (Hagia Sophia) by Jacques Wiener. This is the building many mistakenly identified as that depicted on the medal of Abdul Aziz’s visit to the City of London.

Unlike most of the medals in Jacques Wiener’s series of European edifices, which have the exterior of the building on the obverse and the interior on the reverse, this medal of the Mosque of St. Sophia in Constantinople shows different views of the interior on both the obverse and reverse. (For images and descriptions of Wiener’s wonderful series of medals depicting remarkable buildings in Europe, follow the link at endnote 2).

The inscription in the exergue of the obverse reviews the history of the building as follows: STE SOPHIE A CONSTANTINOPLE BATIE PAR L’EMPEREUR JUSTINIEN 532-537 CONVERTIE IN MOSQUEE 1453 RESTAUREE SOUS LE REGNE DU SULTAN ABDUL MEDJID 1847-1849 PAR G. FOSSATI. (Saint Sophia in Constantinople, built by Emperor Justinian 532-537, converted into a mosque 1453,

restored under the reign of Sultan Abdülmecid 1847-1849 by G. Fossati)

This medal serves as a reminder of the changes that have taken place in houses of worship with each conquering group. The building was at first a church, started in the sixth century during the reign of Emperor Justinian I in the city of Byzantium (later Constantinople, now Istanbul), the former capital of the ancient Byzantine Empire and later the Ottoman Empire. In 532 a great fire prompted a rebuilding project that is now regarded as the apotheosis of Byzantine art and architecture. Most of the existing structure of the Hagia Sophia dates from this period. The building remained as the largest cathedral ever built in the world for nearly a thousand years, until the completion of the Seville Cathedral in 1520.

As the legend on the medal indicates, the church was converted to a mosque in 1453 when Constantinople was conquered by the Ottoman Turks. It was restored during the reign of the Muslim ruler Sultan Abdul Medjid by the architect G. Fossati. Over the years of Ottoman rule, Christian features, such as the bells and altar, were removed, and Islamic features, such


as the four minarets, were added. The Hagia Sophia remained a mosque until more recent times when the government, now the Republic of Turkey, became more secular and converted this building into a museum.

While this medal does not overtly promote religious bigotry, it does tells the story of how a religious building changes depending upon the religious practices of the different power structures, and implies that the conquering group does not often tolerate the religious observances of those it conquered. One might add that such religious intolerance has its counterpart in the manner in which the Native American Indian Nations were treated by their Christian European conquerors (Weiss 2012).

Abdul Aziz: Abdul Aziz (1830-1876), the second son of Sultan Mahmud II, was born in Constantinople. In 1861 he succeeded his brother Abdul Medjid, becoming the 32nd sultan of the Ottoman Empire. During their reigns, the Ottoman Empire still encompassed a considerable geographic area, extending through large parts of the Middle East, including portions of what is now Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Iraq, Jordan, the Palestinian territories, Egypt, the coasts of the Arabian Peninsula, swaths of Southern and Eastern Europe, and Northern Africa, including sections of what is now Tunisia, Libya, Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia (Figure 12).

Although he was educated in the Ottoman tradition, Abdul Aziz greatly admired the progress of the Western countries, and in 1867 he became the first Ottoman sultan to travel to Western Europe, visiting Vienna, Paris and London, the latter prompting the issuance of a medal commemorating his visit, the subject of this discourse.

In 1870 he created the Bulgarian exarchate (an administrative district of the Eastern Orthodox Church in the Byzantine Empire), thus separating the Bulgarian church from the Greek

Church at Constantinople. He acquired great wealth but squandered it extravagantly. The sultan’s profligacy led to an outbreak of Muslim discontent and fanaticism and culminated in Bulgarian atrocities.

Abdul Aziz was an intellectual, writing histories of the Ottoman Empire and composing music. He also expanded the museum system.

The sultan was deposed in 1876 by a group of prominent politicians. His death is attributed to suicide.

So why did Abdul Aziz visit London in 1867?

In 1867, having concluded treaties of commerce with France and England, Abdul Aziz decided to travel to Western Europe to visit a number of important European capitals. He first visited the exhibition at Paris. From there he traveled to the United Kingdom where he was afforded several honors, one of which was to be made a Knight of the Garter. Figure 13 shows a painting of Queen

Victoria investing Sultan Abdul Aziz with the Order of the Garter on board the Royal yacht. The Sultan is accompanied by his nephews and young son.

While in England, he accepted a previous invitation from the Corporation of London to visit the Guildhall (for a medallic image of the Guildhall, see Figure 1), prompting the issuance of a medal commemorating this event (Figure 2).

The visit of Abdul Aziz to the Guildhall was described in some detail in Numismata Londinensia, accordingly: The Sultan was transported in the Queen’s carriage and was seated with the Prince of Wales and Lord Mayor of London. Besides entertainment which included a concert, ball and supper, there was a welcoming address given by a representative of London, containing the following statements: “… We rejoice too, to see in your Imperial Majesty an enlightened Sovereign, who unites to a firm attachment to his own faith, the desire to afford to all his subjects the free exercise of their religion.”Abdul Aziz responded by stating the purpose of his visit, as follows: “I have two objects in view in visiting this and other parts of Europe: one to see in these centers of civilization what still remains to be done in my own country, to complete the work which we have begun; the other, to show my desire to establish, not only among my own subjects, but between my people and the other nations of Europe, that feeling of brotherhood which is the foundation of human progress and the glory of our age.”

ConclusionAs scholarly collectors of medals, we must always question the validity of past pronouncements and descriptions of the material we collect. An example of this dictum is presented in this article, which reveals an error in the identity of a building on the reverse of the medal commemorating the visit of the Sultan of Turkey, Abdul Aziz, to London in 1867. While this may seem to be a relatively unimportant and even trivial revelation,

Figure 12. Territory of Ottoman Empire in mid-nineteenth century ([email protected]).


References: Brown, Laurence A. , British Historical Medals 1837-1901 Volume II: The Reign of Queen Victoria. B.A Seaby Ltd., 1987.

Eidlitz, Robert James, Medals and Medallions Relating to Architects. New York, l927.Eimer, Christopher, British Commemorative Medals and Their Values. Spink and Son Ltd., London, 2010.

