Owner Comments:
One of the more rewarding parts about collecting pieces struck at the Soho Mint is that it forces you to explore numismatic items that otherwise would not have caught your attention. From my collecting perspective, the French token coinage Matthew Boulton struck for the Monneron brothers is an excellent example. Although I appreciated the design of these pieces, I would never have considered collecting them until I started to study their history. Fast forward several years, and I have dozens of examples of various varieties, a complete copy of the Boulton archival material related to their development, and a host of otherwise useless reference material. It would be an understatement to say that I am invested in learning more about these pieces. I plan to eventually create a set devoted especially to the French tokens and medals struck at the Soho Mint, so I will refrain from any major discussion of these pieces here. For now, those who want to learn more can do no better than to consult the article written by Richard Margolis (1988), which is partially supplemented by the work of Richard Doty (1998). The aim of this write-up is only to help viewers understand the significance of this example.
The classification of the French 5 Sol pieces can get rather complicated, so much so that standard references such as Mazard (1965) are incomplete or inaccurate. To this end, I only want to distinguish pieces dated 1791 from those dated 1792. Intuitively, the pieces dated 1791 are the earliest of the French 5 Sol tokens struck at the Soho Mint. There are two major varieties among the pieces dated 1791. As noted in Margolis (1988) and supported by my archival research, the first batch of 5 Sol pieces were struck sometime in November of 1791, but the original designs were slightly revised to alter part of the obverse legend and realign the reverse the legend, which gave rise to the two major varieties. With these details attended to, it was then prudent to change the date from 1791 to 1792 as no large quantity of these pieces would be available before the end of the year. It appears these revisions were complete by December 26th of 1791, with a small sample of specimens making their way to France for approval (all dated 1792). It is critical to note that all 5 Sol pieces up to this point denoted the third year of Liberty (i.e., L’AN III). However, we know from Dr. Swediaur’s letter dated January 11th to Boulton that the National Assembly had just decreed the fourth year of Liberty. The letter directed Boulton to alter the reverse die to reflect L’AN IV. I am still making my way through the relevant archived material, but it seems reasonable to concur with Margolis (1988) that the three varieties of L’AN III pieces (two dated 1791 and one dated 1792) were struck for a very short period. The 1791 varieties were likely struck in very small quantities, given the haste with which the revisions were requested. The 1792 variety likely shared a better fate, as these tend to be better struck than their predecessors, suggesting that they were the product of experience. Nonetheless, the L’AN III varieties are all truly rare.
It is worth noting that PCGS erroneously attributed this piece as a variant of MAZ-145, but it is closer to Maz-142.
***Images are the courtesy of PCGS's TrueView Service***
Obverse: The obverse design is an intense deception of the Fête de la Fédération. I will do my best to describe it, but viewers are encouraged to make their observations based on the images provided. The main scene is contained within a vertically oblong oval. A large column appears in the immediate background of a helmeted female draped in robes, who is depicted facing right. Presumably, this woman is an allegorical figure of the French Republic. Her left arm is completely obscured by the tablet in her hands, which is inscribed
CONSTITUTION DES FRANCAIS. An oddly shaped shield appears to her right, which is decorated with a series of fine horizontal lines that are superseded by three fleur de lis. She is seated on what appears to be a solid platform, like what one would see on a statue or monument. The side of which includes the engraver's name
DUPRÉ. F. . Although unconnected to the platform, a slightly taller, albeit narrower column is depicted. We only see one side, but there is an engraving of what appears to be King Louis XVI. A slightly disheveled laurel wreath is affixed above and to the sides of the king’s portrait. In the foreground, immediately in front of these platforms, a small group of partially unraveled scrolls.
Unlike later varieties, there is no discernible writing on the upper scroll. To the immediate right of the seated figure appears a large group of Garde Nationale soldiers marching in formation in full uniform with slight variations in headgear. Their right arm is raised and pointing straight, presumably a symbol of their oath to the republic. The soldier in the immediate foreground is grasping the hilt of his sword with his left hand. Several more rows of soldiers holding rifles with bayonets affixed are either directly depicted or implied to exist behind this first row of saluting soldiers. One of the soldiers, either from the first or second row, is hoisting his sword high in the air. Although not all are clear enough to describe, at least five flags are presented by the soldiers. The most prominent of which is embellished with a liberty cap above a scroll that I believe is supposed to read as
“VIVRES LIBRES OU MOURIR.”. Above this entire scene, but still contained in the oval, appear the words
“PACTE FEDERATIF.”. In two lines, the legend
14 JUILLET. 1790 appears in the exergue. The oblong oval is contained within the perfectly formed inner circle with a slightly raised rim, within which appears the legend
“VIVRE LIBRES” on the left, and
“OU MOURIR.” on the right. The entire design is enclosed by a toothed border.
Reverse: The entire reverse design is contained within a toothed border. Tightly hugging this border appears the legend
“MONNERON FRERES NEGOCIANS A PARIS 1792”. The date appears centered at the bottom. The entire circular legend is separated by an inner raised ring. Within the inner ring appears the legend “
MEDAILLE DE CONFIANCE DE CINQ-SOLS REMBOURSABLE EN ASSIGNATS DE 50. ET AU DESSUS.” in seven lines. There is a “H” shaped symbol in superscript to the “50”, but I was unable to include that above. An exergue line appears but does not bisect the inner ring. Under this line, it reads “
L’AN III. DE LA LIBERTE” in two lines.
Edge: DEPARTEMENTS • DE • PARIS • DE • RHONE • DE • LOIRE • ET • DU • GARD • (incuse). The PCGS holder obscures the edge, but this is the inscription on the other L’AN III examples in my collection (both 1791 and 1792 dated pieces).
Notes: The Richard Margolis collection has been offered for sale through a series of auctions. He assembled a truly world-class collection of coins, tokens, and medals. Although others may come up for sale in the future, it is telling that so far, Margolis seems to only have acquired two examples of the L’AN III French 5 Sols – both dated 1792. This example is the nicer of the two and included a note from Margolis, which reads: “
Monneron 5 Sols, 1792, L’AN III/Départements superbly struck (presumably on a hand press) on a beautifully bronzed flan, and very likely one of the 144 bronzed copper examples sent by MB to the Monneron Freres on January 4, 1792”. It may seem odd to think this piece was struck on a hand press, but it is important to remember that these pieces were by far the largest and heaviest that Soho had attempted to strike so far. The entire project was plagued with difficulties and a major point of contention, a fact that is clear in the archived material. If one enjoys a heated 18th-century verbal knockdown, they need to look no further than the letters between Boulton and Swediaur once the going got tough. The use of a handpress might also explain the inconsistency of quality among the L’AN III pieces dated 1792 and the drastic differences in quality between the two major L’AN III varieties dated 1791. The 1792 L’AN III type is clearly the byproduct of experience as the majority are almost fully struck, whereas the 1791 varieties are often weakly struck with partially incomplete legends. If a hand press was employed, it would also partially explain why so few of the L’AN III varieties were struck.
References:
Doty, R. (1998). The Soho Mint and the Industrialization of Money. London: National Museum of American History Smithsonian Institution.
Mazard, Jean (1965). Histoire Monétaire et Numismatique Contemporaine 1790-1963 ; Tome I: 1790-1848. Emile Bourgey, Paris.