|
STUART. Charles II. 1660-1685. Proof AV Pattern Crown (39mm, 52.74 g, 6h). Tower (London) mint. Dies by John Roettiers. Dated 1662. CAROLVS · II · DEI · GRATIA, laureate head right / · MAG · BR · FRA · ET · HIB · REX · 16 62, crowned cruciform coats-of-arms with interlocking Cs in quarters; rayed Garter star at center. Edge: DECVS · ET · TVTAMEN. W&R 50 (this coin cited); Linecar & Stone 1A (this coin cited); Bull 426; Bull, Gold p. 208, RRGA1 (this coin illustrated); ESC 69. Lustrous surfaces with splashes of warm red color. Roettier’s iconic portrait accentuated by cameo frost. In NGC encapsulation 6066350-049, graded PF 63 Cameo. Extremely rare, one of only four in private hands. The most extensively provenanced example and arguably the finest, with only the Montagu specimen in contention. Top Pop.
Ex Paramount Collection (Heritage 3096, 25 March 2021), lot 30294; Heritage 296 (30 July 2002), lot 12106; John Jay Pittman Collection (Part III, David Akers, 6 August 1999), lot 3834 (illustrated on front cover); Palace Collections of Egypt [King Farouk] (Sotheby’s, 24 February 1954), lot 810; John G. Murdoch Collection (Part II, Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge, 8 June 1913), lot 616 (£130); Simpson Rostron Collection (Sotheby, Wilkinson & Hodge, 16 May 1892), lot 378 (purchased from Spink); William Lloyd Collection (S. Leigh Sotheby & John Wilkinson, 27 July 1857), lot 224 (part of; “Charles II, Crown, with numerals…”); Duke of Devonshire Collection (Christie & Mason, 26 March 1844), lot 504; Marmaduke Trattle Collection (Sotheby & Son, 30 May 1832), lot 3068; Thomas Dummer Collection (Gerard, 28 June 1785), lot 59; likely Thomas Lee Dummer Collection (†1765).
In the early years of the restored Stuart monarchy, the mint’s sole priority was to convert bullion into coin as quickly and cheaply as possible, resulting in nearly two years of production of hammered coinage. Abortive steps had been made to modernize their equipment by Frenchman Pierre Blondeau under the Commonwealth, including rolling and blank production, but had been resisted by the coiners of the Tower mint. Nevertheless, Blondeau was authorized to strike gold and silver portrait coins of Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell in 1656, and was granted the use of Drury House for the purpose. By 1662, the time had come for the Tower mint fully modernize and adopt the new widespread technology of the screw press. But who was to engrave the dies for this new, milled coinage?
The engraving of the portrait punches for the 1660-1662 hammered coinage had initially been given to Chief Engraver Thomas Rawlins, a royalist who had previously engraved the impressive city view Oxford crown for Charles I. Rawlins failed to follow through, instead hiring Thomas Simon as an outside engraver and directing him to undertake the task. It was Simon’s work with these puncheons made him an obvious choice for the new milled dies.
The competition would come from John (Jan) Roettiers and his brother, Joseph. The Roettiers brothers arrived in England from Antwerp in 1661 at the invitation of King Charles himself. Their father, Philip Roettiers, had lent the king money during his exile, and the pair were obviously well-connected at court from the moment of their arrival. Thomas Simon, in contrast, had remained in England during the Commonwealth and had in fact even engraved the dies for Blondeau’s portrait coinage of Oliver Cromwell. Both engravers were ordered to prepare dies for Unites and Crowns, resulting in what is undoubtedly the most famous contest in numismatics.
Roettiers submitted two designs: one with a laureate head of the king (as on the present coin), and another with a laureate and draped bust. He also employed a variety of edges, including DECVS ET TVTAMEN (An ornament & safeguard), the same with the addition of the date 1662, and a plain edge. These patterns were well received, including by the diarist Samuel Pepys, who viewed both these and Simon’s Cromwell crowns over diner at the Tower, where he was joined by John Roettiers. Pepys writes, “[Mint official Henry Slingsby] extolls those of Rotyr’s above the others; and, indeed, I think they are the better, because the sweeter of the two…” (9 March 1662/63)
Thomas Simon, however, did not immediately respond. Evidently consumed by his other work for the Mint and its associated problems, his response to the Roettiers patterns were not struck until 1663. That response exhibits a superbly detailed baroque portrait coupled with two edge varieties, known as the famous “Petition” and “Reddite” crowns. The later urges the reader, REDDITE QVÆ CAESARIS CAESARI &CT POST (Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s…), while the former “petitions” the King to compare this work to that of the Roettiers. Despite Pepys’s praise for his competitors, it is Simon’s entries that are today held as the pinnacle of English numismatic art.
