All contributions are welcome to be forwarded, please inform us for reprinting
In 2018, Maoyan was entrusted by Mr. John Saunders, a well-known collector in California, to transfer his catalogue of Belgian gold coins to Mr. Dan O'Dowd, the creator of the "Tyrant Collection". Mr. Sanders, a well-known expert and top collector of Low Countries coinage, hopes to use his book to "inspire" Mr. O'Dowd to include Low Countries coins, especially Belgian coins, in the Tyrant Collection.
However, it backfired, and Mr. O'Dowd tossed it aside after a brief glance at the catalog. Out of curiosity, I asked him why there were no Belgian coins in the "Tyrant Collection". Mr. O'Dowd said:
"I always felt that Belgium was a fake country created by man, it was not an independent civilization, and I could not be attracted by Belgian coins."
It is inevitable to generalize, but if you look at the Belgian currency tradition alone, it seems that this is the perception of the country.
Historically, Belgium and the Netherlands (Low Countries) may have produced the most medals and substitutes in Europe during the late Renaissance (or "Northern Renaissance"), but it was also the most "fake" place in numismatic culture.
A significant number of the beautiful medallions commemorating major historical events in Britain and Spain were made in the Netherlands. Or, on the other hand, coins from the Netherlands are often based on the history of other countries.
Medal for the victory at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571 It is believed that this medal was made in 1571 by the city of Utrecht (present-day Netherlands) to congratulate King Philip II of Spain on his victory at the Battle of Lepanto. Lots sold at Tauler & Fau, Spain, June 2020.
This is a very peculiar atmosphere of coin culture. Just as the capital pouring into Hong Kong did not all serve the welfare of the local population faithfully, the art of coinage in the Netherlands sometimes served neutrally throughout Western Europe, rather than merely as a vehicle for its own culture. This tradition of coins and medals, stripped of the will of the country, laid the foundation for the future internationalization of the art of Dutch coins and medals, and even the industrial chain of mass production of coins and medals with foreign motifs.
Cast plaque with the heads of King Philip II of Spain and Queen Mary I of England Around 1555-1558, Jacques Jon-Rink (1530-1606) was made in Brussels in the style of Jacob da Trezzo (1515-1589). Lots sold at Nomos in Switzerland in October 2016.
The Eurasian coins we see today are always more or less "evil" in Brussels (excluding Belgian coinage). This can probably be regarded as a legacy of the Dutch badge tradition. This peculiar coin culture has created quite a few troubles, risks, and mysteries for contemporary numismatic enthusiasts, and has in turn added a lot of fun and challenges to numismatic collecting.
5 Peseta silver coin of the Spanish usuror "Carlos VII" "1874", made in Brussels. We will discuss these coins below. Auction lot at Sovereign Rarities, UK, February 2024.
In this article, Maoyan will give you a brief introduction and discuss the unsolved problems behind the strange patterns, specimens, and medals made (or purportedly made) in Brussels.
1. Brussels ≠ Brussels:
The tradition of Dutch medallions
In the 16th century, the South Netherlands was the economic and trade center of Western Europe, and Bruges and Antwerp were the richest international ports in European trade. The development of the economy is accompanied by the prosperity of art, which naturally includes the prosperity of currency art.
Painter and Buyer, 1565, Pieter Bruegel the Elder. The figure on the left side of the painting may be a self-portrait of the artist. Pieter Bruegel the Elder was one of Antwerp's most iconic painters of the 16th century.
Gerald van Luen's 1723 book A History of the Low Countries on Coins, or a <乌特勒支和约>Brief History of the 12 Dutch Provinces from the time Emperor Charles V handed over the government to his son King Philip, until the signing of the Dutch medallion tradition is explained in a few words. (That's how long Van Luen's book is called.)
Published in 2021 as an English translation of Gerard van Luen's History of the Low Countries on Coins, edited by John Sanders (mentioned at the beginning of this article), adds a large number of physical images to the original book. Maoyan is currently using this version as well.
In short, Van Luen argues that the Dutch tradition of tokens and medals originated in antiquity as counting chips, evolved into beautifully crafted crafts in Rome and the Middle Ages, developed into credentials or souvenirs in the Dutch provincial councils during the Renaissance (the book says that "people carved the history of the country", which sounds very close to medals), and finally became a regular New Year's gift given by Dutch parliaments at all levels.
The 1579 Dordrecht Historical Count Token depicts the battle and the beheading of the Earls of Egmont and Horn on June 5, 1568. CNG Auction Company January 2014 Triton Special Auction Lot.
Van Luen's explanation may not be entirely reliable, but it is worth noting that in the eyes of an 18th-century coin and medalist, tokens and medals have a unique heritage and political and social role that is different from that of coins.
From an empirical point of view, this view is quite plausible. In the 17th and 18th centuries, large precious metal medallions of the German Confederation always weighed as coins of similar size, so that the medallion was not completely separated from the category of coins, which shows the close relatives between the medals and coins. The situation in the Netherlands is quite different, with a wide variety of tokens and badges in a variety of sizes and sometimes self-contained systems, regardless of the size of the coins or their face value.
1648 Münster Peace of Westphalia Medallion This medallion weighs about 1.25 Taylor of the coins in circulation at the time. New York auction lot by SBP Auction Company in the United States in January 2023.
This explains why Dutch tokens and medals are always very beautiful, but coins are always crude—when the function of commemoration and recognition is fully taken over by the medallion, the coins do not have to be overly elaborate because they only serve trade.
1736 100th Anniversary of Utrecht University Auction Lot, August 2023, SBP Auction Company, USA
1 guilder silver coin struck in Utrecht in 1736 Compared to the medal above, the coins of the same year appear very rough. May 2024 auction lot by Heritage Auctions Europe, USA
Moreover, whether Van Luen's conclusions about the development of medals are credible or not, we can at least be sure that in the 16th-18th centuries, with which he lived and was familiar, artistic medals were a necessity in many political and social activities in the Netherlands.
Unfortunately, Van Luen does not give enough information about the industrial structure of the Dutch medals themselves (the relationship between engravers, mould making, raw material transportation, workshops, mints, merchants, supply chains, pricing, and production). However, this is not an isolated case, and although the industrial structure of coins and medals can provide ideas for explaining some of the problems associated with tokens, medals, patterns, and special coinage, it is still a problem that most numismatists often overlook.
In any case, the prosperity of the Dutch coin industry is not only due to the government-run mint, but also to the efforts of private workshops, artists and other practitioners. In 19th-century Belgium, there were as many as 25 private coin workshops in Brussels alone, many of which were small private mints equipped to produce coins for overseas countries.
Many of these private workshops have been lost, and many of the later accounts are unknown, making the origins of the rare coins that may have originated from these private workshops (or in which they were involved in some part of the minting process) seem rather mysterious. In other words, many coins that are believed to have been made in "Brussels" are not necessarily struck by the official "Brussels Mint".