Endnotes: 1. www.historicalartmedals.com/MEDAL%20WEB%20ENTRIES/THUMBNAILS/CITY%20OF%20LONDON/brand%20new%20thumbnails.htm

2. www.historicalartmedals.com/MEDAL%20WEB%20ENTRIES/THUMBNAILS/BELGIUM/WIENER-EUROPEAN%20CATHEDRALS/brand%20new%20thumbnails.htm

it does provide the important lesson to us all that errors may find their way into the numismatic literature and remain so for more than a century. The answer to how this may occur lies in the blind acceptance of material in deservedly reputable and historically important standard reference books on these medals, in this case Numismata Londinensia. Published in 1894 and prepared with the authority of the Corporation of London under the direction of the Library Committee and written by Charles Welch, Librarian to the Corporation of London, it is considered the “bible” on this series of medals. The message to numismatists is that no matter the reputation of the author and publisher, we must be aware that errors do crop up even in apparently unimpeachable sources, and we should consider it our duty to correct them.

Figure 13. Queen Victoria Investing the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Aziz I with the Order of the GarterBy George Housman Thomas, 1867, Oil on Canvas. (From Wikimedia).

Eldem, Edhem , Pride and Privilege: A History of Ottoman Orders, Medals and Decorations, First Edition, Ottoman Bank Archives and Research Centre, Istanbul, 2004.

Forrer, L., Biographical Dictionary of Medallists- Vol. II. Original Edition published in London (1902-1930). Reprinted by Spink (1965) and by Franklin, New York (1970). Third reprint and revised Volume I published by A. H. Baldwin and Sons and A. G. van der Dussen (1980) printed by Cultura Press, Belgium.

Öztuncay, Bahattin, The Photographers of Constantinople; Pioneers, Studios and Artists from 19th Century Istanbul. Istanbul: Aygaz, 2003, p. 208.

Page-Divo, F. and Divo, J-P., Medailles de Napoleon III, Hess Divo AG, Zurich, 2001.

Reinecke, K., Jacques Wiener-Europa in Munzen, Medaillen, Briefmarken, Verlag Europaische Begenungstatte am Kloster Kamp e. V., Kamp-Lintfort Druck Ewen-Druck, Kamp-Lintfort. Ordenmuseum Abtei Kamp Exhibition Catalogue, 1989.

Taylor, Jeremy, The Architectural Medal England in the Nineteenth Century. Published by British Museum Publication Ltd., London l978.

Van Hoydonck, Emiel , Jacques Wiener (1815-1899)- Medailles Jetons, 1 ere Edition, l972.

Weiss, Benjamin, Historical and Commemorative Medals: Collection of Benjamin Weiss, http://www.historicalartmedals.com/ 2003-2016.

Weiss, Benjamin, “Medallic History of the War of 1812: Consequences to the American Indian Nations,” Journal of the Medal Collectors of America The MCA Advisory, Vol.15, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. pp. 1-32, 2012.

Welch, Charles, Numismata Londinensia. Medals Struck by the Corporation of London to Commemorate Important Municipal Events 1831-1893. Blades, East and Blades, London, l894.

Wiener, Jacques, Medals of the Most Remarkable Edifices of Europe. See Reinecke and also Van Hoydonck.


T he familiarity that I have with the Breton manuscript catalogue, a portion of which, was featured

in the July/August 2016 issue of The MCA Advisory (List of the rarest collection of Indian Chief relics Medals &c &c and other medals ever offered) has prompted me to expand further on the subject. Following the 14 offerings of the Indian Peace medals that were featured in The Advisory, the catalogue continued with the relevant Canadian medals associated with the Seven Year’s War, military medals relating to the War of 1812, the Fenian Raids of 1866 and 1870, and those of the rebellions at Red River in 1870 and the North-West in 1885.

The present paper tracks the medals sold to Robert Reford from the P.N. Breton sale, and later sold by Reford through a sale conducted by Sotheby’s. This has been relegated to the last section of this paper, but I felt it was necessary and hopefully interesting to note the various numismatists transacting with both Breton and Reford. This now included a third generation of collectors, some of whom I came to know personally and who were buyers at the Reford sale. I shall probably be accused of straying, as I have made references to the antiquarian activities of both Breton and Reford, and also of that later group. Many of these men, known to me, had diverse interests and this became more evident as I examined our earlier correspondence.

The Breton catalogue was as well a reminder of the two collections of papers that I had acquired. The first were those of Victor Morin, including work by L.A. Renaud relating entirely to the subject of North American Indian Peace medals. Morin had been a member of the Royal Society of Canada, and a president of the Montreal Historical Society. A notary by profession, he had practiced in Montreal since 1888 and lived in the city for the rest of his life. He attended Laval University where classes were held at the Chateau de Ramezay, and where he obtained degrees in 1888 and 1910. He is, of course, notable

for his work “Les medailles decernees aux Indiens,” published originally in the Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, in 1915, and in an author’s private edition in 1916.

The Morin papers on North American Indian medals, which included the Breton manuscript catalogue as well as the L.A. Renaud papers on the same subject, came into my hands as a result of their purchase from J. Douglas Ferguson in October, 1974. Doug, a collector since 1915 or 1916, had been a friend of Victor Morin and was able to purchase his fabulous collection of Indian medals around 1955. The Ferguson Indian medal collection included acquisitions from other collectors as well as Morin, but the latter’s collection, according to Ferguson, was the most important. Dealing mostly with descendants,

Ferguson had the “pick of the litter” of several of these prominent collections, which included those of Wickham and Gravel of Montreal, Dr. Langstroth of

Saint John, N.B., as well as the Baldwin collection of England. The Ferguson medals now form the backbone of the Indian medal collection at the Glenbow Foundation in Calgary, part of the Ferguson donation in 1966. Morin’s Indian trade silver was sold to Izzy Ehrlich, a well-known Montreal book dealer in Canadiana and Americana, who had also purchased some of the rare Morin books. Morin was ninety years of age when he made these transactions, but he was mentally alert and still actively attending to his notarial duties at the time; indeed he survived an additional five years after he sold his collections. The trade silver became an addition to the important silver collection formed by Henry Birks, now housed at the National Gallery of Canada.

