Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia Vol 23 (2012)

Volume 23 Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia Contents President’s Report iii Managing Editor’s Letter v Walter Bloom & Colin Pitchfork Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards 1 Nicholas Wright A new eastern bronze coin of Seleukos II Pogon 21 Lyn Kidson Minting in Ephesus: economics and self-promotion in the Early Imperial Period 27 Peter Lane S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 37 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) iii iv JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) President’s Report With the concurrent production of two (slim) volumes of the Journal in order to catch up to the desired yearly production cycle, my usual news will appear in Volume 24. But I can highlight some important numismatic projects in the country, at least that I know about. Simon Gray is just about to publish a deinitive work on Australasian Merchant tokens, a full colour corpus of all known examples including many up-to-now unrecorded varieties. he amount of research that has gone into this project is immense and the book will be the bible for collectors of this material and those interested in this fascinating period of our history. Les Carlisle and I are editing a History of Stokes (Australasia), using material originally compiled by the late Leigh Blackburn. he work commences with the arrival of homas Stokes on 1st January 1854 as a passenger on the sailing ship Birmingham that entered Port Phillip Bay to complete a voyage of more than fourteen weeks from Liverpool, and goes through to the business arrangement that Stokes had with the Franklin Mint in the 1970s. he text has been completed and we have reached the stage of inserting the many images. Roger McNeice OAM is inalizing his latest book, he Jubilee of Tasmania and the Cessation of Transportation Medal, which will be launched on 23rd November 2013 at the 50 years’ celebration of the establishment of the Tasmanian Numismatic Society. From hursday 3rd July to Sunday 6th July 2014, the Royal Numismatic Society of New Zealand, in conjunction with the Numismatic Association of Australia, and with the support of the Numismatic Society of Auckland, is organizing a major Conference and Fair in Wellington. Readers are invited to register interest now at [email protected]. nz. Secretary Peter Lane will be giving a paper at this conference on his involvement in the search last July for Kilwa and Dutch coins on Marchinbar Island in the Northern Territory. And inally, Peter Lane joins me as an Expert Examiner under the Protection of Movable Cultural Heritage Act 1986. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) v his volume would not have appeared without our Editorial Board: Gil Davis (Managing Editor), Walter Bloom, Peter Lane, John Melville-Jones, Barrie Newman (Layout Editor), John O’Connor (Copy Editor), Martin Purdy, Clare Rowan and Ken Sheedy. I also thank Council members for their continued support. Walter R Bloom President, NAA www.naa-online.com October 2013 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) vi JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Managing Editor’s Letter It is with great pleasure that I see this volume go to print. Firstly, it relects a diverse range of modern Australian and ancient numismatic studies; secondly, the scholarship is excellent; and thirdly, each article uses numismatics to add signiicantly to our broader knowledge in quite diferent ways. We lead with an article by NAA stalwarts Walter Bloom and Colin Pitchfork analysing an early (possibly the earliest known) Australian coin hoard. heir key indings about wear rates are likely to have worldwide interest and application in unlikely quarters. For instance, it is oten diicult to determine the ideal weight and standard of an ancient coin, so the revelation that percentage wear rate is linear is of critical importance. Nicholas Wright also provides us with new material in his note about a previously unknown type of Seleukos II. His exemplary discussion of the iconography of his subject demonstrates the sort of worthwhile contribution that numismatics can make to our knowledge of history. Lyn Kidson is a new contributor in the early stages of her research. However, she makes some keen observations on the role of pictorial images on the coinage of Ephesus in the early Roman principate, and helps to decode the propaganda messages of both the emperors and the city. Finally, proliic contributor Peter Lane gives us the history of the leading South Australian medal maker S. Schlank & Co. his is an important work especially for collectors as Schlank, despite its 80 year history, is little known in the numismatic world. I trust you will enjoy reading this volume. Dr Gil Davis October 2013. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) vii viii JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Introduction Within the last ive years two New South Wales coin hoards fortuitously came intact on to the market. It was immediately recognized that these modern coins dating from the Victorian period through to just ater World War I were not simply accumulations or coin collections, but must have come from hoards. his supposition was conirmed with the owners. Realizing the hoards’ importance, the authors recorded the coins by country (British and Australian), date, mint, and most importantly, their individual weights. his article is a report on these indings together with a statistical analysis of the weight loss of the coins during circulation. We show that for the Australian silver coins in the combined hoards, the mean percentage weight loss per year per coin by denomination follows a linear relationship, and that the smaller the coin, the larger the percentage weight loss. Background In July 2008 (Sale 88 (see igs 1, 2 and 4), Lots 1605 – 1672, 1758 – 1896) and early 2009 Sale 90, Lots 323 - 415), Noble Numismatics sold two hoards at auction of Australian and British coins both buried in 1921, which are consequently described as the ‘1921 Hoards A and B’. he facts presented were that Hoard A was claimed to be found during renovations and work in the back yard of a property on the Central Coast, less than 100 km north of Sydney, and Hoard B was claimed to be found in the southern suburbs of Sydney. he remarkable similarity of both hoards in value and mix of gold and silver tends to suggest that the hoards had a common source but this is not proved. Both hoards contain Australian and British coins that were put aside from circulation in early 1921. Noble Numismatics Sale 88 Lot 1612 (image courtesy Noble Numismatics) JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 1 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Noble Numismatics Sale 88 Lot 1623 (image courtesy Noble Numismatics) he relative proportions of Australian silver coins in the hoards follow those expected from the numbers struck during the diferent years, indicating that these were selected at random from the coins in circulation at the time. When the hoards were sold they achieved a combined hammer price of over $210,000. At the time of its deposit approximately 20% of the silver currency in circulation was British, some of which had been in circulation since the 1830s. he face value in the hoards of Australian silver coins was £142.1.9 (2651 coins) in Hoard A and £113.6.3 (2231 coins) in Hoard B, and of British silver coins £41.8.3 (768 coins) in Hoard A and £37.12.3 (772 coins) in Hoard B. In Hoard A there were 18 half sovereigns (1854 to 1915) and a single sovereign (1909), and in Hoard B, 13 half sovereigns (1902 – 1915) and 8 sovereigns (1904 – 1914). he total face value of both hoards including gold was £358.18.6, and he Richmond River Express and Casino Kyogle the total number of coins was 6462. he Advertiser, 16 November 1920. p. 4. presence of British coins of George V in both hoards dated as late as 1919, with a preponderance of British lorins during the war years, suggests that some of these coins were acquired in England by Australian troops returning from World War I. No half-crowns were present in the hoard as these ceased to circulate ater the introduction of regular Australian silver coins in 1910, but were recalled and stored at banks and later returned to England. While 1921M threepences featured in the hoards, no 1921 plain threepences were present as they were introduced late in 1921 from new dies without the M mintmark. Only a small number of 1920M (Melbourne 2 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards Mint) shillings (minted December 1920 - January 1921) and 1921 star (Sydney Mint) shillings (minted early in 1921) were present. his together with the overall pattern of wear suggests a hoard being put together in the period February - May of 1921. A likely reason the hoards were put away was the fear of the possible debasement of Australian silver coins to 0.500 ine from the then current 0.925 (sterling) ineness. Australia didn’t go ahead with this debasement as the ruling world price of silver became stable, but the ineness of the silver coinage in Britain was reduced in 1920. Hoards A and B have been carefully examined with all coins weighed and the details recorded. he hoards represent a time capsule of coins circulating at the time in the Sydney region and the nearby regional area of NSW. he amount of wear is considerable considering that most of the Australian coins had as little as ten years of circulation. he 1918 to 1921 coins showed less wear with many of the 1921 pieces close to uncirculated. In this paper we look at the wear rates for the combined hoards. he relationship between the two hoards will be the subject of a further study as the sample sizes are relatively small. Melbourne Mint study he wear rates of Australian coins have been examined once before in a study of some 75,000 coins referred to in the Report of the Deputy Master of the Melbourne Branch of the Royal Mint for the year 1933, pp 105 -107.1 We are grateful to Jim Noble for pointing out an earlier and more complete version of this article.2 he Melbourne Mint study was somewhat diferent. Firstly the coins had been longer in circulation. Secondly the presented results were given denomination by denomination in two-year groups up until 1921, then grouped for the respective periods 1922-1924 and 1925-1932. While coins struck with a given date were not necessarily issued in that year, such groupings make deductions about the wear rates more problematic. However, there are some interesting metallurgical observations which we reproduce here as the publication would be inaccessible to most readers: Examinations of the silver coins withdrawn from circulation were made in England on several occasions last century with a view to determining the rate of wear and the consequent life of the coins, and to check the results thus obtained, experiments were made by tumbling coins in a barrel, it being assumed that wear was due solely to abrasion caused 1 McCay, Hugh D, Report of the Deputy-Master of the Melbourne Branch of the Royal Mint for the year 1933. Sixty-fourth Annual Report of the Deputy Master and Comptroller of the Royal Mint, 1933, Appendix No. XIII, 18th May 1934, pp. 103-107. 