"1863 Queen Victoria 1 Shilling Pattern" This "pattern" is not an official pattern and the obverse portrait is by Brussels engraver Charles Wiener (1832-1888/7). Lots at St James's, UK, February 2024.
The state of the official mints of Belgium and the Netherlands today provides a deeper understanding of the Dutch mint's tradition of "scattered" minting since ancient times.
布鲁塞尔造币厂(比利时王室造币厂,Royal Mint of Belgium)自2017年起就不再自行铸币,比利时硬币由位于乌特勒支的荷兰造币厂(Royal Dutch Mint)代工,而荷兰造币厂则更是在2016年就已经出售给比利时的海伦集团(Heylen Group)。
In other words, there are no state-owned mints in Belgium and the Netherlands, and it is actually a company that mints coins for both countries. It's reminiscent of the traders, artists and craftsmen who historically lived in private workshops in the Netherlands, who once supported half of the country's mintage industry.
"Brussels" is not the same as "Brussels Mint". Historically, private workshops in the city have produced many "patterns", "specimens", tokens and medals in national and other national motifs without authorization (for various purposes). Nowadays, these unofficial coins from "Brussels" are often misinterpreted or defaulted to being official coins from the "Brussels Mint", often to the detriment of amateur collectors who are not able to discern them.
Throughout 19th-century Europe, Brussels was just one of many cities upstream of the supply chain of the minting industry in a similar situation. Therefore, it is important for contemporary collectors to understand the minting tradition and industrial structure of the Netherlands. Only by being familiar with the relevant history and drawing inferences from others can we keep ourselves alert and critical thinking at all times.
2. Don't over-read – "1860" Cambodian coinage
Among the coins purportedly from Brussels, the "1860" Cambodian coinage of various denominations is a special group.
The myriad craftsmanship, chaotic mold design, confusing origins, and unverifiable minting years of this group of coins show us the complexity of the numismatic industry in the 19th century, and provide material for us to study how the foundry business operated in the Brussels numismatic industry at that time.
Therefore, we might as well take a serious look at this case from multiple perspectives.
There are many varieties of Cambodian coins of "1860" according to their material, denomination and nature, which Jean Lecompte listed in detail in his book "Coins and Coins of French Indochina". And here are a few simple drawings for Quanyou who are not familiar with this series to illustrate:
The "1860" Cambodian Proof Silver Coin Set has denominations of 4, 2, 1 franc and 50 and 25 cents from left to right. MDC Auction May 2024 Lots.
"1860" Cambodian 10 Cents Proof Copper Coin Sold by SBP Auction Company in April 2024
"1860" Cambodian 10 Cent "Pattern" (ESSAI) Auction by SBP Auction Company in the United States in October 2023
"1860" Cambodian 5 Cents Copper Coin, September 2023 auction by SBP Auctions, USA
"1860" Cambodia 5 Cent "Pattern" Auction Lot at SBP Auction Company in the United States in May 2022
There is not much information about this group of coins that is truly historically available and credible, so its nature has always been the subject of debate. There is basically a consensus in Jean Lecante's book that the coins were actually minted after 1875; But he describes the coin's origin as a private workshop in Brussels, which is worth considering.
James S. In his 1981 History of the Birmingham Mint, O. Sweeney provides details of the production of three Cambodian "1860" 5 and 10 Cent copper coin orders received by the Birmingham Mint between 1879 and 89, but the description of this order is ambiguous. When it comes to the supply of blanks and dies by the party entrusting the order, the word "furnish" (when used as a verb means to supply, equip) is used.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the word "Furnish," but the written and vague verb, in the absence of further context, seems to imply the message that no one at the Heeden plant may know or record exactly where the molds came from.
As for the die, the coin itself gives us a clue. Underneath the king's head on the obverse of the coin, we can see the name of Brussels coin artist C. Henri Charlie Verdon. WURDEN), SO JUST FROM THIS POINT OF VIEW, WE CAN ASSUME THAT THE MOLDS FOR THESE COINS DID INDEED COME FROM BRUSSELS, OR AT LEAST WERE ORIGINALLY DESIGNED IN BRUSSELS.
But just because the molds were made in Brussels' atelier in Wilden doesn't mean that all coins were made here, and it doesn't explain why the copper coins ended up in England.
The industry's reference to the original year of minting of these coins to 1875 and the designation of origin as "Brussels" is more empirical. An example of this is the following chapter:
1875 Menig Brothers Machinery Company in Brussels: This chapter features Wilden's carved head of Norodom on the front and an angel slaying demons on the back. Lots sold at SBP Auctions in August 2019.
This type of mint advertising stamps were very common in Europe at the same time, and their purpose was generally to promote minting machinery or to advertise coinage services. While it's a bit of a stretch to put together the King of Cambodia and the Angel Slaying Demons, it does provide us with a lot of useful information.
首先,这枚广告章出自布鲁塞尔的门尼格兄弟机械公司(Mennig Frères Mechanics)。
The fact that the company was able to use the portrait of the King of Cambodia on the front of the stamp means that they had a partnership with Vilden, and it is possible that the early patterns of the Cambodian coins were produced by this company.
Former site of the Mennig Brothers Machinery Company The company's workshop was founded in 1874 and is located in Anderlecht, southwest of Brussels, with its main building close to the Charleroi-Brussels canal. The picture comes from the Internet.
Plans for the main building of the Niague Brothers Machinery Company in 1875 The image is from the official website of the Brussels Architectural Heritage Inventory
However, we can't conclude that the final production coin also came from here (if there was a production coin in the series' denominations), because the company conveyed more of a desire to sell machinery than a desire to win a mint order through this nondescript advertising medal. In addition, they have produced so-called "Trials" for other countries, and it seems that they have not received orders for circulating coins. Thus, it is possible that the company only produced a pattern or specimen of the "1860" Cambodian coin, and never planned to participate in mass production or ultimately failed to secure an order for a circulating coin.
Blank tested by Mennigo Brothers Machinery Company in 1885 for the Portosí Mint in San Luis, Mexico This product is supposed to be a prototype produced for the purpose of demonstrating minting machinery. Lots sold at SA Auctions in May 2019.
Secondly, the date on the obverse (1875) and the design of the angel slaying the demon carved by Verden on the back provide an indication of the actual date of the series.
The motif was clearly not designed specifically for Cambodian subjects, but was chosen by Mennig Brothers Machinery to demonstrate craftsmanship or to be used as a trademark-like logo. In fact, Verden's design of an angel slaying demons appears on several other medallions.