The second collection of papers, a much larger group, was that of Robert Wilson

Reford, and pertained to his numismatic pursuits, as well as to his large collections of books and manuscripts. It also represented a smattering of papers relating to some of his

Tracking The BreTon /reford Medals and Their Provenance, MosTly Based on The BreTon ManuscriPT caTalogue

as well as coMMenTaries

By warren Baker

Robert W. Reford 1861-1951Montreal Multi-faceted Collector

P.N. Breton 1858-1917 Montreal Dealer


L.A. Renaud 1879-1954Collector, Agent and Curator

important Canadian art purchases. The List of the rarest collection of Indian Chief relics Medals &c and other medals ever offered, a catalogue containing 36 lots had been prepared, as noted in The MCA Advisory, by the famous Montreal dealer, P.N. Breton. Both the Morin and Reford copies of the catalogue had been written in a dark blue ink but, in the case of the one sent to Robert Reford, it was embellished with titles in red ink. The catalogue, or list as Breton referred to it, came in an exercise book of 48 pages, (24 leaves), though the descriptions are contained on only 12 leaves, the versos of which are blank. The successful purchaser of the collection, Robert Wilson Reford, was a wealthy merchant and first generation Canadian, whose father of the same name had emigrated from Antrim, Northern Ireland, in 1845 at the age of fourteen. Robert Reford, Sr. established Robert Reford & Company, shipping agents and importers about 1879. His son became involved in the business in 1889, and became his father’s partner in 1906, taking over in 1913 on his death.

Robert Reford, Jr. (1867-1951) was an outstanding Canadiana collector, but his art and print collections were far better known than were his numismatic or other collections. He had a large and fine collection of books, manuscripts, and maps, and was the possessor of the original oil portrait of Cunne Shote by Parsons, described by John Adams in The MCA Advisory issue of March, 2006. Reford also had acquired one of the portraits by Sir Peter Lely of Prince Rupert, to whom the Hudson’s Bay Company was chartered in 1670. His art collection, besides his well- known Canadian historical sketches, consisted of old masters and the prominent 18th and early 19th century British artists. Portraits were a favorite of Reford’s. Included in the collection was Madonna of the Yarnwinder, attributed to da Vinci, but others thought it to be of the school of da Vinci. It was eventually confirmed as a genuine da Vinci by Professor Martin Kemp of St. Andrew’s University in his study The Mystery of the Madonna of the Yarnfinder, published by the National Gallery of Scotland in 1992. However, the authentication came too late, as the family had returned the painting to the dealer after Reford’s death in 1951. He had owned the painting since 1928. One of the finest private holdings of art in Canada was certainly that of Robert Reford.

His numismatic collecting activities appear to have started in the early part of the 20th century, and, as with most of the elite Montreal collectors, he seems to have been guided in these pursuits by P.N. Breton and L.A. Renaud. He was active almost

up to the time of his death, as witnessed by a letter written to Douglas Ferguson to whom he was offering medals. The Depression affected him, though not as direly as some others, and he was attempting to sell some of his paintings in 1937. From his letter copies of 1950, his offerings of Canadian medals and art from his collections appear to have been unpleasant experiences for him. He had unsuccessfully offered his two Beaver Club medals to Roland Tree, of Henry Stevens Sons and Stile, and to Doug Ferguson. Those medals were the presently unlocated Henry MacKenzie medal, and the one presented to the brother of the founder of McGill University, John McGill.

A number of his oil paintings by Cornelius Krieghoff, a genre painter who depicted the old French Canadian “habitant” and Indians, their customs,

dwellings, and landscapes of the Quebec area were sold to Sigmund Samuel for his Canadiana Gallery at the Royal Ontario Museum. These transactions

were complicated, and caused Reford some anguish. Another of the items that Reford succeeded in selling was a letter in the hand of Horatio Nelson, written from on board the Albermarle at New York on November 15, 1782 to a junior officer. Captain Nelson was appointed commander of the H.M.S. Albermarle on August 15, 1781. In April of 1782 he crossed the Atlantic to Quebec, and in November sailed to New York and the Caribbean. The letter was sold by Reford to R.W.G. Vail, Director of the New York Historical Society in 1951, very possibly the last sale he made. The letter has for me a very interesting history, due to the discovery in the Reford papers of an envelope with the Reford business return address on the back flap. The face of the envelope bore the inscription The Baker’s Nelson/Kreighoff, written in Reford’s hand.

Within, were two illustrations of Kreighoff paintings, as well as a folded full page

illustrated newspaper article from the Saturday issue of The Montreal Daily Star, dated October 29 1898, titled A letter of Lord Nelson’s. Part of the text had the byline, Letter owned by a Montrealer caught my particular interest: the history of this letter is interesting. It was originally in the possession of an old Chelsea

Victor Morin 1865-1960 Montreal Writer and Collector


pensioner, who had refused large sums for it. He got into financial difficulty, however, and at last sold the document to Mr. B. Baker, second-hand bookseller of the Old Curiosity Shop, 2116 St. Catherine Street, Montreal. Mr. Ferrier obtained the letter from Mr. Baker about eight or ten years ago… James Ferrier was a well-known Montreal businessman and financier, and had also been the mayor of Montreal in 1845. He was one of Canada’s early numismatists, and notably one of the founders of the Numismatic & Antiquarian Society of Montreal. His numismatic collection was sold by Cogan in 1871. The sale, unfortunately, does not identify the owner, but McLachlan has done so in his article in the Numismatist for October, 1911. He also claimed that Alfred Sandham had catalogued the sale for Ferrier. The sale is disappointing in its Canadian content, although it contained a great token rarity. The sale lists only thirty-two Canadian lots, four of which were medals, and the star was the Archibald MacLennan Beaver Club medal which now resides in the collections of Library and Archives Canada, formerly known as the Public Archives of Canada. As Ferrier died in 1888 the letter must have been sold that year or one or two years prior to that date. Benjamin Baker, as a matter of great coincidence, was my great-grandfather. He had come to Canada in about 1869, settling in Montreal with his father, and setting up, by 1870, an engraving, stamp and stencil business. In 1886, possibly coincident with the year his father died, he opened the Old Curiosity Shop on St. Catherine Street and later at other locations. The Nelson letter came into the hands of Albert Britnell, well-known Toronto bookseller, who sold it to Robert Reford in May, 1906.

In July 1983 I received a letter from Alexis Reford, grandson of Robert Wilson Reford, seeking information on one of the Fenian bonds, which at that time was still in the hands of the family. This communication soon led to our meeting in that month, and a friendship which lasted till his death on September 22, 1998. Alexis was the then current president of the Robert Reford Company, Limited.