Ultimately, the task of engraving the dies for the new milled coinage was awarded to Roettiers. Court politics undoubtedly played some role in the decision, but technical problems with Simon’s other work for the mint, particularly the high failure rate of his puncheons, must also have been a contributing factor. (See C.E. Challines, A New History of the Royal Mint [Cambridge, 1992), p. 348-351)
The exquisite example offered in this lot is one of a precious handful of specimens from the famous contest known in gold. It was one of John Jay Pittman’s favorite of the many coins he owned and often featured in his numerous exhibits of British coins. Bull (English Silver Coins, 6th ed. [2015]) and W&R both note four known examples, to which five more can be added. A corpus of known specimens is listed below.
- The present example. Ex Paramount Collection (Heritage 3096, 25 March 2021), lot 30294; Heritage 296 (30 July 2002), lot 12106; John Jay Pittman Collection (Part III, David Akers, 6 August 1999), lot 3834 (illustrated on front cover); Palace Collections of Egypt (King Farouk – Sotheby’s, 24 February 1954), lot 810; John G. Murdoch Collection (Part II, Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge, 8 June 1913), lot 616 (£130); Simpson Rostron Collection (Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge, 16May 1892), lot 378 (purchased Spink); William Lloyd Collection (S. Leigh Sotheby & John Wilkinson, 27 July 1857), lot 224 (part of; “Charles II, Crown, with numerals…”); Duke of Devonshire Collection (Christie & Mason, 26 March 1844), lot 504; Marmaduke Trattle Collection (Sotheby & Son, 30 May 1832), lot 3068; Thomas Dummer Collection (Gerard, 28 June 1785), lot 59; likely Thomas Lee Dummer Collection (†1765)
- H. Montagu (Part III, Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge, 13 November 1896), lot 823 (purchased by Rollin); W. Brice Collection (collection acquired en block by Montagu in 1887); H.H. Duncombe (Sotheby, Wilkinson, & Hodge, 21 June 1869) lot 155; J. Baker (S. Leigh Sotheby & John Wilkinson, 1 June 1855), lot 54; Thomas Thomas (S. Leigh Sotheby & Co., 23 February 1844), lot 915. The inclusion of Trattle in the description from the Montagu catalog is erroneous and should refer to the plain edge version.
- Numismatica Genevensis 22 (24 November 2025), lot 239 (Hewitt pedigree appears erroneous); Monnaies de Collection 10 (13 October 2022), lot 1023 (NGC PF 61)
- Christie’s (18 February 1992), lot 500; Seaby Coin & Medal Bulletin 717 (May 1978), no. A460
- Vivian Hewitt Collection (Glendining, 13 April 1972), lot 373
- British Museum E.3465
- Royal Mint Museum (Hocking, Catalogue of the Coins, Tokens, Medals, Dies, and Seals in the Museum of the Royal Mint. Vol. I: Coins and Tokens [London, 1906], no. 1358)
- National Museum of Scotland (Holmes, “The Lindsay Carnegie Collection at the National Museums of Scotland,” in BNJ 74 [2004], p. 149); Lindsay Carnegie (1840-1911) Collection
- Hunterian Museum. Ex William Hunter Collection
- Hunterian Museum. Ex Thomas Coats Collection
The final winners of all Triton XXIX lots will be determined at the live public sale that will be held on 13-14 January 2026.
Triton XXIX – Session Four – Lot 920-1141 will be held Wednesday afternoon, 14 January 2026 beginning at 2:00 PM ET.
Winning bids are subject to a 22.5% buyer's fee for bids placed on this website and 25% for all others.
We recognize that our users may have various Internet Browsers and Operating Systems. We like our visitors to have the best possible experience when using our bidding platform. However, we do recognize that it is impossible to develop applications that work identically, efficiently and effectively on all web browsers. The CNG bidding platform supports the latest stable major version and stable previous version of Chrome and Firefox.
|