Cat's Eye found examples of this design applied to other medallions in 1874 and 1875 as follows -
Medal for the 1874 Brussels Humanitarian CongressThis medal was designed and carved by Wilden and features the same image of an angel slaying a demon as the one on the 1875 Mennig Brothers Machinery Company advertising plaque. Image from the official website of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam.
The 1875 Orange-Nassau Dynasty Medal, also designed and carved by Wilden, features the same angel slaying demons on the reverse. Image from the official website of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam.
Maoyan has not yet found out whether the above two medals were made by Wilden's studio or by other workshops in Brussels, so it cannot draw more conclusions from this.
Therefore, this design appears on the Mennig Brothers Machinery Company advertising plaque with Norodom's head in 1875, probably because the company made the above two medals and therefore holds its mold; It may also be that the die was obtained from Virden after working with the Verden studio to make the "1860" Cambodian coin; It is also possible that at the time when Velden had completed the front moulding but not yet the back moulding, Mennaig Brothers Machinery had combined the front with Norodom's portrait and Velden's previous design into a single advertising stamp for some investment purpose.
In any case, there is no point in guessing. The purpose of Maoyan's listing of the above conjectures is to tell you the many uncertainties that inevitably arise from studying the "1860" Cambodian coins with the 1875 Mennig Brothers Machinery Company advertising medal.
However, the most valuable message this plaque gives us is not the above, but the words "A. BRICHAUT DIREXIT" (produced by Auguste Brishaw) below the portrait of Norodom on the front.
Auguste Brichaud was one of the most influential figures in the Brussels numismatic industry in the 19th century, working at the Brussels Royal Mint and working with many private workshops and foreign mints on various medals and coinage projects.
Auguste Brishaw's involvement disputed the nature of many of the so-called "patterns" and "specimens" in the series. Brishaw himself is known for his many attempts to use his connections to design and manufacture bizarre so-called "patterns" or medallions (which are in fact commercial fabrications) for profit, and there is no reason to think that he would not have used this facilitation to make some so-called "patterns" of "1860" Cambodian coins to sell for profit.
1887 Bulgarian 10 Stotinkhe "Pattern" This coin, created by August Brishaw and in the nature of a medallion, is actually part of a "Bulgarian History" series produced by Brishaw, somewhat similar to the "Historical Celebrity Series Medals" produced by the contemporary Franklin Mint. Lots sold at SBP Auction in August 2011.
Maoyan will find an opportunity to write a separate article on the 19th-century industry in which European (especially in England and Belgium) coin dealers created all sorts of bizarre "pattern coins" with curiosity collectors as the target group.
Brishaw was not the engraver of the medallion, but his name appears on the medallion, indicating that it was most likely not a product of Mennig Bros. Machinery for its own purposes, but was part of an order led by Brishaw and involving Virden and Mennig Bros. Machinery.
But even with this in mind, we still can't dispel the fog that hangs over the Cambodian coins of 1860. Which coins in this collection belong to the same order or project in which Brishaw and others participated? Were all coins struck using molds designed by Wilden made by these three parties? And, why was the mass production order for this series of copper coins finally handed over to Seaton along with the mold? The answers to these questions are still unknown.
In addition to the above known information and doubts, the fact that there is a large difference in the workmanship of the various denominations of Cambodian coins in "1860" is also a difficult problem to explain.
Some of the denominations seen by the cat's eye were struck by modern machinery with rims (smoothed or toothed) or stamped and cut (smoothed edges with cut marks).
Quan You, who has an understanding of the minting process, naturally understands that the former of the two processes can only be completed by the European Mint or the Asian Mint that has purchased the full set of equipment of the European Mint; The latter could be done by any privately equipped European workshop or Asian mint, or even by a factory that made buttons or other small metal elements.
The Vietnamese "Bao Da Tong Bao" coin plate that has not been completely cut after stamping, circa 1933, old collection of Jean Leconte. Some of the "1860" silver coins seen by the cat's eye are likely to have been produced in a similar manner, with a smooth edge with cut marks. MDC Auction May 2024 Lots.
As can be seen from the above-mentioned 1874 floral medallion designed by Wilden and the 1875 Mennig Brothers Machinery Company advertising medal, it is clear that the private workshops in Brussels were very well equipped, and the level of Heeton coinage goes without saying. Therefore, given the different craftsmanship of the "1860" Cambodian coins seen so far, the possibility of other foundries outside of the private workshops in Brussels and the Heeton Mint in England cannot be ruled out.
In recent years, some of the so-called "patterns" and rare denominations of "1860" Cambodian coins (such as the famous Piaste silver coin with the Chinese character "One Yuan") have been considered fictitious or purely commercial medallions. This argument is generally convincing, although the actual market performance of these coins does not appear to have been affected much.
"1860" Cambodian 1 Piast (1 Yuan) Silver Coin This coin is distinct in style and craftsmanship from other "1860" Cambodian coins. Auction lot April 2024 by SBP Auction Company, USA.
In the case of the "1860 Cambodian Dollar" above, we have not been able to determine exactly who the "FACONNET" is under the portrait of the king on the obverse. Many believe that it is the signature of a lesser-known French female artist named Marie-Anne Eugénie Faconnet.
The earliest version of this view found online by Maoyan was published in a 2021 article on the Numismatic Bibliomania Society's web blog, E-Sylum. In this article, the author describes the "1860 Cambodian One Dollar" silver coin, and points out its early provenance and misunderstandings about its designer. Finally, he attributed the signature "FACONNET" to Marie-Anne Eugenie Faconnay in a very uncertain tone, as it was the only name he could find in Leonard Ferrer's famous index of coin artists.
Regardless of whether the coin was the work of the Faconnais, we can at least be sure that the signature "FACONNET" did not belong to a full-time engraver at the official mint of any of the major European countries at the time. From this point of view, it is likely that the "1860 Cambodian One Dollar" is not an official custom pattern, but more likely some kind of fabrication or display made for the purpose of sale.
Finally, let's ignore these unanswered questions and turn our attention back to one of the most visible and overlooked fundamental questions on this coin: why do all coins have the year 1860?
This is a common occurrence on Asian coins, referred to as the "Frozen Date" (literally, "frozen year"), which refers to the situation in which the year on a coin does not change depending on the actual year of mint. The 1835 Indian rupee is a similar case, and those years on the rupee minted after 1835 are still "1835".
1835 British East India Company 1 Rupee Silver Coin The rupees struck after 1835 in this series have not changed their year over time. Auction lot April 2024 by SBP Auction Company, USA.
This is sometimes the case with Asian coins because the mint is not in a position to modify the coin die and therefore always struck the same mold; Sometimes it is a deliberate attempt to use the year of the reigning monarch's accession or accession to the throne as a fixed year.
So what kind of situation does the "1860" Cambodian series belong to?
It should be said that it is neither.
First of all, judging from the variety of dies used in the surviving "1860" Norodom patterns and circulating coins, whether or not they were official coinage, at least there is no shortage of funds to adjust the molds and the use of the same stencil.