About fifteen years after Robert Reford’s passing, Alexis’ father, Eric, undertook the responsibility of selling his father’s numerous collections. The first sale occurred at Christie’s, London on July 5, 1967, with the offering of a single item, that

being …A Manuscript Chart of the St. Lawrence River by Captain James Cook. It was followed by an offering of some of Reford’s

historical manuscripts, most of which were Canadian related, at a Parke Bernet sale in New York on May 7, 1968. Sotheby (Canada), located in Toronto undertook the offering of Robert Reford’s valuable collection of water colours, prints and maps from the 27th to the 29th of May, 1968, and this was followed up by his coins and medals, again by Sotheby’s in Toronto, on the 30th of October, 1968. Another sale, though not entirely consisting of Reford’s properties, occurred at Sotheby in Toronto on April 22-24th, 1969. No medals were offered in this catalogue, but Reford’s Mohawk Prayer Book, dated, Quebec 1780 was, according to Sotheby, reputed to have been Chief Joseph Brant’s Prayer Book. Another important lot in that sale was the Rindisbacher watercolour portrait, executed in the winter of 1822 of Le Grand Serpent, Principal Chief of the

Sioux Tribe resident near The Lake Winnipeg drawing towards the the source of the Mississippi. The chief is portrayed with his medal, depicted in a generic fashion, the effigy being unrecognizable to even John Adams. This,

however, does not seem atypical as the young artist, attentive to his subject likely considered the medal to be of secondary interest. The uplifted head and oval appearance of the medal is reminiscent of some of the earlier Jesuit copper medals, but the size is much larger than those distributed by the Jesuits and the period that the picture was painted is far too late for any Jesuit influence. If any attempt at all was made to copy what the artist actually saw, perhaps the medal represents one of the Spanish types.

A lesser known sale occurred in Montreal in late April and for several days in May, 1971 at Jacoby’s. Though Reford was not noted in the catalogue to be a consignor, two lots of medals were identified as being his property and were later acknowledged by the auctioneer to have come from the

Reford collection. They had possibly been withheld from the Sotheby sale, but more

likely were simply misplaced at the time of that sale. On May 5th, the medals came up for sale. The first lot, number 915 was a George III shell medal, the size of which was unfortunately not recorded, though it is represented by a reasonable halftone print. The second medal is the Henry MacKenzie Beaver Club gold medal, which I purchased on behalf of Peter

James Ferrier. 1800-1888 Montreal Collector

P.M. Wickham. 1856-1937 Montreal Collector


Ludger Gravel 1864 - 1933 Montreal Collector

Winkworth for $2750. Henry MacKenzie was a cousin of Sir Alexander MacKenzie, the famous explorer and partner in the North West Company. The medal has a long numismatic history, having been in the collection of Montreal collector, Henry Mott, and sold at his sale, held by Cogan on June, 1876. Its selling price of $27.50 is notable, when compared with the “Montreal” medal to Tankalkel (Adams 1) which sold for $13.00! The MacKenzie Beaver Club medal was resold two years later by the purchaser, Henry W. Holland, through Woodward in November 1878. Holland had also purchased the Tankalkel medal which realized a profit of four dollars, almost balancing his loss of five dollars on the resale of the Beaver Club medal, which came into the hands of W.W.C. Wilson at some point and was sold in his 1925 sale to L.A. Renaud on behalf of Robert Reford.

Based on Sarah Elizabeth Ivory’s master’s thesis The European Art And Canadiana Collections Of Robert Wilson Reford (1867-1951), family accounts suggest that he started collecting in 1884, but 1888 may be closer to the mark, as Reford’s father is recorded as stating that he was “investing in art” in that year. According to the inventories, invoices, and correspondence in my possession, the earliest record of a purchase was in 1899, when he records a purchase of three watercolors of Montreal by Walter Baker, and two sketches by Percy Allen Woodcock. These, of course, constitute Canadiana purchases, and Reford’s early passion was in the old masters and European art. The earliest record that I have of a numismatic acquisition, and in that discipline he appears to have preferred Canadian material, is in 1907, when he purchased an Upper Canada Preserved cased silver medal, a restrike, and a couple of European military decorations. The letter offering the medals, however, suggests that he had had some experience prior to that date.

The purchase of the entire Breton offering constitutes the most important part of the Sotheby sale of October 30th 1968. His correspondence and other documents tell of Reford’s other numismatic contacts, and provide provenance on several more of the medals sold at the Reford Sale, not part of the Breton collection. There were two typescript copies of the Breton manuscript, each one meriting close examination as they provided subtle insight into the transaction. His inventory notebook, organized

alphabetically under the names of the sellers was also helpful, although in the case of the Breton purchase no date is given

as to when the transaction took place. The numismatic contacts in the context of additions that Reford made to his collections were not as widespread as one would have hoped. S.H. Chapman, L.A. Renaud, P.N. Breton, James Reid, Louis Laurin, F.H. Alexander of Winnipeg, Baldwin of London, and Mallett & Son of Bath, England are the only names in the archives, but there were no doubt a few others with whom personal transactions took place and no record survives. This latter group would, however, be few in number, as Reford kept good written records of his acquisitions, even though this does not appear to be the case in the beginning.

One of the typescripts has the distinction of identifying Breton as either the owner of the medals, or the agent of the sale. The manuscript

does not so identify him, nor have prices been assigned to the lots, although Breton

has been named as the cataloguer on the title page by Doug Ferguson in the Morin copy of the manuscript. Three copies are known to me of Breton’s manuscript catalogue, but surely

a few others must have been produced. McLachlan, Robie Reid, Wickham, Gravel, and Langstroth, and many in the United States would have been prospective buyers, but not likely for the entire collection. It was certainly a stylish, (howbeit time-consuming) way of offering a collection of this importance, and a departure from his practice of issuing printed lists. When this catalogue was issued is unknown, but the Breton/Reford correspondence occurs for a very short period between August 9th 1916, Breton’s first letter, and ends on October 30th, 1917 with Reford’s last letter to Breton. The first Breton letter refers to his purchase of the Learmont collection, a sale McLachlan would have been surprised about, having stated in his closing of Learmont’s obituary notice in The Numismatist for June, 1914 that “His

collection remains at the disposal of his widow, but it is not likely to be placed on the market, as he left no instructions to that effect in his will.” There is no talk in the McLachlan obituary about Learmont’s collection of medals, other than the 1768 version of the Louisbourg medal, but he may have been careful about making an announcement if he had designs on the collection. The sole offering of a medal from the Learmont collection to Reford is found in Breton’s

James Reid d. 1917 Montreal Collector


letter of August 10th, 1916, the day following the one in which he announced his purchase of the Learmont collection. This was an example of Morin 3, the medal representing the crowning of Louis XV in 1722 (Sacre de Louis XV, 1722). I have no record within the Reford papers that he purchased it, and it was not present in the Sotheby sale. Morin had found his specimen in Lorette on the Huron reserve. It had been, according to Morin, in the hands of the family of Chief Bastian for almost two centuries. If the collection of medals sold by Breton to Reford was the Learmont collection, I cannot verify it.