2 McCay, Hugh D, Silver coinage of Australia – rate of wear, Royal Mint, Melbourne in-house publication, 12th August 1933, 8 pp. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 3 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork by the coins rubbing on each other or on counters and to impact when thrown down. A general conclusion was reached that large coins wear more slowly than small ones, and that, ceteris paribus, the harder the coin the longer its life. In 1906 it was found that the wear on sixpences was much more rapid than other coins, in spite of the fact that they were harder than the larger coins, and that they had the shortest life of any, and returned to the Mint in the worst condition. hey were a much more popular coin than the threepence, and so would circulate more rapidly. In 1912 Dr. Rose investigated the relative hardness of the surface and the interior of coins, and also of that part of the surface which was raised, as against the smooth table of the coin. As might be expected, he found that the interior was much soter than the surface, and the raised portion soter than the plain table. Also, it was proved that the thinner a coin the harder it was. In reporting the results of a further investigation in 1924, in which a small number of coins were taken from circulation, Dr. Rose wrote:“It is now known that the wear of coins is due to a combination of chemical and mechanical action. If simple abrasion of metal, at a rate dependent on hardness and toughness were the sole cause of wear, coins would always be clean. Dirt, however, accumulates on coins. It consists of grease mixed with various solids, including soot and dust of all kinds, and is soon contaminated with oxides and salts of the metals of which the coins consist. hese compounds are the products of corrosion due to the attacks of atmospheric acid and the fatty acids of grease, together with common salt. he crust formed by corrosion is also mixed with detached particles of metal, and is easily abraded. A great part of the wear of the coins is accordingly due to corrosion, while they are at rest, followed by abrasion when they are in active circulation. Tarnishing may be regarded as the irst stage in corrosion and the formation of a patina as the second stage, in which a layer of the products of corrosion mixed with dirt accumulates in the sunk part of the coin, but is removed by abrasion from the projecting parts. When the coin becomes smooth, the patina is removed almost as fast as it forms.” It appears that, provided the hard portion is tough, the soter metal wears more rapidly, and therefore, as a coin wears the rate of wear increases. Larger coins, having less surface exposed in proportion to their weight, are less subject to wear than smaller, but against this the height of the relief of the design is less in proportion to the weight, the relief being proportional to the diameter. Further, the smaller part of the weight is in the protecting rim; and less of the weight has been hardened by the pressure of the dies, which hardens the surface only. It follows that the larger coins become unit for circulation, owing to wear ater they have lost a smaller proportion of their weight. 4 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards he New South Wales Hoards he structure of the remainder of this paper is as follows. For the combined Hoards A and B we present graphs of the mean percentage weight loss for each denomination and each date, with the original data given in three appendices. his study concentrates on the mean percentage weight loss (MPWL) for the coins in the hoards, deined by: MPWL = (weight of coin as struck – mean weight of coins of a particular date) × 100 weight of coin as struck where the weight of coin as struck is the actual theoretical weight. (a) he Australian coins he threepence data for the combined hoards give: Age (years) Mean weight Mean % weight loss 11 1.3627 3.6109 10 1.3791 2.4539 9 1.3844 2.0784 7 1.3918 1.5565 6 1.3914 1.5870 5 1.3980 1.1145 4 1.3996 1.0038 3 1.4049 0.6271 2 1.4096 0.2955 1 1.4107 0.2164 0 1.4125 0.0920 (it is convenient when charting the data to give the age in years rather than the dates themselves, note that there is no Year 8 (1913) dated Australian threepence). here is a slight diference between the mean weight of the 1921 coins and the actual theoretical weight of 1.4138g) Noble Numismatics Sale 88 Lot 1669 (image courtesy Noble Numismatics) JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 5 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Australia, threepence y1% = - 0.1596 + 0.2826 x1 4 S R-Sq R-Sq(adj) 0.289846 93.5% 92.8% Mean % weight loss 3 2 1 0 0 2 4 6 Age (years) 8 10 12 Here we have a plot of mean percentage weight loss (MPWL) versus age in years (Age). As would be expected, the older the coin, the higher the mean percentage weight loss (as found in the Melbourne Mint study). However, the relationship is close to linear within a 95% degree of conidence, viz