Second, there is no detailed and reliable evidence to prove that the same year as "1860" is used by these coins as an official will.
Regarding the latter of the two points, there are many people in the numismatic world who tend to acquiesce unconditionally. 1860 was the year of Norodom's accession, and while all of the coins in this series may have been struck after 1875, it is not surprising to use this vintage. This may be true in itself, but if you know the style of Brishaw and Wilden, you might have some different ideas.
The year "1860" is actually quite a delicate year. Although Norodom could theoretically have been on the throne since the death of King Anton in 1860, the heirloom was always withheld by Siam, which made his authority as king de jure disputed, and he himself was not crowned in Bangkok until 1863. Secondly, Cambodia only became a French protectorate in 1863.
The coronation of Norodom The picture comes from the Internet
In other words, "1860", the ostensibly reigning year of Norodom, was in fact before he became de jure king of Cambodia and was crowned, and before French jurisdiction. With this as a year of coinage, Brishaw and Verdon could do whatever they wanted, freeing themselves to mint and sell commercial "patterns" for profit without fear of accountability from France or Cambodia.
The use of the "edge" vintage can also be seen in the French "fictitious coinage", which is suspected to have been completed by Brichaux and Verden, and we will continue to discuss it later.
As for the "1860" vintage, all three orders were made by the Heedon Factory, it seems that the client only provided the molds for this year. We don't know who instructed the client to do so.
Before moving on to the next section, we will conclude with a summary of the "1860" Cambodian series of coins produced under the name of Brussels.
Numismatists have over the years identified a number of archives, letters, records, etc., but most of them are not valid evidence to explain any of the issues, because:
1. There is no evidence that the "1860" Cambodian coinage currently on the market belongs to the same set of coinage, or that there is no clear relationship between the "1860" Cambodian coins designed by Verden and the surviving coins made by other engravers and artists bearing the same portrait of Norodom and the inscription "1860" (such as the "1860 Cambodian dollar" mentioned above) made by other engravers and artists;
2. Even if there are archives, correspondence or records that Norodom or the French authorities planned or commissioned someone to mint Cambodian coins, we cannot be sure that the minting scheme referred to in these archives was actually put into practice, nor that the coinage referred to in these archives is the specific type of Cambodian coins of "1860" that is now on the market;
3. Due to the lack of Wilden Studio archives, it is not yet possible to prove who commissioned the design of these "1860" Cambodian coins that are currently in existence, and for what purpose, and it is difficult to trace whether these dies were actually sent to one or more mints for mass production under a particular order, or whether they were eventually bought by a coin dealer to be made and sold to collectors;
4. The "1860" Cambodian copper coin production record recorded by the Heeton Mill is the most reliable production order of the series, but the mill's records lack further documentation of the order and the origin of the mold.
As for the well-known issue of the so-called "1860" Cambodian coin die being given to the Cambodian royal family, we have the right to ignore it as no one has provided a list of the stencils sent to Cambodia.
The "1860" Cambodian Gold 1 Franc coin is made from corroded and damaged dies. These coins are often thought to have come from the Phnom Penh Mint and are the product of the Cambodian royal family's acquisition of old molds. Lots sold at SBP Auctions in April 2023.
Today, coins on the market that appear to be extraordinarily rough due to corrosion and damage to the mold are often considered to be the product of the mold after it arrived in Cambodia. Whether this is entirely credible, or whether it is possible that a considerable part of the old corroded molds went into the hands of private individuals or coin dealers, and that a large part of the surviving coins produced from the corroded molds actually came from private workshops, leaving it to those who specialize in collecting Cambodian coins.
The "1860" Cambodian coins are often regarded as "forgeries" or "medallions" in denominations other than copper, which is generally unjust. The high prices of these scarce varieties are not so much because they have left an important chapter in the history of human coinage, but more likely because of the combination of curious collectors who lack information and investors who bet on emerging markets but lack enthusiasm for numismatic research itself.
Interestingly, the 5 and 10 cents of the 5 cents and 10 cents produced by the Heedon factory for Cambodia in 1879, 1882 and 1889, with the exception of the 5 cents in 1889, the rest of the production far exceeded the amount of French coins minted in the same year and the same denomination. We probably can't conclude that Cambodia was the largest emerging economy in Asia between 1879 and 1889, but there is something strange about it.
Maoyan said that the "1860" Cambodian coins should not be over-interpreted, and I believe everyone has understood the reason after reading this. As it stands, the background of these coins may never be verified, but that doesn't mean they should all be falsified. If you like this collection, then do your homework, choose a few of the varieties that are from reliable provenance, and follow the conventional wisdom to accept the established market at the moment.
Maoyan discusses it as the main part of this article, mainly to show how good the artists, workshops and merchants of Brussels were in the 19th century, and how much their business operations have caused confusion to the numismatic industry today.
3. France: The main victim of "fictitious coinage" in Europe in the 19th century
The "1860" Cambodian series is one of the few varieties of fictional coinage (or fictional coins dressed as "pattern coins") produced in Europe in the 19th century. Presumably because Cambodia itself is far from the continent, Brishaw and others don't have to worry too much about being held accountable for counterfeiting or unauthorized sale of these coins.
In contrast, the most proud and profitable products of the mint in Brussels were probably those coins with the special historical and political background of European countries. Perhaps to avoid legal liability, Brussels-based practitioners such as Brishaw and Verden were much more cautious in making Euro-themed coinage, with their own names rarely appearing on these products, and the channels of sale were so secretive that most people at the time did not know where these "rebellious" "patterns" came from.
For now, the initial product of these "coinages" (or "patterns," as some might expect) may have been the "1816" Napoleon II coins.
"1816" Napoleon II 5 franc "pattern" by Jean Elsen auction house auction in March 2024
"1816" Napoleon II 2 franc "Pattern" sold by MDC Auctions in November 2018
"1816" Napoleon II 1 franc "pattern" MDC Auction House November 2018 lot
"1816" Napoleon II 1/2 franc "pattern" MDC auction house November 2018 lot
According to Shepard Pond in his article "French Usurpers in Numismatics", a description of this "1816" Napoleon II coin appears in an article published in 1861 by the President of the Belgian Royal Numismatic Society. These coins were met with skepticism at the outset, and almost no one believed them to be official patterns.
The main reasons why people question can be summarized in two points:
For one, the coins were too crudely made to be the official French pattern;
Second, the historical line recognized by the Bonapartist was that Napoleon II automatically "ascended the throne" immediately after Napoleon I's abdication in 1815, and that if a commemorative set of coins were to be used to express political positions, the year should be 1815 instead of 1816.