Another of the typescripts, a carbon copy, assigns values to each of the thirty six lots sold to Reford, but the prices don’t appear to be in Breton’s hand, and seem to have been entered by Reford himself. The value of the medals and artifacts in the Breton offering totaled $4553.00 for all thirty-six items in both the Reford inventory, as well as on the carbon copy typescript. The totals from those two documents conflict with the pencil note at top of the carbon copy: P.N. Breton/$3650. One can only speculate as to Reford’s actual cost for the collection, but it seems unlikely that it was $4350. The lower total was probably the asking or negotiated price, and the entries in the inventory and carbon copy likely represent evaluations established by Breton for Reford, or Reford’s personal assessment of values.

What may have been one of Breton’s last letters was one sent to Robert Reford. There were no numismatic offerings, but the letter is insightful as to other antiquarian interests shared by both men: the items to be considered were two ceinture flechees, two flintlock pistols, a Fleury Mesplet imprint, and five rare Quebec coloured lithographs. Reford’s response, the following day reads as follows: Present serves to acknowledge yours of October 29th. I am leaving for New York tonight, but will try to call and see you on my return. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that they never again communicated, as a mere twelve days later Pierre Napoleon Breton died suddenly, apparently stricken by a heart attack on his way home from the purchase of a collection of Canadian books.

The Reford numismatic sale was an important event, attracting collectors and dealers from both Canada and the United States, and bringing in European bidders as well. It

was participated in by old friends such as John Ford, and Bob Vlack, as well as new acquaintances, such as Peter Winkworth, to whom I was introduced by Peter Mitchell of Sotheby. Other collectors with whom I eventually came in contact were Bob Band, recently deceased, a friend and great collector; another, Sam Weir of Niagara Falls, unknown in numismatic circles outbid John Ford on the “Happy While United” medal, purchasing it at $3300.00 ($3080 U.S.) - no buyer’s premium in those days. Andrew Merrillees of Toronto was another collector, previously unknown to me that participated in the sale, and I eventually made contact with him through an invitation to his house where his two large turtles had free reign. He was a modern day railroad tycoon, and anything relating to the early

days of the railway was of interest, including the cars and the engines. He didn’t like

being outbid at auction, and claimed that he had only lost one item to another bidder. On that occasion he was furious, and demanded of the auction house personnel as to who had the affrontery to have bid against him. When he was told that it was the Baron de Rothschild, he was somewhat placated.

To co-relate the medals sold by Breton to Reford with those sold at the Reford sale in October, 1968 is not without problems as lotting in the Reford sale brought in medals purchased from other sources as well. The first listing therefore includes only pieces sold by Breton, and a second listing represents medals in the Reford sale purchased from other dealers and collectors. I’ve attempted to establish both from whom, and when Robert Reford acquired his medals, and have as well followed up with the purchasers

at the Sotheby Sale. The prices realized at that sale have been noted, as well as the

identity of the successful bidder. I have also continued to give short commentaries of a personal nature on those with whom I came in contact at the sale. The last entry is the value assigned by Robert Reford, which is entered in both the carbon copy list, as well as in Reford’s inventory, housed in a small black leatherette loose-leaf binder.

Cover of P.N. Breton’s Handwritten Fixed Price List

Joseph B. Learmont 1839-1914. Montreal Collector


NuMber 1. Brant gorget. H.A. Dean had acquired the gorget directly from a descendant, the great, great, granddaughter of the celebrated Chieftain, Captain Joseph Brant. In a typescript and manuscript sworn declaration in the matter of the sale of the gorget to Dean, Catherine Sero traced the provenance as follows:

That on the death of the said Chieftan (sic) Captain Joseph Brant the said Gorget descended to his daughter Elizabeth Brant, known as Betsy Brant. That the said Elizabeth or Betsy Brant presented the said Gorget to my Uncle Abraham Brant who was a brother of my Father, John S. Brant. That my Uncle Abraham Brant was drowned in or about the year (not entered) That my grandmother Rachael Brant, the mother of my said Uncle and Father got possession of said medal and presented the same to my Father, John S. Brant, and my said Father had same in his possession about twenty years, and after his death I being the eldest child - (handwritten, initialled, in pen by F.S.W Allbridge, “A Commissioner”) have had absolute possession of same for over twenty years and I - became entitled to same and I am now selling the same to Mr. H.A. Dean. Signed at Belleville, in the County of Hastings, 25th day of Novr., 1910 by Catharine sero (sic). A second declaration of the same date is a much more abbreviated but precise version as to the ownership: I Catherine Sero of the Village of Shannonville in the County of Hastings, Widow do solemnly declare, that I am the absolute owner of the above mentioned Gorget and that I have the absolute right to sell and dispose of the same and no one else has any claim or interest therein of any kind. I obtained said Gorget “from my Father” the same having descended to me from him, I being the person entitled to the same after his death. And I further declare that I have to-day sold the same for valuable consideration to H.A. Dean and I acknowledge to have received such valuable consideration from him. Both documents are signed by “A Commissioner”, F. S. Wallbridge. The document makes no reference to the cost of the gorget, the most valuable item in the Breton offering which had been purchased by Dean in 1910. The value of the gorget had been assigned at $1000.00 by Breton or Reford. The gorget now resides with the Mohawks in Brantford, having been purchased by the Rev. Philip McCready of Toronto on their behalf at Sotheby’s Art Sale (lot 280), held on May 27-29 1968.

It sold for $13,000, giving it the distinction of exceeding in value every valuable print, map and watercolor in the sale, with the exception of the Duncan watercolor sketch album which now resides in the Royal Ontario Museum collection.

Phil was one of the premier art dealers in Canada and also handled some rather large collections of antiquarian books. The values assigned at the end of the descriptions which follow below are those given in the Reford inventory, and on the carbon typescript.

NuMber 2. As can be seen by the illustration in The Advisory combined five wonderful relics which had been the property of Captain Isaac Hill (Anoghsoktea). These artifacts had also belonged to H.A. Dean as can be seen by the catalogue of the Indian exhibit on page 90 of the Ontario Historical Society’s sponsored exhibit of historical Canadian objects held at Victoria College, Toronto, on June 14th to 28th, 1899. The first of the Hill artifacts listed in the Victoria College catalogue is the George III Indian Peace medal given to

Captain Hill, a contemporary of Brant, as no. 7. The crown deed for services, issued in 1802 is noted as no. 10, while the sword and silver spoon are part of no. 8 in the listing, and the Mohawk Prayer Book is probably the 6th

listed item. This is the most valuable group in the list, being valued at $1500.

