Dr Mead's Allectus indiscretion **updated**

On 16 January 1750, almost exactly 276 years ago, the Reverend William Stukeley wrote to his old friend Maurice Johnson lamenting the gift of the unique Carausius “Oriuna” denarius to King Louis XV of France, as well as a gold aureus of Allectus. The relevant part of the letter is below, reproducing the spelling and punctuation used:

“Dr Mead had 2 gold Allectus’s; more than any body else had. he gave one to the French king. Not content with this indescretion, he sent him an unique silver coyn of Carausius; on the reverse, his wife ORIVNA AUGUSTA, & this without so much as a drawing taken of it.”

Dr Richard Mead was the doctor who attended Queen Anne on her deathbed and was the court physician to King George II until his death in 1754.

I have already posted, in 2022, about the Allectus aureus that was included in the subsequent sale of Mead’s coin collection:

The provenance of an aureus of Allectus in the BM

Is it possible to identify the aureus given to the French king?

Presumably the royal collection is now in the Bibliotheque National in Paris and, assuming it wasn’t previously exchange or sold, it should be found there. Andrew Burnett lists a total of 24 known aurei of Allectus in his 1984 BNJ paper. Of those there are four that are identified as being in the Paris collection but only two, coins 3 and 19 have recorded provenance s that could potentially fit. Both have the reverse of SPES AVG and are the only recorded Allectus aurei with this reverse.

This is where we now have a problem as both of these coins were stolen in the 1831 robbery and are now lost.

We do, however, have a record of both coins in the Monumenta Historica Britannia by Petrie (1848) where they were represented from previous engravings on the plates. These are also reproduced by Burnett an his plate of Allectan aurei. 

Checking Sam Moorhead's recent revision of RIC for Carausius and Allectus draws a blank on which of the two coins it might be the gifted coin to the French king by Mead. Similarly Shiel, Webb and Cohen, although acknowledging the existence of these coins, all fail to identify the Mead provenance of one of them. 

The main difference between the two aurei is in the obverse titles, number 3 being ALLECTVS PF AVG, whereas 19 is IMP C ALLECTVS PF AVG. We must go back to Kennedy's second monograph on Oriuna from 1756 and there, on page 11, we have the answer to the question as to which coin was from Mead. He tells us that the coin reading ALLECTVS PF AVG, coin 3, is the specimen that came from Mead. 

The loss of both known types of SPES AVG aureus of Allectus is a pity and does, indeed, stem from Mead's indiscretion. 

References

Burnett, A, "The coinage of Allectus" BNJ 54 (1984)

Kennedy, J, Further Observations on Carausius (1756)

Moorhead, S, Roman Imperial Coinage V.5 (2025)

Petrie, H, Monumenta Historica Britannia (1848)

Shiel, N, The Episode of Carausius and Allectus (1977)

Webb, P, "The coinage of Allectus" NC 6 (1906)

The largest Henry II coin hoard (until the Tealby hoard)

The Bramham Moor hoard from Withy and Ryall

Some time before 1756 a small hoard of 12 silver pennies were discovered on Bramham Moor (West Yorkshire/North Yorkshire border) that was either deliberately deposited or accidentally lost around 1168-70 AD. They were coins of King Stephen’s successor, Henry II, who arranged for the murder of another Saint, the Archbishop of Canterbury, St Thomas a Beckett, in 1170.

The circumstances of the find are unknown. The coins, however, were engraved (albeit poorly) and published on Plate III of Withy and Ryall, “Twelve Plates of English Silver Coins from the Norman Conquest to Henry VIII inclusive”, 1756.

In 1818 the journal Archaeologia was able to report that it was the largest hoard of Henry II coins known until the huge find of 5,700 at Tealby in Lincolnshire in 1807.

The entry in Archaeologia, 1818

Postumus GERMANICVS MAX V reverse

The Gallic usurper Postumus ceased striking sestertii and double sestertii in the year 263. Unofficial mints continued the production of double sestertii.