MPWL = -0.1596 + 0.2826×Age With a constant (0.2826) rate of mean percentage weight loss over the period in question. his constant rate is at odds with the metallurgical statement in the Melbourne Mint report. Carrying out a similar analysis for all four silver denominations gives the following graphs: 6 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards Australia, sixpence y2% = - 0.1598 + 0.2421 x2 3.5 Mean % weight loss 3.0 S R-Sq R-Sq(adj) 0.286366 92.4% 91.4% S R-Sq R-Sq(adj) 0.121956 97.4% 97.1% 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0 2 4 6 Age (years) 8 10 12 Australia, shilling y3% = - 0.1200 + 0.1957 x3 2.5 Mean % weight loss 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 2 4 6 Age (years) 8 10 12 7 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Australia, florin y4% = - 0.1595 + 0.1833 x4 S R-Sq R-Sq(adj) Mean % weight loss 2.0 0.101764 97.8% 97.5% 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0 2 4 6 Age (years) 8 10 12 (in the above we have combined the numbers for 1915 and 1915H shilling, 1914 and 1914H lorins, and 1915 and 1915H lorins respectively). We would remind the reader that no Australian threepences were minted in 1913, no sixpences in either 1913 or 1915, no shillings in 1919, and no lorins in 1920. Tabulating the regression lines for all four denominations gives: 3d MPWL = - 0.1596 + 0.2826×Age 6d MPWL = - 0.1598 + 0.2421×Age 1/- MPWL = - 0.1200 + 0.1957×Age 2/- MPWL = - 0.1595 + 0.1833×Age he rate of mean percentage weight loss decreases as the size of the coin increases, in keeping with early British studies as outlined in the Melbourne Mint report. he reasons for this are varied, but will depend on relative usage as well as metallurgical properties of the surface together with the proportion taken up with the design. It must be remembered that the above study is on coins of a very restricted period, and essentially on relatively new coins given when they were buried. It should also be noted that these coins did not have the degree of circulation of their British counterparts, based not only on the difering population sizes, but also on the fact that Australian and British coins were circulating side by side during this period. Can we write for certain that Hoards A and B come from the same hoard? Most likely there is little that can be said given the relatively small sample sizes. 8 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards (b) he British coins he sample sizes are even smaller, but it is instructive to look at scatter plots for the four denominations (3d, 6d, 1/-, 2/-) appearing in the 1921 Hoards over the period 1890 to 1920. Great Britain, threepence 40 Frequency 30 20 10 0 1890 1895 1900 1905 Date 1910 1915 1920 1915 1920 Great Britain, sixpence 60 50 Frequency 40 30 20 10 0 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 Date JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 9 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Great Britain, shilling 50 Frequency 40 30 20 10 0 1890 1895 1900 1905 Date 1910 1915 1920 1910 1915 1920 Great Britain, florin 40 Frequency 30 20 10 0 1890 10 1895 1900 1905 Date JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards It must be emphasized that the sample sizes are small. he numbers of British coin in circulation would depend on what quantities were imported into Australia (with some very minor proportion brought in by travellers). One might conclude from the four charts above that there was a signiicant importing of all four denominations sometime later in the period 1906 – 1909, and a modest import of the irst three denominations with a special importing of lorins in the early part of the century. Royal Mint records would be needed to ascertain if these observations do indeed hold. We tabulate the data for both hoards, in Appendix I the grade ranges and numbers for the Australian coins, in Appendix II the mean weights and mean percentage weight loss for each denomination, and in Appendix III the numbers for the British coins. Conclusions hese seem to be the irst recorded hoards of Australian coins, and it is remarkable that they have been put down so early in the history of Australian Commonwealth coinage along with British coinage that was circulating side by side during these years. his has given us an almost unique opportunity to study wear rates on Australian silver coins during the period 1910 - 1921, which have been found to follow a very strong linear relationship for each of the four denominations. More importantly, the rate of wear depends on the actual size of the coin, with the smallest denominations wearing at the highest rate. Professor Walter Bloom, a mathematician in his working life, is the honorary numismatist at the Western Australian Museum. He is President of both the Numismatic Association of Australia and the Perth Numismatic Society, and is Vice-President of the International Committee on Money and Banking Museums (ICOMON). He is also the writer of the Oceania sections of the Survey of Numismatic Research. Walter has been the recipient of both the NAA Paul Simon Memorial and the NAA Ray Jewell Silver Awards, and in recent years he has been carrying out a major project in the Berlin Coin Cabinet with support from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. [email protected] Colin Pitchfork is a numismatic consultant who lives in Sydney and has been actively involved in professional