NuMber 3. The rare Mohawk Prayer Book, no 5 in the Dean exhibit had belonged to Captain Deseronto. None of the six artifacts, represented by Nos. 2 and 3 were presented for sale at Sotheby’s, but were likely sold to the bookseller William P. Wolfe, whose shop’s front entrance on Hospital Street virtually backed into the rear of the office of the Reford Office Building on St. Sacrement Street. I acquired Captain Hill’s Crown Deed from Bill Wolfe in the early 1970s. These first three listings had been in the Indian Exhibit at the Canadian Historical Exhibition, sponsored by the Ontario Historical Society, and held at Victoria College from June 14th to the 28th, 1899. It was valued at $100.

NuMber 4. Indian Chief Peace Medallion. (The Happy While United medal, 1764). Adams 2/5 represents lot 108 in the Reford Sale, Oct., 1968, purchased by Sam Weir for $3300 for his museum in Niagara Falls. Valued at $110.

Hiram Alanzo Dean 1863-1918 Ontario collector

Robert Wallace McLachlan 1845-1926 Montreal/ Writer and collector

bretoN objeCts ANd MedAls, CorresPoNdiNg with the reford sAle At sotheby, oCtober, 1968.


NuMber 5. Indian Chief Medal. (George III and Queen Charlotte Marriage medal). Adams 11/11, early census. This was lot 107 of the Reford Sale, sold for $720.00 to Sam Weir. Valued at $110.

NuMber 6. Indian Chief Medal. ( George III large size solid medal). Adams 7.1/13. modern census. This was lot 110 of the Reford sale, sold to Sam Weir for $1250. Valued at $110.

NuMber 7. Indian Chief Medal. (George III large size shells medal). Adams 7.3/59, early census. This represents lot 111 of the Reford sale, sold for $900.00 to Spink & Son. Valued at $110.

NuMber 8. Indian Chief Medal. (George III Medium Size Solid medal). Adams 8/14, early census. This was lot 117, sold at Reford Sale to Warda Drummond of Montreal for $1250.00. Miss Drummond was a niece of William Henry Drummond, the dialect poet whose book The Habitant and Other French-Canadian Poems became world famous. Valued at $110.

NuMber 9. Indian Chief Medal. (George III, 1814 medal). Adams 12.1/28, early census. Lot 118 of the Reford Sale, said to have belonged to Tecumseh. Purchased by Clarke, a collector unknown to me, for $1150.00. Valued at $120.

NuMber 10. Indian Chief Medal. (George III, 1814 medal). Adams 12.1/29. Lot 119 of the Reford Sale, which sold to Lieut-Col. Malcolm Ferguson, an agent for Parks Canada for $780.00. Valued at $110.

NuMber 11. Indian Chief Medal. (George III, medium size medal, 1814). Adams 13.1/7. This is lot 120 of the Reford Sale, which sold to Warda Drummond of Montreal for $1200.00. Valued at 110.

NuMber 12. Indian Chief Treaty Medallion. Silver medal for Treaty No. 6, 1876. Jam. Fig. 38. This was lot 122 of the Reford Sale, sold to Wells, a collector unknown to me. The price realized was $980. Valued at $110.

NuMber 13. Capture of Quebec 13th Sept. 1759. Bronze. Betts 421. With “William Pitt Administring” on edge. Part of lot 90, sold to L.M., unknown to me

for $360, including the following number 14. Valued at $50.

NuMber 14. Quebec Taken. Copper. This medal would appear to combine two obverses, that of the previous, and the “O Fair Britannia Hail” obverse. The medal as described

does not appear to be listed in any of the standard works, nor was it in the Ford or Adams collection, but the description tallies with the second medal in lot 90 of the Reford sale. Part of lot 90, sold to L.M. for $360, including the previous number 13. Valued at $100.

NuMber 15. Successes of 1758-59. Silver. Betts 416. This was part of lot 93 in the Reford sale, sold to Blair McDermid, a dealer and collector who lived on Manitoulin Island. The lot of four medals brought $290. Valued at $25.

NuMber 16. Successes of 1759. Silver. (Betts 418). Part of lot 93, purchased by Blair McDermid with three other medals. Lot of four medals sold for $290. Valued at $25.

NuMber 17. Belleisle Taken, 1761. Silver. (M-H. 370). Part of lot 92, purchased by

Blair McDermid with three other medals. Lot of three medals sold for $280. Valued at $25.NuMber 18. Capture of Belleisle, 1759. Gilt proof. (M.I.G. II, 441). Part of lot 92, purchased by Blair McDermid with three other medals. Lot of three medals sold for $280. Valued at $15.

NuMber 19. Canada Subdued, 1760. Silver. “William Pitt Administring” on edge. Betts 430. Lot 94, purchased by L.M. for $420. Valued at $50.NuMber 20. Canada Subdued, 1760. Bronze. Reford sale offers both copper and bronze examples. Betts 430. Lot 95, sold to Sam Weir for $660. Only the bronze medal is on the Breton list, valued at $10.

NuMber 21. Louisbourg Taken, 26th July 1758. Brass (pinchbeck). Breton’s description is for Betts 407, not one of the medals indicated in Lot 84 of the Reford Sale. That lot refers to four copper Louisbourg medals, viz. Betts 408, 409, 411 and 412. However Betts 403 through 406, four of the pinchbeck medals, were also included, though not tallied in the count. If all eight medals were present, the lot sold at a

bargain price of $170 to Sam Weir.

Henry Mott 1831-1914? Montreal collector

The Shop of P.N. Breton Montreal in 1951


Peter Winkworth 1929-2005 London Collector

Sam Weir 1898-1981 Niagara Falls Collector

NuMber 22. Hudson Bay Co. Medal. Bronze proof in Original Shell. Br. 181. Lot 115, sold to Johnston for $1600. Valued at $20.

NuMber 23. Chryslers Farm Medal. Silver, given to Joseph Portch 89th Foot. Br. 63. Lot 126, sold to East Hampton, N.Y. collector, Dr. Alan York for $650. Alan, a prominent collector of temperance and military medals, passed away earlier this year.

NuMber 24. Fort Detroit Medal. Silver, given to S. Wright Canadian Militia. Br. 64. Lot 124, sold to Spink & Sons for $480.