Today, most people believe that these "1816" Napoleon II coins were made by Brishaw and Verden, mainly from the numismatic history of the Count of Chambeau by Henri Boquier and Gaston Cavalier, which deals with the coins of Henry, Count of Chambeau (the so-called "Henry V").
The book also suggests that Adrien Hippolyte Veyrat, a French engraver working in Brussels at the time, may have been involved in the project, but it is unclear whether there were other Brussels workshops involved.
The main reason why this group of "1816" Napoleon III coins is mentioned in the book of Henry, Count of Chambeau, is that the various coins, patterns, or coins struck under the name of "Henry V" are likely to come from the same source.
A bronze Henry V 5 franc medallion dated August 2, 1830 sold at MDC auction in March 2023
If these "1816" Napoleon II coins had been struck in the 1860s, it would have seemed that the French authorities under Napoleon III at the time could have turned a blind eye to their circulation. But the coins that appeared at the same time and were struck under the name of "Henry V" were a different story entirely.
After the July Revolution in France in 1830, Charles X and Louis-Antoine, Duke of Angoulême, Dauphin renounced the French throne and went into exile in England. Louis-Philippe I became king of France, the Orleans dynasty of France, and the exile was called Orthodox. After the death of Charles X's father and son, the Count of Chambeau and Henry, Duke of Bordeaux, became the kings of France supported by the orthodox royalists, called "Henry V".
Henri, Count of Chambeau and Duke of Bordeaux, circa 1828, Alexandre Jean-Dubois-de la Hoone (1791-1834)
Henry V, who had the support of both the Orthodox and Orleanists after the fall of Napoleon III, was the most promising of all the usurposers in modern France, but he abdicated the throne because he refused to accept the tricolor inherited from the French Revolution.
In a sense, he can be seen as the uncrowned king for a while, but minting coins in his name is obviously riskier than minting coins in the name of Napoleon II during the Second Empire. Or, to put it another way, without the support and patronage of the royalists, no one would have made so many "Henry V" coins purely for profit.
"1832" French "Henry V" 5 franc silver coin Auction by Kunk, Germany, July 2021
"1832" French "Henry V" 2 franc silver coin Burgan Numismatique sold at auction in November 2021
"1832" French "Henry V" 1 franc silver coin MDC auction house June 2022 lot
Therefore, these coins of "Henry V" are also called "competition coins". The coins were supposedly financed by a royalist party known as Lambert, but the origin is disputed. The History of the Counts of Chambeau's Numismatics suggests that the coins came from England, with other sources to support it, but Leonard Ferrer believes that the coins also came from Brishaw and a Brussels workshop.
1843 "HENRY V" VISIT TO BRITISH MEDAL A 5-FRANC SILVER MEDAL WITH THE FRENCH INSCRIPTION "FRAPPÉ À LONDRES" (DOUBTFUL) ON THE REVERSE OF THE STAMP, AND THE OBVERSE PORTRAIT SIMILAR TO THE OTHER "HENRY V" COINS OF 1832 ON THE MARKET, SOME HAVE SPECULATED THAT THE ENTIRE SERIES WAS MADE IN ENGLAND. MDC Auction October 2022 Auction Lot.
Given the sensitive status of Henry V, it seems that the makers of Henry V coins deliberately avoided leaving enough useful information on the coins to explore their provenance. As a result, the number of Henry V coins seen in the market has always been controversial. Among them, the following set of 5 and 10 cents dated "1832" is particularly strange.
"1832" French "Henry V" 5 cents Silver Coin MDC Auction Company November 2018 Lot
1832 French Henry V 10 cents MDC Auction December 2017 lot
Theoretically, Henry V was only 12 years old in 1832 and could not have had the beard he depicted on the coin. This odd design raises suspicions that the coin's designer knew nothing about Henry. We also can't be sure that these odd "1832" silver coins and other coins bearing the portrait of "Henry V" came from the same workshop.
If these "imaginary coins" of 19th-century France had only those of the above varieties with clear political intentions, the account might not have been counted on the lawless workshops of Brussels. But as more and more French "patterns" appeared on the market in the 1870s, one could not help but suspect that the coins themselves were produced for commercial purposes and sold to collectors. As numismatists traced their origins to these "patterns", more and more eyes eventually turned to Brussels.
Michel Tayal and Michel Arnault's catalogue of French Patterns and Thickeners, 1870-2001, lists many of these "patterns" that appeared during the Third Republic, mainly in the 1870s, and not very serious. These "patterns" also include the 1871 set of middle-aged heads of "Henry V" for 5 francs.
"1871" Henry V of France "5 franc silver "pattern", sold by SBP Auctions, USA, January 2020
The actual year of minting of this coin may not be 1871 but 1874, because, according to an account of the French numismatist Paul Bordeaux in 1874, cited by Shepber Pound, the "1871" "Henry V" 5 francs were discovered after the same unknown "patterns" bearing the portrait of the French statesman Léon Gambetta appeared on the market in 1873. And it was relatively rare at the time.
5 franc silver "pattern" with Gambi's head MDC Auction October 2023 lot
We can probably understand that the "1871" 5 francs of "Henri V" were put on sale between 1873 and 1874. In the opinion of many, the 5 francs of "Henry V 1871" and the coins dated "1830" to "1832" bearing the portrait of a young man "Henry V" were made by Brichau and a Brussels workshop. This idea may well be true, but there is no direct evidence to prove it.
In any case, this "Henry V" of "1871" is more deliberate, but still discreet. Below the portrait on the obverse of the coin is a "Capel F." (CAPEL F.), whether this is a means of confusion by the person or the producer.
On the reverse side of the coin, "ESSAI" is written on the right side of the date, indicating that the nature of the coin is a pattern or specimen and not intended for circulation. The iris emblem to the left of the year is thought to symbolize France, but if I have to say it, it can also be understood as the Bruges Mint in the Netherlands, which has disappeared for more than a century. In short, it was not a mark used by anyone at the Paris Mint at the time.
In addition, the year "1871" was chosen with no less caution. As mentioned earlier, the closest Henry V came to the French throne was in 1871, when he was granted the throne but did not ascend the throne because of his opposition to the continued use of the "tricolor". 1871 was the year when the regime was in turmoil and "Henry V" was recognized but did not ascend the throne, and the "pattern coin" of "Henry V" could be produced in this year to avoid legal liability to a certain extent.
It turns out that the concerns of the person who made this coin (most likely Brishaw) were not unfounded. The History of the Count of Chambeau's Coin mentions that there was indeed an official French notice for the coin, requiring it to be confiscated as soon as it appeared. Apparently, however, no one has traced the provenance of these coins, as the French authorities also knew that the "pattern coins" were nothing more than collectibles sold to curiosity hunters.
Contemporaries of usurped coins on the market also include the "1874" Napoleon IV coinage. This coin is actually a little more sensitive than the Henry V coin, and therefore more secretive in circulation.