numismatics for over ity years. He has held the position of President of the Australian Numismatic Society (ANS) on many occasions since 1967, retiring from that position in 2008, and has been the recipient of both of the Society’s highest awards namely the gold and silver medals. Colin is currently the Vice-President of the NAA and the ANS, and has been a recipient of the NAA Paul Simon Memorial Award. He is a member of the Board of the Australian Centre of Ancient Numismatic Studies (ACANS) at Macquarie University. [email protected] JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 11 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Appendix I Australia threepences Grade Hoard A Hoard B Total 1910 EDWARD VII G-UNC 108 103 211 1911 GEORGE V G-EF 35 23 58 1912 GEORGE V G-UNC 36 43 79 1914 GEORGE V G-EF 41 43 84 1915 GEORGE V G-gVF 8 15 23 1916M GEORGE V G-UNC 30 17 47 1917M GEORGE V G-UNC 66 52 118 1918M GEORGE V F-UNC 117 116 233 1919M GEORGE V VF-UNC 60 48 108 1920M GEORGE V VF-UNC 18 12 30 1921 GEORGE V 1921M GEORGE V 0 VF-UNC 46 45 91 565 517 1082 Grade Hoard A Hoard B Total G-VF 76 73 149 TOTAL Face value £13.10.6 ($27.05) Australia sixpences 1910 EDWARD VII 1911 GEORGE V G-gEF 90 94 184 1912 GEORGE V G-nUNC 52 58 110 1914 GEORGE V G-EF 64 77 141 1916M GEORGE V F-UNC 75 76 151 1917M GEORGE V nF-UNC 76 72 148 1918M GEORGE V F-UNC 47 51 98 1919M GEORGE V VG-UNC 70 69 139 1920M GEORGE V VF-UNC 41 19 60 1921 GEORGE V VF-UNC 56 33 89 647 622 1269 TOTAL Face value 12 £31.14.6 ($63.45) JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards Australia shillings Grade Hoard A Hoard B Total 1910 EDWARD VII G-VF 49 33 82 1911 GEORGE V G-VF 46 22 68 1912 GEORGE V G-VF 19 7 26 1913 GEORGE V G-VF 17 2 19 1914 GEORGE V G-VF 47 38 85 1915 GEORGE V G- F 10 6 16 1915H GEORGE V G- F 10 10 20 1916M GEORGE V VG-VF 130 83 213 1917M GEORGE V nF-UNC 111 112 223 1918M GEORGE V nF-nUNC 45 34 79 1920M GEORGE V VF-UNC 9 8 17 1921* GEORGE V VF-UNC 8 3 11 501 358 859 Grade Hoard A Hoard B Total TOTAL Face value £42.19.0 ($85.90) Australia lorins 1910 EDWARD VII G-F 52 40 92 1911 GEORGE V G-VG 41 19 60 1912 GEORGE V G-VG 52 44 96 1913 GEORGE V G-VG 45 27 72 1914 GEORGE V VG-gF 89 57 146 1914H GEORGE V VG-gF 15 4 19 1915 GEORGE V VG-gF 16 19 35 1915H GEORGE V VG-nF 29 24 53 1916M GEORGE V VG-gVF 144 104 248 1917M GEORGE V VG-nUNC 202 167 369 1918M GEORGE V nF-UNC 175 155 330 1919M GEORGE V F-nUNC 66 44 110 1921 GEORGE V gVF-UNC 12 30 42 938 734 1672 TOTAL Face value £167.4.0 ($334.40) TOTAL Australia silver face value = £255.8.0 ($510.80), Number of coins 4,882 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 13 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Appendix II Hoard A (Australia) 3D 14 Mean weight Mean % weight loss 6D Mean weight Mean % weight loss 1910 1.3770 2.6029 1910 2.7440 2.9566 1911 1.3790 2.4615 1911 2.7740 1.8956 1912 1.3860 1.9663 1912 2.7810 1.6480 1914 1.3920 1.5419 1914 2.7850 1.5066 1915 1.3890 1.7541 1916 2.8060 0.7639 1916 1.4000 0.9761 1917 2.8100 0.6224 1917 1.4000 0.9761 1918 2.8080 0.6932 1918 1.4070 0.4810 1919 2.8220 0.1980 1919 1.4100 0.2688 1920 2.8250 0.0920 1920 1.4110 0.1980 1921 2.8280 -0.0141 1921 1.4120 0.1273 Full weight 1.4138 Full weight 2.8276 1/- Mean weight Mean % weight loss 2/- Mean weight Mean % weight loss 1910 5.5360 2.1078 1910 11.1020 1.8426 1911 5.5600 1.6834 1911 11.1280 1.6127 1912 5.5740 1.4358 1912 11.1320 1.5773 1913 5.5700 1.5066 1913 11.1740 1.2060 1914 5.6010 0.9584 1914 11.2112 0.8771 1915 5.5975 1.0203 1915 11.2267 0.7403 1916 5.6150 0.7109 1916 11.2490 0.5429 1917 5.6350 0.3572 1917 11.2650 0.4014 1918 5.6320 0.4102 1918 11.2900 0.1804 1920 5.6570 -0.0318 1919 11.3010 0.0831 1921 5.6580 -0.0495 1921 11.3180 -0.0672 Full weight 5.6552 Full weight 11.3104 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards Hoard B (Australia) 3D Mean weight Mean % weight loss 6D Mean weight Mean % weight loss 1910 1.3743 2.7939 1910 2.7423 3.0167 1911 1.3787 2.4827 1911 2.7715 1.9840 1912 1.3828 2.1927 1912 2.7693 2.0618 1914 1.3919 1.5490 1914 2.7883 1.3899 1915 1.3925 1.5066 1916 2.8035 0.8523 1916 1.3941 1.3934 1917 2.8058 0.7710 1917 1.3996 1.0044 1918 2.8076 0.7073 1918 1.4033 0.7427 1919 2.8184 0.3254 1919 1.4092 0.3254 1920 2.8200 0.2688 1921 2.8245 0.1096 Full weight 2.8276 2/- Mean weight 1920 1.4108 0.2122 1921 1.4122 0.1132 Full weight 1.4138 1/- Mean weight Mean % weight loss Mean % weight loss 1910 5.5248 2.3058 1910 11.0658 2.1626 1911 5.5414 2.0123 1911 11.1247 1.6419 1912 5.5614 1.6587 1912 11.1341 1.5587 1913 5.5250 2.3023 1913 11.1352 1.5490 1914 5.5789 1.3492 1914 11.1826 1.1299 1915 5.5738 1.4394 1915 11.1958 1.0132 1916 5.5982 1.0079 1916 11.2123 0.8673 1917 5.6186 0.6472 1917 11.2362 0.6560 1918 5.6194 0.6330 1918 11.2577 0.4659 1920 5.6500 0.0920 1919 11.2727 0.3333 1921 5.6467 0.1503 1921 11.3087 0.0150 Full weight 5.6552 Full weight 11.3104 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 15 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Appendix III Great Britain Hoard A 3d 1843 1 6d 1/- 1859 2/1 1860 1 1861 1 1862 1863 1 1864 1 1865 2 1866 1 1 1867 1868 1869 1 1870 1 1871 1 1872 1 4 3 1873 1 3 3 4 3 2 2 1877 3 1 1878 1 1 1 2 3 1880 1 2 1881 1 1 1874 1 1875 1876 1879 1 1 1882 3 1883 15 1884 1 1885 1886 1 2 1 1887 3 1887 2 1888 1889 16 3 2 4 2 1 3 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards 1890 3 1891 2 1892 3 3 4 2 1 1893 2 1893 1 1894 1 1 1895 2 1 2 3 1896 3 