Baldwin's of St. James's
Auction 14 14 Jan 2018
View prices realized
► Sale information
Find similar lots
British Coins, George III, pattern halfpenny, in bronzed copper, undated, toothed border, narrow rim, laur. bust r., small eagle's head below, rev. nude Britannia seated, pointing l., her l. arm resting on shield, paddle behind (P.994 [Extremely Rare]), certified and graded by NGC as Proof 66 Brown, a superlative example of this early pattern for the coming Soho Mint coinage, its surfaces smooth as silk and the colour of fine mahogany, one of the finest known
*ex Cheshire collection
While the obverse image of King George is familiar and appears, with minute variations, on a number of patterns and proof coppers, it is the reverse of the presently offered pattern coin that compels study and appreciation. In fact, this beautiful coin is almost an illustration, in and of itself, of the achievements of both the Soho Mint and the later die-sinker who 'rescued' Soho's dies, re-struck them, and thereby made coins available for collectors who otherwise would never lay eyes on such items, nor understand their history. All numismatists owe Taylor a huge debt in this regard. We can all study the progression of dies as related by Peck, but why does a regal coin feature on one side an exquisite, heavily frosted portrait of King George, and on the other side an 'unfinished' and therefore nude portrayal of the emblem of the land? Crowther tells us what probably happened: 'The figure of Britannia on the halfpennies by Droz is very graceful. To ensure the agreement of his work with the rules of anatomy, Droz first engraved a nude figure, and afterwards added the drapery. . . . All the halfpennies with the nude reverse were struck by Mr. Taylor' (pp.43-44). Further, he explains that among the scrap bought by Taylor at the Mint sale in 1848 'were found several dies for halfpennies by Droz, and other patterns. A few of these dies had never been used, nor even hardened'. Taylor took these dies, hardened them, paired various ones, burnished them to rid them of rust, and struck small quantities, then destroyed some of the dies. Other dies survived and passed into collections in the late 19th century, but were never used again. Even Crowther, in 1886, says no one knows how many were made, but evidently precious few. All of Taylor's re-striking activity occurred between 1862 and 1880. He did not evidently set out to deceive collectors. His output of medals was prodigious, as a talented engraver and die-sinker. In the 1850s he was responsible for such creations as the Port Philip gold coins, copper patterns for the Republic of Liberia, and numerous Australian merchants' tokens, or store cards. His plan was to mint coins on contract as a serious businessman, much as Boulton had done earlier, but his dreams were ruined just a few years later when the price of gold made his ideas difficult to implement. In 1857, his coining press was sold. His passion for coining was not dead, though, and he seems to have wandered into re-striking many of the Soho dies obtained at that sale in 1848. Peck's cataloguing of all his issues gave credence to his work, and enumerated all known examples for collectors to consider and seek to obtain. Clearly, then, even though this is a restrike, it is a sample of what was a 1790-era trial piece, albeit by a man who did not himself create or engrave either of the dies. What he did was leave for us a testimonial, or memorial, to the artistic accomplishments of earlier artists.
($3500-4500)
*ex Cheshire collection
While the obverse image of King George is familiar and appears, with minute variations, on a number of patterns and proof coppers, it is the reverse of the presently offered pattern coin that compels study and appreciation. In fact, this beautiful coin is almost an illustration, in and of itself, of the achievements of both the Soho Mint and the later die-sinker who 'rescued' Soho's dies, re-struck them, and thereby made coins available for collectors who otherwise would never lay eyes on such items, nor understand their history. All numismatists owe Taylor a huge debt in this regard. We can all study the progression of dies as related by Peck, but why does a regal coin feature on one side an exquisite, heavily frosted portrait of King George, and on the other side an 'unfinished' and therefore nude portrayal of the emblem of the land? Crowther tells us what probably happened: 'The figure of Britannia on the halfpennies by Droz is very graceful. To ensure the agreement of his work with the rules of anatomy, Droz first engraved a nude figure, and afterwards added the drapery. . . . All the halfpennies with the nude reverse were struck by Mr. Taylor' (pp.43-44). Further, he explains that among the scrap bought by Taylor at the Mint sale in 1848 'were found several dies for halfpennies by Droz, and other patterns. A few of these dies had never been used, nor even hardened'. Taylor took these dies, hardened them, paired various ones, burnished them to rid them of rust, and struck small quantities, then destroyed some of the dies. Other dies survived and passed into collections in the late 19th century, but were never used again. Even Crowther, in 1886, says no one knows how many were made, but evidently precious few. All of Taylor's re-striking activity occurred between 1862 and 1880. He did not evidently set out to deceive collectors. His output of medals was prodigious, as a talented engraver and die-sinker. In the 1850s he was responsible for such creations as the Port Philip gold coins, copper patterns for the Republic of Liberia, and numerous Australian merchants' tokens, or store cards. His plan was to mint coins on contract as a serious businessman, much as Boulton had done earlier, but his dreams were ruined just a few years later when the price of gold made his ideas difficult to implement. In 1857, his coining press was sold. His passion for coining was not dead, though, and he seems to have wandered into re-striking many of the Soho dies obtained at that sale in 1848. Peck's cataloguing of all his issues gave credence to his work, and enumerated all known examples for collectors to consider and seek to obtain. Clearly, then, even though this is a restrike, it is a sample of what was a 1790-era trial piece, albeit by a man who did not himself create or engrave either of the dies. What he did was leave for us a testimonial, or memorial, to the artistic accomplishments of earlier artists.
($3500-4500)