"Napoleon IV 1874" 5 franc "Pattern" Jean Elsen auction house auction lot March 2024
"Napoleon IV 1874" 2 franc "Pattern" Auction by Jean Elsen, auction lot March 2024
"Napoleon IV 1874" 1 franc "pattern" by Jean Elsen auction house auction in March 2024
The signature below the headpiece on the obverse of the coin is an unknown "C. DE F.", reminiscent of the "Capel F." Signature. Judging by the craftsmanship, the design and the signature that is meant to be covered, it's hard to believe that the two coins have nothing to do with each other. As a result, we nowadays tend to think that they are all Brishaw's masterpieces.
As Cat's Eyes suggests, Shell Pound cites numismatist Paul Bordeaux as mentioning a coin with the portrait of the French statesman Léon Gambi (pictured above, the obverse of the coin is below). Although it is not dated, it may have appeared on the market in 1873.
According to the book "French Patterns and Thickeners 1870-2001", this coin may have been the work of Verden. It is difficult to determine whether Wilden produced and sold his own coins, commissioned them to be made by other workshops, or whether others hired Wilden to design coins for sale.
There are two other contemporaneous "patterns" listed in the book "French Patterns and Thickeners, 1870-2001", which may have been of Verden, namely the 5 francs of Adolf Thiers dated "1872" and the 5 francs of Patrice McMahon dated "1874".
"1872" Adolfo Thiers 5 francs "Pattern coin" Jean Vinchon company
"1874" Patrice McMahon 5 franc "Pattern" by Jean Vinchon sold at auction December 2023
Among them, McMahon 5 francs is particularly annoying. The signature below the coin's head reads "Napoleon F." (NAPOLEON F.), A "I USE A PSEUDONYM, WHAT CAN YOU DO WITH ME".
Considering the collaboration between Verden and Brishaw in the "1860" Cambodian coins discussed above, it is likely that some of the anonymous French "patterns" or fabricated coins we discuss in this section were also the result of a conspiracy between the two men. And through the methods used by the two on these French coins, we seem to be able to infer in reverse that they dared to leave their real names on the Cambodian coins, either because they felt that the Cambodian emperor was far away and completely unscrupulous, or they really received an official order.
In any case, mere inference is pointless. These unsolved mysteries in the numismatic world will be left to those who really love these varieties to investigate.
4. Spain: An alternative victim of the Brussels minting business
Similar to France, 19th-century Spain suffered from the Brussels coinage. Patrick O'Connor, in his book The Coat of Queen Isabel II of Spain, cites Tomas Dasí's discourse in the fifties to explain these Spanish coinage produced in Brussels. Cat's Eye felt that he had a passage that best illustrated this type of coin, so he transcribed it as follows:
"In the second half of the 19th century, coinage and pattern coins were popular among European and American collectors, and those who had access to minting equipment engaged in an active trade. Sometimes this is approved by the Mint, and sometimes it is somewhat unsightly. ”
From this passage, we can probably already see the difference between the Spanish "pattern coins" "counterfeited" in Brussels in the 19th century and the various French coins mentioned above, and the key to this difference is the phrase "sometimes approved by the mint".
O'Connor came to this conclusion because some of the suspected counterfeit Spanish coins used the molds of regular mint patterns. The most expensive and well-known of these coins are the "mismatches" of the two Isabel II 20 riyals stencils with the portrait of Napoleon III at the Paris Mint:
1855 Spain 20 riyals - Mismatch of portrait of Isabel II and portrait of Napoleon III Hess-Divo Auction Company, October 2003
1855 Spanish 20 riyals – Mismatch between portrait of Napoleon III and Spanish coat of arms Auction by Hess-Divo, October 2003
The two "mismatched specimens" use two portrait stencils of Napoleon III, both from the official 1853 5-franc pattern from the Paris Mint, both by Louis-Charles Bouvet; Isabel II's 20-riyals front and back die, designed by Eduardo Fernández Pescador, is one of the most famous patterns of the Isabel II era.
1853 Napoleon III 5 franc pattern MDC auction October 2023 lot
Pescador's 1855 20 Riyals Pattern sold at SA Auctions, USA, May 2022
According to O'Connor, Pescador's die may have been brought with him when he went to study at the Paris Mint. In any case, these molds should theoretically be kept at the Paris Mint. As a result, many people see these two "mismatched specimens" as the product of the Paris Mint's experimentation with the die.
However, as many have questioned, such experiments have no meaning for the Paris Mint.
The Paris Mint has a full set of Isabel II 20 riyals stencils designed by Napoleon III and Pescador, so why not test the correct combination of stencils, but in this "mismatched" way?
In fact, there have been claims for years that the Pescador-designed Isabel II 20 Riyal die ended up in private hands, mainly because of the following "1855 Spanish Philippine 5-Peseta Pattern":
"1855" Spanish Philippine 5 Peseta "Pattern" The obverse of the coin features the Pescador 20 riyals obverse design. New York auction lot by SBP Auction Company in the United States in January 2019
The 1855 Philippine 5-Peseta Pattern is a private coinage, as the peseta did not become the main unit of currency in Spain until 1869, while the Philippines used the peso throughout the 19th century, and the likelihood of a Spanish Philippine 5-Peseta pattern in 1855 is almost nil.
The coin was a private coinage, indicating that Pescadore's die had fallen into private hands. Thomas D'Arcy and Leonard Ferrer's origins of this "pattern" eventually point to a private studio in Brussels, and the only person who ran the coinage privately and had the power and connections to call on or buy the official stencil of the Paris Mint was Brishaw.
As a result, the "1855 Spanish Filipino Pattern" was counted on Brishaw's head, along with the two "specimens" with the portrait of Napoleon III mentioned above.
In addition, since the design on the reverse of the 1855 Spanish Philippine 5 Peseta Pattern has a lot of similarities with the reverse design of the 1859 Spanish Philippine 2 Cents Copper Sample, and the latter does not have any of the characteristics of the official Spanish pattern, we can basically assume that this 1859 Spanish Philippine 2 Cents Copper Pattern is also from a Brussels workshop (Brishaw).
"1859" Spanish Philippines 2 points "Bronze sample" Auction Company SBP auction in the United States, October 2020
Spain experienced a period of turmoil after Isabel II's abdication in 1868, after the exiled "Carlos faction" proclaimed Carlos, Duke of Madrid, "Carlos VII". The battle for the throne broke out in 1872 and is known as the "Third Carlos War". Carlos VII briefly controlled the Basque Country and Catalonia in northern Spain, but he was forced to jump repeatedly across the border between France and Spain due to the unfavorable war, and was finally defeated in 1876.
Spanish usurper "Carlos VII" circa 1880, French photographer Nadal (1820-1910). The picture comes from the Internet.