3 3 3 1897 4 1 2 4 1898 3 1 1899 2 9 8 8 1900 8 9 13 20 1901 3 4 6 9 1902 1 4 1 3 1903 6 5 3 3 1904 7 1 2 2 1905 2 9 1 1906 11 25 9 4 1907 17 16 22 10 1908 20 17 3 6 1909 6 1 3 3 1910 2 2 1 1911 2 2 5 5 1912 2 5 1913 2 2 1914 1 5 1 1 1915 4 4 8 4 1916 1 4 9 3 2 6 6 1917 1918 2 5 3 5 1919 1 2 3 3 No visible date 15 42 9 107 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 17 Walter R Bloom and Colin E Pitchfork Hoard B 3d 6d 1834 2/- 1 1838 1 1839 1843 1/- 1 1 1844 1 1853 1 1856 1 2 1859 1860 1861 1 1 1862 1863 1 1864 1865 1866 1 1 1867 1 1 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1 3 1874 3 2 1 5 3 2 1875 1876 2 1877 1 2 3 1 1878 2 2 1 1 4 3 2 1 1 1879 1 1880 1881 1 1882 1883 1 1 1884 1 5 1 1 1885 2 1886 1 2 1 1887 18 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Two 1921 New South Wales coin hoards 1887 1 1888 3 5 1 1889 3 5 1 3 1890 6 2 2 5 1891 3 1 4 2 1892 2 1 1893 1893 1 1894 2 1 1895 1 5 1 1896 3 5 3 6 1897 5 1 1 4 1898 1 3 8 4 1899 4 8 3 5 1900 8 17 14 18 1901 5 7 4 3 1902 10 7 4 4 1903 3 11 2 2 1904 7 5 1 1905 8 9 1906 15 32 4 2 1907 20 22 23 9 1908 20 22 2 6 1909 3 5 4 1 1910 1 5 2 2 1911 3 1912 3 1913 3 1914 1915 1916 2 1917 3 6 8 1 1 6 1 5 4 8 11 1 4 5 4 7 5 6 5 1919 1 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 6 4 3 1918 No visible date 1 24 9 3 65 19 20 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) A new eastern bronze coin of Seleukos II Pogon Nicholas L. Wright Obv: Male head r., with long hair covering neck and pointed beard, diademed; dotted border. Rev: In r. ield, […]ΑΣΙ[…]; in l. ield, […]ΕΛΕ[…]; Apollo standing l. holding arrow (or bow?) in r. hand, perhaps(?) resting l. hand on grounded bow; dotted border. 0 Æ 17; 2.54g; Private coll., Ex Yuri Suhanov, Ashdod, Israel 2013. his numismatic note presents a previously unrecorded Seleukid bronze coin recently sold on the market by the Ashdod based, licensed, antiquities dealer Yura Suhanov.* he new coin combines a bearded portrait obverse type with a standing Apollo reverse. he iconography is discussed in the context of the Parthian campaign of Seleukos II in the 220s BC and a mint attribution to Susa is proposed. Based on the combination of the bearded obverse portrait and the standing Apollo reverse, the coin was erroneously advertised as a Parthian or Armenian imitation of Antiochos III. However, the placement of the remnant traces of letters on the reverse allows for the credible reconstruction of the legend as [Β]ΑΣΙ[ΛΕΩΣ] [Σ]ΕΛΕ[ΥΚΟΥ]. he reconstructed legend combined with the image of Apollo, the dynastic patron and progenitor of the Seleukids,1 leaves little doubt that the bronze coin was intended as a Seleukid royal emission. he obverse bearded portrait might at irst sight appear anomalous for a Seleukid * I would like to express my appreciation to Panagiotis Iossif and Laura Wright for their helpful suggestions while preparing this manuscript. All errors remain the responsibility of the author. Note the following abbreviations used throughout: SC I = Houghton, A. and Lorber, C. 2002, Seleucid coins, a comprehensive catalogue part I: Seleucus I through Antiochus III (2 volumes), American Numismatic Society, New York. SC II = Houghton, A., Lorber, C. and Hoover, O. 2008, Seleucid coins, a comprehensive catalogue part II: Seleucus IV through Antiochus XIII (2 volumes), American Numismatic Society, New York. 1 See for example Diodorus Siculus 19.90.1-5; Appian Syrian Wars. 56; Justin 15.4.3-9. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 21 Nicholas L. Wright emission. he head appears to sport a Parthianising hair style, long at the back of the neck and worn in an elaborate roll akin to the second century BC ‘Satrap’ statue from Shami, and the numismatic portraits of the irst century BC Elymaiote rulers including Kamnaskires III and his successors.2 Unfortunately, the very worn nature of the coin makes it almost impossible to discern whether the apparent hairstyling is real or a mere illusion. he hairstyling confusion will only be clariied by the appearance of a better preserved specimen in the future. he presence of the long pointed beard, however, is much more certain. While it is true that Seleukid kings most commonly conformed to the diadochic practice of being depicted clean shaven, it has been well demonstrated that Seleukid kings could be shown sporting a variety of beard styles if and when it suited their purposes.3 Seleukid monarchs who were normally depicted clean shaven might grow a beard for a speciic reason, and kings more commonly shown wearing beards might occasionally be depicted without one; the two portrait types were not mutually exclusive. Lorber and Iossif interpret the spontaneous appearance of bearded numismatic portraits for kings normally depicted clean shaven as representations of so-called campaign beards, the “outward token of a vow to a god or gods to ensure the success of a particular military campaign”.4 Of all the Seleukid rulers, the long-nosed obverse portrait on this coin bears a close resemblance to Seleukos II. It is no coincidence that it was Seleukos II who was the irst Seleukid king to be depicted with a beard, an attribute which led Polybius to identify him with the cognomen Pogon or ‘Bearded’.5 Linfert associated the beard of Seleukos II with a hypothetical period of Parthian captivity; the same association has also been wrongly applied to the hirsute Demetrios II a century later although that king did spend over a decade at the Parthian court.6 Parthian style hair and a long beard might be seen to support Linfert’s position. However, the diferent stages of the growth of Seleukos II’s beard can be mapped in numismatic portraiture and has been convincingly linked to the king’s anabasis to repulse the Parthian threat to Seleukid rule over the Iranian plateau, c.228-226 BC.7 he king’s beard was seemingly the visible expression of a vow to defeat the Parthians, not an advertisement of his defeat and humiliation. 