Unofficial mints continued the production of double sestertii seemingly until towards the end of Postumus’ rule in 269. The imitations declined in size so much that the radiate bronzes are frequently mis-described as dupondii.

Postumus, double sestertius, "atelier II" mint, PAX AVG

Initially the imitative coins continued the designs used for the official bronze coinage but, through time, additional reverse types entered the repertoire. The majority of the new reverses sought to mimic the reverse types of the official radiate silver coinage of Postumus, for example PAX AVG is frequently encountered.

Gallienus, antoninianus, Trier mint, GERMANICVS MAX V

Occasionally other coins serve as prototypes. During the 250’s Gallienus struck a silver antoninianus at the Trier mint with the reverse of two captives sat beneath a trophy of arms accompanied by the legend GERMANICVS MAX V. The reverse design, including the legend, can be found on this pair of significantly reduced imitative double sestertii of Postumus, perhaps manufactured c.267-8.

Postumus, double sestertii, irregular mint, GERMANICVS MAX V

These two coins quite clearly share the same reverse die, the obverse though, are from different dies. I know of another coin that uses this reverse die and is also an obverse die duplicate with the bottom coin above. It was found in a hoard of Postumus coins from Mericourt-l’Abbe. 

Postumus, imitative double sestertius, Mericourt-l'Abbe hoard

The Mericourt-l'Abbe hoard comprised official, unofficial from “atelier II”, now thought to be a significant unofficial mint complex making (striking and casting) both silver and bronze coins of Postumus located at Chateaubleu, and other irregular coins of uncertain mint location.

Proximity of Mericourt-l'Abbe (yellow 8) to Chateaubleu (Blue 13)

You might speculate that what the die cutters were aiming for was a similar reverse type that did occur in the official large bronze of Postumus, the captives and trophy but with the legend FELICITAS AVG. The fact that they legend used was from a coin of Gallienus may demonstrate that the overall design was more important than accuracy of the accompanying lettering. 

Postumus double sestertius FELICITAS AVG (from de Witte) 

An Aurelian antoninianus with a 1936 pedigree

With the various MoUs regulating international trade in cultural objects and the UNESCO convention provenance or pedigree is playing an ever increasing role in the marketability of ancient coins, particularly high end specimens.

I was doing some research into provenance of some low end Roman coins of Aurelian when I hit upon an unexpected result for the coin at the top of the page.

The coin is an antoninianus of the 3rd emission from the Mediolanum (Milan) mint, RIC 138 corrected, RIC MER 1468 (temp), MIR 61b2(3) (this coin, plate 9, described as 4th emission by Gobl).

The coin is unremarkable in itself, except for the excellent state of preservation, has a very prominent die break on the reverse extending across half of the coin, leaving a raised line. It was apparently sold by Munzhandlung Basel in 1936 in their 18th March sale, lot 1990 where the described as FDC, no mention of the die break, and sure enough, it appears on plate 24.

Munzhandlung Basel was formed by an offshoot of the Cahn family in 1934, having left Frankfurt to avoid persecution. They purchased a huge and impressive collection of Greek and Roman coins from Prince Waldeck, “Prince W” identified on the auction catalogue frontispiece, seemingly put together in the 18th century by his ancestors. This collection formed the backbone of their first five ancient coin sales.

Searching Wikipedia there are a couple of Princes of Waldeck that could have been responsible for the sale of the family collection. The most likely, I would think, is Friedrich (1865-1946). He was the last reigning Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont, abdicating on 13th November 1918 when the monarchy was abolished.

Unusual Abassid fulus identified after 35 years!

Some thirty-five years ago I had a desire to get a better understanding of non European early mediaeval coins. A friend gifted me a dozen, or so, out of his oddments box and off I set, armed with two basic references, Richard Plant's “Arabic Coins And How To Read Them” and “Marsden’s Numismata Orientalia Illustrata” by Stephen Album.

Most coins fell into place but one has defied me until today!