The coins of 1874-76 that are now in circulation with the portrait of "Carlos VII" can probably be regarded as an important "political legacy" left by him. Cat's eye and select several as follows:
"1874" Spanish "Carlos VII" 5 Peseta "Pattern" Auction Company SBP Auction Company in the United States Auction Company August 2022 Lot
1875 Spanish "Carlos VII" 5 & 10 Cent Copper Coins Soler & Llach Auction May 2024 Lot
The consensus in the numismatic community is that the Carlos VII coins are minted except for those coins marked with "O. T." The miner's copper coins are mined outside the small town of Onyati in the Basque Country, and the rest are from Brussels. But there are also those who believe that those with "O. T." It is possible that the copper coins of the factory mark also came from Brussels, or at least the molds came from Brussels.
The obverse of the 1875 Carlos VII 5 Cent Copper Coin bears the "O. T." Located below the avatar. Lots to be auctioned by Tauler & Fau in May 2024
If the aforementioned Isabel II-related "specimens" and "patterns" are suspected to be "Mint-approved" products in O'Connor's book, these "Carlos VII" copper coins and "patterns" are of the "somewhat unremarkable" variety. Maoyan has not found any particularly detailed research or archives on these Carlos VII coins (especially those patterns), and given the fact that they came from Brussels, Maoyan suspects that detailed information may never be found.
These coins do not conform to the Spanish numismatic tradition in terms of text and design. They may have really been ordered by Carlos VII or his supporters to prove the legitimacy of the dynasty, but given that Carlos VII himself was busy jumping across the Franco-Spanish border at the time, Maoyan could not rule out the possibility that they were impersonated by a workshop in Brussels to sell for profit.
5. Often walk by the river, how can you not take the blame:
伊朗回历1281年和1297年样币
The earliest known modern Iranian European coins bearing the Tehran mint name are the gold, silver, and copper patterns and specimens from 1281 Hijri (1864). Last year's Kian Collection by Sincona Auction in Switzerland had a relatively complete set of Hijri 1281 patterns, and the cat's eye selected a few denomination maps as follows:
2 Turkman gold coin pattern
1 Turkan gold coin pattern
2000 dinar silver coin pattern
Bronze sample of 2,000 dinars
50 dinar copper pattern
According to Rudi Matthee in his book The Introduction of Mechanized Minting in Qajar, Iran, the pattern was made by the "Austrian" Franz Pechan von Prägenberg (later known as "Pechan") from a mould engraved by a Frenchman who had been invited to set up a mint in Iran.
Franz Peschan von Pregenberg Born in Bohemia under Austrian rule, Peschan was actually Czech, having worked for the Mint in Milan and Vienna. The picture comes from the Internet.
However, as many suspected, both the craftsmanship and the variety made it hard to believe that the "patterns" came from the Tehran Mint in poor condition. You know, in order to keep the mint running, Pechamp and his team had to dig up the machinery that was purchased from France on the Caspian coast and put it back together bit by bit.
In his 1974 book, Modern Iranian Minting, 1876-1974, the author traces the moulds of the 1281 Iranian "pattern" to the Brussels Mint, which outsourced Iran during this period. As mentioned above, in view of the bad reputation of the city of Brussels itself in the "pattern coin" industry and many unshady behaviors, Maoyan feels that it is quite a scoundrel to put the provenance of this group of "pattern coins" on the head of the Brussels Mint, and there is a great idea to make this matter "dead and unproven".
Fortunately, last year, the Swiss company Sincona auctioned a commemorative medal for the opening of the Tehran Mint with the date "1282 A.D." The craftsmanship of this medal is as exquisite as that of the 1281 pattern, and most importantly it bears the signature of Charles Trotang (C. Trotang) at the bottom of the obverse. Trotin）。 According to Leonard Ferrer, Trotang ran his own atelier in Paris and was hired to make dies for Iran in the circa 1860s for "20, 10 and 5 francs of gold, 2 and 1 francs of silver, and 50 and 25 cenins of copper".
Commemorative Medal for the Opening of the Tehran Mint in 1282 Rajba Thani with the signature "C. Trotin" on the lower front of the medal.
According to the relationship between the Iranian gold, silver, and copper coins of the Nasser al-Din Shah era and that of France in the Nasser al-Din Shah era, as described in the 1973 book Coins, Medals and Seals of the Shah, 1500-1941, Ferrer's denominations actually correspond to about 2, 1, and 1/2 Turkman gold coins, 2000 and 1000 dinars of silver, and 50 and 25 dinar copper coins. This is consistent with all known denominations of the 1281 Iranian "pattern" in existence.
At this point, we can be sure that the mould of this set of 1281 Hijri patterns was originally made by Trotang in his workshop in Paris for the Tehran Mint in Iran, and that the Brussels Mint would not have to carry this pot. It is not known who commissioned Trotang's private studio to make the molds.
1869 Suez Canal Opening Series Medals - Vittorio Emanuele II The Series of Medals for the Opening of the Suez Canal is a set of Charles Trotang's well-known works, the series has the same design on the back, and the front is beautifully carved with the heads of European monarchs. Katz auction in November 2023.
However, this does not mean that the nature of this set of Iranian patterns is necessarily unquestionable. Collectors are often more concerned about whether the molds from these private workshops end up in the hands of the coin dealers, and whether patterns continue to be produced for sale purposes.
If the mould of this set of Iranian patterns from 1281 A.H. was later bought by merchants or workshops in Brussels (Virden or Brishaw, etc.), then the nature of the patterns currently available on the market is questionable. Correspondingly, it explains why the book Modern Iranian Minting, 1876-1974 suggests that the mould for this set of patterns came from Brussels.
Judging from the Iranian Hijri 1281 pattern coins seen so far, there are indeed cases where the state of the mold is different. Therefore, there is good reason to suspect that the patterns seen in the market were not produced in the same batch. Then, without being able to fully trace the flow of this set of molds and the origin of the patterns, we can only treat this set of patterns with the same attitude as we did with the Cambodian coins from 1860 above.
Unlike this set of 1281 patterns, which have traditionally been regarded as "unknown", there was a variety popularly known as the "Brussels pattern" in Iran during the Nassr al-Din Shah era, which was the famous "Brussels Edition" of the 1297 (1880) 5,000 dinar pattern.
"Brussels Edition" 1297 Rajul 5,000 Dinar Cat's Eye Collection
As mentioned earlier, the "Austrian" Peschan did not design Tehran's first modern vintage coins as the world thinks, but he did make Tehran's modern large-scale silver coins from 1296 Mahjri (1879). Large silver coins (krona-type silver coins) are rarely used in traditional Iranian coinage, and Peshan's large 5,000 dinar circulating silver coin may be considered a landmark innovation in Iran's modern coinage history.