2 Smith, RRR 1988, Hellenistic Royal Portraits, Clarendon Press, Oxford: pl. 57, nos. 2-4, pl. 78, no. 4. 3 Lorber, CC and Iossif, PP 2009, ‘Seleucid Campaign Beards’, L’Antiquité Classique, vol. 78, pp. 87-115. he Diadochi (Greek Diadokhoi) were the Successors to Alexander the Great. 4 Lorber and Iossif 2009, p. 91. 5 Polybius 2.71.4. 6 Linfert, A 1976, ‘Bärtige Herrscher’, JDAI vol. 91, p. 158; see also Smith 1988, p. 46, n.2; contra Lorber and Iossif 2009, pp. 98-9, 105; Wright, NL 2012, Divine Kings and Sacred Spaces: Power and Religion in Hellenistic Syria (301-64 BC), Archaeopress, Oxford: pp. 58-9. 7 Lorber and Iossif 2009, pp. 95- 6. Anabasis is the Ancient Greek word conventionally used to describe this up-country expedition. 22 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) A new eastern bronze coin of Seleukos II Pogon he king initially sported a stubbly beard at Uncertain mint 37 in western Mesopotamia from where, it has been posited, he embarked on his campaign.8 It developed into a short curly beard at Nisibis,9 a portrait type still in use when the king progressed to Susa.10 he mint at Susa produced the most extensive coinage of Seleukos’ Parthian campaign suggesting a prolonged stay in Elymais. Ater the production of initial portraits showing the king with a short beard, Susan bronzes start to depict a longer pointed beard,11 a portrait type also adopted on the king’s arrival at Ekbatana.12 A bulla (seal impression) from Seleukeia on the Tigris and further fully bearded portraits at Uncertain mint 37 and the ΔΕΛ monogram mint associated with Antioch are perhaps testament to the westward return of Seleukos to challenge the invasion of Antiochos Hierax.13 he royal head on this coin, with its longer pointed beard, its well within the typology outlined by Lorber and Iossif, and suggests that the coin may have been minted at one of the major eastern centres such as Susa or Ekbatana.14 Apollo and his associated attributes formed one of the largest corpora from which the Seleukids drew inspiration for their coin types.15 he form of Apollo on the reverse of this coin, standing let, examining an arrow (or bow?) in his right hand, was a slight variation of the form most commonly used by Seleukos II where the god in the same pose leans his let elbow on a tall tripod. On this coin there is no space in the right ield for Apollo to be leaning on a tripod although there are heavily worn traces which might betray the existence of an upright bow below the god’s let hand. A standing Apollo examining a bow without a tripod is known only from the reverse of a single bronze type minted at Susa, the obverse portrait of which was ‘probably bearded’.16 A standing Apollo leaning on a grounded bow was a more common type variant for Seleukos II and appears used by Seleukos II as a reverse type on coins of all three metals 8 SC II pp. 666-7, no. Ad161. 9 SC I p. 271-2, nos. 749-50. 10 SC I p. 279-81, nos. 788, 795-6. 11 SC I p. 281, nos. 797-8 and perhaps 799. 12 SC I p. 286, nos. 822-824. 13 Invernizzi, A 2004, Seleucia al Tigri. Le impronte di sigillo dagli Archivi I: Sigilli uiciali, ritratti, Edizioni dell’Orso, Alexandria: p. 40, pl.16; Uncertain Mint 37, SC I: p. 252, nos.685-6; ΔΕΛ monogram mint, SC I: p. 260, nos. 711-2. 14 Lorber and Iossif 2009, pp. 113-5. 15 Erickson, K and Wright, NL 2011, ‘he ‘royal archer’ and Apollo in the East: Greco-Persian iconography in the Seleukid empire’, in Holmes, N (ed) Proceedings of the XIVth International Numismatic Congress, Glasgow, 2009 (volume 1), International Numismatic Council, Glasgow: pp. 163-8; Iossif, P 2011, ‘Apollo Toxotes and the Seleukids: Comme un air de famille’, in Iossif, PP, Chankowski, AS and Lorber CC (eds) More than Men, Less than Gods. Studies on Royal Cult and Emperor Worship. Proceedings of the Conference Organized by the Belgian School at Athens (1-2 November 2007), Studia Hellenistica 51, Leuven: pp. 229-91. 16 SC I p. 280, no. 794. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 23 Nicholas L. Wright across the empire. he following table outlines the distribution of the standing Apollo with grounded bow reverse type citing SC numbers. he last column indicates whether the mint is also known to have produced bearded obverse portraits of Seleukos II. Susa is included on account of its bearded portraiture. It did not employ the standing Apollo with grounded bow type but did, as cited above, produce a bronze issue showing a standing Apollo examining a bow in his right hand. he mint attribution for this coin must, without other supporting examples, remain speculative. he coin is unprovenanced although Suhanov claims to have purchased it from another dealer who trades in antiquities from across the Middle East, frequently from Iraqi sources. Such ambiguous language does not aid in an attribution, but it does allow for an origin east of the Euphrates. here is no clear pattern in