NuMber 25. Fort Detroit Medal. Silver, given to W. Dougall Canadian Militia. Br. 64. Lot 123, sold to Spink & Sons for $500.

NuMber 26. Chateauguay Medal. Silver, given to Heskatonuning “Warrior.” Lot 125 describes the Reford Chateauguay medal as being to Wighe Skaionwiio, Warrior. Barbara Wilson’s compilation of the Military General Service medals contains a section titled Indian chiefs and warriors and officers of the Indian Department, and the listing of Wishe Honastiokon would seem to somehow correspond with both descriptions given by Breton and the Sotheby catalogue of the Reford collection. Mullen’s work on the M.G.S. medals corresponds with Barbara Wilson’s listing in the case of the Indian chiefs and warriors. Sold to J.W. Brown, a Toronto dealer in military medals for $720. Valued at $40.

NuMber 27. Fenian Raid 1866, Fenian Raid 1870, 2 clasps. Silver, given to Staff Sergt. J. Taylor, Brockville & Ottawa Rifles A Co. Lot 129, sold to J.W. Brown for $200. Valued at $25.NuMber 28. Fenian Raid 1866, Red River 1870, 2 clasps. Silver, given to W. Crallin, Ontario Rifles. Lot 130, sold to J.J. Cloran for $550. Valued at $100.

NuMber 29. Fenian Raid 1866. Silver, given to Color Sergt. T. McMullen 9th (Battalion). Lot 127, sold to D. Matthews for $75. I had a brief correspondence with Mr. Matthews in November and December, 1968. Valued at $10.

NuMber 30. Fenian Raid 1866. Silver, given to T. Cambridge 14th P.W.O.R. Part of lot 134, containing three medals, which

sold for $180 to the late Ross Irwin, well known collector and writer on Canadian military medals. Medal valued at $8.

NuMber 31. Fenian Raid 1866. Silver, given to Bugler E. Harris, Campbellford Infantry Co. Part of lot 133, containing two medals sold for $110 to J.W. Brown. Above medal valued at $10.

NuMber 32. Fenian Raid 1870. Silver, given to Sergt. H. Johnston 18th Bn. Not offered at the Reford Sale. Valued at $15.

NuMber 33. Red River 1870. Silver given to Adec (A. de C.) Harvey Ontario Rifles. Lot 128, sold to Charles de Volpi for $580. Charles de Volpi was notably a collector and author on Canadian prints, and collector of manuscripts. He later in his life took up numismatics in a small way. Valued at $100.

NuMber 34. North West, Saskatchewan bar. Silver given to Corp. McMullen 10th Bn. R.G. Lot 132, sold to D. Matthews for $220. Valued at $15.

NuMber 35. North West, no clasp. Silver given to James C. Williams. Lot 131, sold to J. Shkwarek for $70. Valued at $5.

NuMber 36. Long Service in Colonial Forces. Silver, given to Bugler E. Harris, 16th Regt. Part of lot 133, sold with number 31 to J.W. Brown for $110. This medal valued at $15.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MedAls sold At the reford sAle, PurChAsed

froM sourCes other thAN P.N. bretoN.

lot 84. Lot of the four pinchbeck medals sold to Sam Weir for $170. This may be one of the medals in the lot sold by Mallett & Son, London for 5 pounds to Reford according to their invoice of June 28, 1912. Mallett’s invoice only describes a medal

“Louisbourg taken.” This seems to be an exceedingly high price for that period.


lot 89. French Indian “peace” medal, bronze, 1686. Purchased by Reford from Renaud in a lot offering. Valued at $10, but the lot of four medals was sold for $75 (see lots 105, 106, 114). This medal was purchased by Sam Weir for $660.

lot 91. Death of Wolfe 1759, by Gossett and Kirk, bronze. Sold by Renaud to Reford in his offering dated January 29, 1926 for $6.50. Purchased by Peter Winkworth for $180.

lot 92. Lot of three Belleisle medals. This may be the third medal, sold by Mallett & Son for 14 shillings, probably in bronze or copper, though the metal is not referenced in the Reford sale catalogue. The two others were sold by Breton (silver, and gilt).

lot 93. Lot of four “Successes” medals. The two types in silver sold from Breton catalogue. Mallett sold one to Reford for 17/6p., probably the copper or bronze medal.

lot 97. Upper Canada Preserved, 1812, silver medal. Sold to Refort by Renaud on January 29, 1926 for $25. Another of the same, but a cased medal, was sold to Reford on June 7, 1907 by James Reid, who commented that “Spink offers the bronze at five pounds, ten shillings.” This second medal is not likely the one in the Sotheby sale, as that specimen does not seem to have been cased, or at least was not described as such.

lot 99. Sir George Etienne Cartier silver medal. Sold by L.A. Renaud to Refort on January 29, 1926 for $50. This was a very high price for that period.

lot 101. Lot of three shooting medals The 1871 Manitoba Rifle Association medal in silver was sold by Renaud to Refort for $5 in his offering of January 29, 1926.Lot 105. George I copper medal by J. Croker, Betts 165. Purchased from Renaud in an undated lot offering. Renaud valued the medal at from $35 to $50 , but the lot of four medals was sold for $75. (See lots89, 106 and 114). Sold to Sam Weir for $75.

lot 106. George II brass medal, Betts167. Purchased from Renaud by Refort in an undated offering of four medals. Renaud valued the medal at from $40 to $60, but offered the lot at $75 (see lots 89, 105 and 114). Sold to Sam Weir for $840.

lot 109. George III large size silver shell medal. (Adams 7.1/57, early census), sold to Reford by S.H. Chapman in October 1923. This medal was from the Hunter sale (lot 55), an unsold lot which appeared to have had a reserve of $90.00, bought in at $75.00 by Chapman. Sold at the Reford sale to Sam Weir for $1100.

lot 112. George III large size solid medal. (Adams 7.2/60, early census), sold to Johnson, an unknown collector to me for $980. It had been acquired from S. H. Chapman for $60.

in October, 1923; he described it as similar to lot 59 of the Hunter sale.

lot 113. George III large size solid medal. (Adams 7.3/61, early census), sold to Spink & Sons for $880. It had been sold to Reford by S. H. Chapman for $70 in October, 1923 and was described as similar to lot 60 of the Hunter sale. It was purchased by Spink & Sons.

lot 114. Simcoe medal by Miller, 1794. This medal occurs in an undated offering by L.A. Renaud to Reford, with his estimate “value up to $100,” but he had sold it with three other medals at $75. He had established values of $185 – quite a discount!lot 115. Hudson’s Bay Company medal. (Br. 181, Jam. Fig. 20) Sold to Johnson for $1600. Reford, according to the invoice of Mallett & Son, London, dated

June 28, 1912 purchased the medal for 7 pounds.

lot 116. Hudson’s Bay Company medal, (Br. 181 rev.). This may be the medal sold by Mallett in his offering and sale of 1912 to Reford. The medal offered is not described as having a case but, as Mallett’s description are of a minimal nature, this may represent the one he sold to Reford. The medal sold for $900 to Wells.

lot 121. Victoria, large electrotype treaty medal, 1872. Sold to Reford by Renaud on January 29, 1926 for $40. Renaud described it as “copper, silver gilt cast from Confederation medal. Dies joined and bound by rim. Indians refused this as it was not silver.” Sold to Ward A. Drummond for $1200.