Rajri 1296 5000 dinar cat's eye collection
Pechamp was quite cautious about this work. In 1293 and 1294 (1876-77 A.H.), he designed two well-known large medallion coins with experimental properties. Cat's Eye cannot determine whether the mould on the obverse (lion face) of this large silver coin was made by Pechamp himself, but it can at least be understood that he participated in the design, so this article is entitled to refer to it as Pechamp's work.
1293 Rajmah 100th Anniversary of the Qajar Dynasty 5,000 Dinar Commemorative Coin Auction by SBP Auction Company in the United States in August 2023
After gaining approval, Peshan produced Tehran's first large-scale modern 5,000 dinar silver coin from 1296 (1879) using a similar obverse (lion's face) design.
However, Peshan's participation in the currency reform was met with strong opposition from traditional die-hard forces, and he himself left Tehran in 1879. At this time, the Tehran Mint may still have a 5,000 dinar die for the 1297 Hijri (1880H) that he had prepared, allowing this very large and distinctive coin to continue to be minted for some time.
Perhaps due to the technical level of the Tehran Mint, or perhaps due to Peshang's own inexperience, the original 5,000 dinar silver coin die soon became too worn out to be used for minting, and it seems that Pechamp's original progenitor could not continue to make working dies.
As a result, in 1297 the Tehran Mint obtained a new 5,000 dinar obverse (lion's face) die. Maoyan uses the word "get" here because it's not clear exactly where the mold came from.
Many believe that this coin is from Brussels (e.g., the aforementioned Modern Iranian Mintage, 1876-1974) because the obverse (lion's face) looks much finer than the earlier 5,000 dinars. It is even speculated that this coin was harvested after Nasser Dinshah's trip to Europe in 1878, and is a sample coin delivered with the mold. Today's mainstream auctions in Europe and the United States also accept this view. As a result, the 1297 5,000 dinar coin, which was trial-minted in small quantities from a new mold, became what is now known as the "Brussels pattern".
Nassr al-Din Shah Khazar 1881, French photographer Nadal (1820-1910). The picture comes from the Internet.
However, according to the entries in the catalogue of the Belgian National Archives under the archives of the Brussels Princely Mint, the Brussels Princely Mint initially cooperated with Iran in 1883. Therefore, the stencil for the "Brussels pattern" was not supplied at least by the Brussels Royal Mint. If the mold really came from Brussels, it could only be a private studio.
But even that doesn't make sense, because all the "Brussels patterns" seen so far only have a new mold on the front (lion's face) and a cracked mold on the back (literally). If the Tehran Mint did order molds from Brussels, there would be no reason to order only the lion face molds and not the literal molds.
The reverse side of the "Brussels" 5,000 dinar pattern The die is old and cracked, and some of the die cracks match those on the regular 5,000 dinar coin. Lots to be auctioned by NGSA Auctions in November 2022.
In addition, Maoyan made some interesting discoveries by comparing the patterns and specimens made with the new molds (this version is not in circulation), and the facts are listed below:
1. The workmanship of the "Brussels Pattern" does not conform to the level of workmanship of any European mint (not even that of a private workshop), and the literal stencil is made of the original 5,000 dinar die of the cracked Tehran Mint, so this coin should be a pattern coin from Tehran;
2. The obverse (lion) stencil is not a new custom-made coin die from the Tehran Mint, but a stencil of some kind of commemorative medal/medallion in stock, which may have been ordered from Europe, or it may have been previously made by Peschamp himself or privately ordered from Europe;
3. The original stamping of the original stamping was completed after three stampings to produce the only 5,000 dinar pattern with the age "AH12XX" (XX is blank), but the lion's face was blurred due to the high embossing of the mould (the mould may have been designed as a medallion);
12XX AH 5,000 Dinar Trial Proof, Heritage Auctions, USA, New York Auction in January 2018
4. The above-mentioned working mould was also used in the production of bronze medals of the Military Academy in 1297 A.H., which was also ineffective because the relief was too high;
The bronze medal of the Military Academy in 1297 is the same as the 12XX trial sample in the picture above. Auction by Sincona, Switzerland, October 2023.
5. The original mould was then reprinted with a moderately reduced embossed die (and possibly multiple stencils), and the pattern produced from this stencil is the so-called "Brussels 1297 pattern", but the embossing is still too high, and only a small number of patterns are produced;
6. The above-mentioned working dies were later used in the production of contemporaneous medals, including the early undated "Medal for Valour" and similar medals from the following years 1298 AH;
Early undated "Medal of Valor" Auction by Sincona, Switzerland, October 2023.
7. It is known that a "1297 Brussels pattern" was overlaid on a "Medal of Valor" of an unrecognizable year (possibly 1298 or 1300), and the cat's eye speculated that it may have been due to the high pressure required for the high relief on the obverse (lion's face) and the high number of stampings, which was fearful of damaging the cracked 5,000 dinar lettering mold, so the second resort was to change the lettering mold on the finished "Medal of Valor" to be processed into a 5,000 dinar pattern for retention or as a sample.
To sum up, the "1297 Brussels Pattern" is actually a pattern produced by the Tehran Mint. This coin is beautiful because of the high relief mould on the obverse, which may have been originally designed for a medal or medal, but it was also because the mould required too much pressure that both trials failed, and only a small number of patterns and specimens survived.
As for whether this mold really came from Brussels, there is not enough information to support it. In the spirit of scientific rigor, Maoyan can only say that the possibility that the mold came from a private studio in Brussels cannot be completely ruled out at the moment.
At this point, this article can finally be concluded.
This article, Maoyan wrote for a long time. Originally, I was going to write three articles, but I thought "let's put together this boring content", so I merged the three articles, and finally became this article that didn't go well.
This kind of article itself is actually the easiest to write. There are three or five papers on the Internet and two or three books on the table, which can be pieced together in an hour.
The reason why it is slow to write is purely because Maoyan is never satisfied. In order to make the article less boring, Maoyan changed the structure back and forth, deleted many quotations and excerpts, and added some personal research and experience sharing of Maoyan, which finally made the grassroots pseudo-academic taste of "folk academic enthusiasts" in this article a little lighter......
What Maoyan has recently written and is about to write is this kind of thing that fills in the gaps, just to make up for the basic content that this official account has been missing. If you think the content of Maoyan is also a bit boring, please bear with me. When the cat's eye finishes writing what is on hand, it will return to its previous style.
Thank you for your continued support, Maoyan will continue to work hard!
Cat's Eye Hidden Coins
maoyanco.com
Don't forget the original intention,
Collect coins with you
WeChat public account: Maoyan Tibetan coins
Weibo: @猫眼藏币
Bilibili: A cat's eye looks at the coin
Today's headlines: Cat's eye looks at coins
Tik Tok: Fur is only 1st generation Savannah
Submissions & Others: [email protected]