I knew the remaining coin was an Abassid fulus but I saw a word at the top of the central reverse legend. I read the word as Zahir, Richard Plant agreed with me and suggested it may be a fulus of caliph al-Mamun (198-218 AH/813-833 AD) naming a local official, given the abundant bronze coinage of that caliph. However, nothing was forthcoming as a positive identification in the literature, even on subsequent searches of more advanced references.

Today I had another go and, yes, I got it! From a paper in Journal of Archaeological Research and Studies 6, issue 1, published June 2023, I discovered that I had misread the word and that it was Tahir. It would appear that this fulus, previously unpublished (although known from several specimens in sales) names Tahir ibn al-Husayn and records an alliance with the Tahrid dynasty. The fifth line on the reverse contains the word Al-Harb, for Al-Harb ibn Isa.

There are four styles of fulus recorded in the paper, this one being of the third style and is the variant with the letter alef after ta. They all date to AH 200 and were struck at a single mint, Sur al-Ma’muniyyah, modern day Tyre in the Lebanon.

No alef type

With alef type

It’s good to finally have a secure positive identification after so long. The original research paper cited can be downloaded from the link below:

LINK TO DOWNLOAD CITED PAPER

Two large gold medallions of Carausius

Reading the 25th anniversary volume of The Asylum, the journal of the Numismatic Bibliomania Society, I came across an article titled "Blunders, hoaxes and lost masterpieces from the numismatic literature of the Renaissance" by John Cunnally.

The article seeks to describe coins now known to be false, paduans and other copies, that were in collections documented during the boom of collecting coins that came with the expansion of the humanist movements across Europe. It brought to mind a couple of records of gold medallions of Carausius that I had recently noted.

Today we know of only three large base metal medallions of Carausius, all different, housed within the British Museum. It has been suggested by Toynbee that they may be off metal strikes and that there were gold versions also produced, now lost. This view is not universally accepted.

I came across a letter, on deposit at the John Hopkins University Sheridan Libraries, of the antiquary William Stukeley to John Collins, dated 3rd September 1753. He was thanking Collins for the loan of some coins to engrave for the plates in the forthcoming second volume of his book Medallic History of Carausius. There is a passage in the letter where Stukeley notes that he has acquired a gold medallion of Carausius the size of a half crown. There is sadly no description of the reverse type in the letter and no sign of it engraved in the plates of the Medallic History. Was Stukeley bluffing, trying to make the recipient of the letter envious? Or did he, perhaps, discover the piece to be a fake? 

That brings me on to the next large gold medallion of Carausius. Whilst searching for Stukeley's specimen in the Medallic History I came across a large votive piece at the top of plate XVI, coin 1.

The medallion, noted by Stukeley as being in the collection of Jacomo Musselius of Verona, is of a reverse type wholly unknown in the repertoire of Carausius numismatics and is much more akin to the silver medallions of Constantius II. I wonder, as the piece is now lost, whether it is a fantasy piece, concocted from the description of the later fourth century medallions and if it ever existed beyond the illustration on the page. 

The Tropaeum Traiani of Adamklissi as a coin type of Trajan

Rescued from my junk bag and winning no prizes in the beauty contest (devastated on the obverse by corrosion, sadly) I think this is an interesting building reverse.

The coin is one of Trajan, Tomis (modern Constanța, Romania) in Moesia Inferior, AE 20mm, RPC 779. It shows why the RPC physical books are so valuable compared to the website listing. The "trophy on pedestal", paraphrased from their website, is described fuller in the book text where they suggest the reverse is actually the memorial at Adamklissi, the Tropaeum Traiani, recording the first victory of Trajan over Decebalus.

The circular monument, topped with a sculptural trophy of arms (now preserved in the museum) at Adamklissi, was restored in the late 1970s. The coin would seem to show the detail of the top of the structure.

The location of Adamklissi is in the hinterland of Tomis and so the memorial would be familiar to the residents of the city. The coin type may have served as a warning to those with a mind set on further unrest. As it turns out, that was an unsuccessful ambition.

Around the base there are a series of 54 vignettes or metopes, not wholly unlike the sciences on its more famous counterpart Trajan’s Column in Rome.