It is gratifying to a researcher and collector to be able to document objects sold more than fifty years later as a result of records left behind by the acquirer of medals and artifacts. The collector, Robert Reford, has himself passed on sixty-five years ago, and one of his numismatic mentors, Pierre Napoleon Breton, passed away just short of a century ago.

The sale of medals and artifacts by Breton to Reford took place just shy of 100 years ago!! The result of the sale of Brant’s gorget and nine Indian peace medals sold to Robert Reford, rated at the higher inventory value (not at what Reford apparently paid), amounted to $2000 in 1916. The total of the Sotheby sales in 1968 were $54,830 for the same items. In my opinion, that group of ten items would achieve upwards of $200,000 today.


At the Berlin (Germany) auction held by Fritz Rudolf Künker on February 2, 2017, a rare War of 1812 gold medal was sold for €200,000. This one honored Major

General Alexander Macomb for the Battle of Plattsburgh that occurred on September 11, 1814. The final price, including the buyer’s fee of 20 percent, amounted to €240,000, assuming that the buyer was in the United States. If purchased by a European collector the final price would have been 23 percent above the €200,000 hammer price. [It was purchased by a European. Ed.] Alexander Macomb was born at Detroit on April 3, 1782, the son of a fur merchant and his French wife. (At that time, despite the 1783 peace treaty ending the Revolutionary War, Detroit was still under British control). The family soon moved to New York. Macomb joined the United States Army at an early age and quickly rose in rank as his abilities became known. The battle of Plattsburgh was his crowning achievement and a signal victory for the American cause during the War of 1812. The British army, under General George Prévost, had moved south from Canada in August 1814 in an effort to split New England off from the rest of the United States. The route of the British was along the western side of Lake Champlain, possibly aiming for the Hudson River and New York City. With about 14,000 men under his command the prospects of success were good, a fact painfully clear to the American military men in the area. General Macomb was given the difficult task of stopping the British advance with such soldiers as could be gathered on short notice. In all, his troops numbered less than 4,000, far short of what he thought was needed. Some of the troops were little better than invalids, making Macomb’s problems even worse. Reinforcements were received from the local militias before the main battle on September 11, but the numbers were still far short of those available to General Prevost. Despite being hampered by a lack of troops under his direct command, Macomb energetically created defensive positions designed to block the British army advance at Plattsburgh. At the same time that Prévost began his march, the British had launched gunboats on the Canadian end of Lake Champlain. Captain Thomas Macdonough was ordered to stop this avenue of attack with such armed ships as he could muster. On September 11, 1814, the British forces launched all-out attacks by land and lake at Plattsburgh and the outcome was in doubt for some hours. At length, however, both Macomb on land and Macdonough on the water were overwhelmingly victorious and the British forces under Prévost forced to rapidly retreat under great pressure. The retreat was so sudden that large quantities of military and naval supplies had to be abandoned.

The threat to New England was now over. British authorities in Canada were so angered by Prévost’s failure that he was under a cloud of suspicion and never again served in the military. In all fairness to the British commander, however, he knew that he could not proceed once the naval battle had been lost. Due to the accusations against him, however, a court-martial was scheduled for 1816 but Prévost died before it could convene. Congress soon recognized the signal victories at Plattsburgh

and Lake Champlain and gold medals were approved for both commanders. That for Macomb came on

November 3, 1814, less than two months after the battle. Despite the prompt Congressional

action on the award for Alexander Macomb it would be some years before the gold medal was struck and presented to the Plattsburgh victor. As Congress had awarded numerous medals for victories on both land and sea, the War and Navy Departments naturally

wished to have their medals done as soon as possible. The Navy struck first, hiring

assistant mint engraver John Reich to begin work on the dies for Captain Isaac Hull. The

Hull dies were soon completed and Reich then began work on the medal for Captain Stephen Decatur.

However, Reich’s eyesight failed at this critical juncture and the obverse die was so badly done that it was

called a caricature by the Navy Department. At this point Moritz Fürst was hired by the

Navy Department and he was to complete the naval dies ordered by Congress. As Fürst was the only competent die sinker then available, the Army had no choice except to wait until this engraver was free to work on the military medals, which did not come until late 1819. The dies for the Macomb medal

were executed in 1821 and 1822, but Chief Coiner Adam Eckfeldt was very slow to

harden the dies. In December 1823, the reverse die in fact broke in hardening and had to

be done anew by Fürst. The Macomb medal in gold was finally struck by the chief coiner in December 1824 and

duly presented to the General by the War Department. Macomb died on June 25, 1841 at Washington, DC; at that time he was the Commanding General of the United States Army, having served in that post since 1835. The original gold medal was kept in the Macomb family and it was a descendant who finally sold the medal at the Künker sale in February of this year. The illustration with this article is of the original gold medal as it appeared on the Künker website. The Philadelphia Mint sold copper-bronzed copies of the Macomb medal beginning in the spring of 1861. After 1900, however, the Mint switched to sand-blasted bronze. The Macomb medal, along with many others, ceased to be struck for public sale in the 1980s and today can be obtained only on the secondary market.

THE ALEXANDER MACOMB MEDALBy R.W. Julian

A MedAllic concept

1. Carlo Rovelli’s short masterpiece Seven Brief Lessons on Physics

2. A visualization of gravitational waves caused by two rapidly orbiting black holes in a binary system

3. Schematic of two black holes colliding, to create gravitational waves

4. The concept emerges

5. A medal is created

For more on A Medallic Concept, see page 71

2

3

4

5

volume 20 – number 2 march – april 2017historicalartmedals.com/mca april 2017 e version...

Documents