the corpus of Seleukos II’s coinage which links the standing Apollo reverse iconography on this coin with any speciic mint or region. he presence of the obverse portrait with pointed beard strongly suggests a Mesopotamian or eastern mint with the portraits at Susa, Ekbatana, Seleukeia on the Tigris (bulla), Uncertain mint 37 and the ΔΕΛ monogram mint providing known precedents. he dotted border on the reverse, visible on this coin only in the less worn area above Apollo, is another feature indicative of the principal eastern Seleukid mints at Seleukeia on the Tigris, Susa and Ekbatana. In contrast, there was no tradition of employing dotted borders around reverse types at the ΔΕΛ monogram mint or Uncertain mint 37.17 It is also notable that the mints at Seleukeia on the Tigris, Susa and Ekbatana were typiied during the reign of Seleukos II for their frequent changes of type.18 At Susa in particular, the bronze issues are ‘poorly known, with most varieties surviving in a single specimen’, a remarkable number of which display a bearded portrait of the king and can be associated with the Parthian campaign.19 he bronze lans produced at the mints at Ekbatana and Seleukeia on the Tigris, however, were most oten bevelled. he thick, dumpy lan on this coin is consistent with the majority of Susan emissions under Seleukos II and his immediate predecessors.20 Although any attribution must remain tentative, the combined evidence provided by the iconographic details and the fabric of the coin would all point strongly towards an attribution to the mint at Susa, thereby lending weight to the importance of that mint during the anabasis of Seleukos II. Nicholas Wright is a ield archaeologist and numismatist based in Ireland. He holds a BA (Hons) in archaeology from the University of Sydney and a PhD from Macquarie University. He was an ACANS Junior Fellow in 2007. [email protected] 17 SC II p. 680 no.Ad189. 18 SC I p. 231. 19 SC I p. 279. 20 SC II vol.2 pp. 62-5. 24 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) A new eastern bronze coin of Seleukos II Pogon Mint distribution of the standing Apollo with grounded bow reverse type citing reference numbers to the Houghton, Lorber and Hoover Seleucid coins volumes. Mint AV Sardes AR Æ 656 660-661, Ad143145 Magnesia on the Meander Ephesos 670 671 Uncertain mint 37 (western Mesopotamia) Antioch 673 682-684, Ad163-163A 687-688, 701 691 ΔΕΛ monogram mint 703 705 Mint using Antioch control 717-720 Uncertain mint 38 (western Mesopotamia) Ad164 Uncertain mint 39 (western) 722 Uncertain mint 41 (western Mesopotamia) Short and curly, pointed 700 Pointed 729 Uncertain mint 43 (western) 732-733, Ad168 ON monogram mint (Kommagene or western Mesopotamia) Ad169-170 Uncertain mint 44 (eastern Mesopotamia) Ad171 Unattributed western mint 736, Ad172 Nisibis 750 Seleukeia on the Tigris 762, 786 Short and curly 781-784 Susa Ekbatana Short and curly, pointed 809-810, 812 Unattributed eastern issue Baktrian mint JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Mint possibly producing bearded portraits Pointed Ad189 Short and curly 832 25 26 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Minting in Ephesus: economics and self-promotion in the Early Imperial Period Lyn Kidson his article seeks to sketch the contribution numismatics has played in the study of Ephesus in a time of profound social and political change from Augustus’ early principate (29 BCE) to the end of Hadrian’s reign (138 CE). Both Augustus and Hadrian were concerned about the currency available in Asia Minor and instigated large issues of cistophori, some of which were minted in Ephesus.1 Asia Minor became economically prosperous during this period and Ephesus was its unoicial capital.2 his economic growth saw Ephesus transformed with continual building works and an inlux of immigrants from disparate parts of the Empire.3 he silver cistophori that were minted in Ephesus bear types that reveal something of the nature of the relationship between the emperors and their subjects. Since the cistophori were for use only within Asia Minor (it was a ‘closed economic system’ much like Egypt), Augustus and his oicials undoubtedly saw the potential to tailor a message to this speciic audience.4 he pictorial propaganda on this coinage, especially on the reverse, undergoes development from the Augustan issues through the Claudian issue to those of Hadrian, with the presence of Artemis growing with each numismatic step. When we turn to the bronze civic coinage minted by Ephesus for use in the city and its territory, the pictorial language and attending inscriptions shit in focus from the relationship with the Emperor to proclaiming Ephesian prestige in Asia Minor. he civic coinage became a propaganda vehicle for the city in its rivalry with other cities in Asia Minor. 1 For overview of coinage of Asia under Augustus: A.M. Barnett, M. Amandry, P.P. Ripollès (1998) Roman Provincial Coinage (RPC) Vol.1, London: 363-522; Under Hadrian: W. E. Metcalf (1980) he Cistophori of Hadrian, Numismatic Studies 15, New York. 2 P. Bruun (2002) ‘Coins and the Roman Imperial Government’. In: G.M. Paul & M Ierardi (eds.) Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire, 4th ed. (org. 1999) Ann Arbor: 19-40; G. M. Rodgers (1991) he Sacred Identity of Ephesos: Foundation Myths of a Roman City, London and New York: 14-16 3 J.R. Patterson (1991) ‘Settlement, city and elite in Samnium and Lycia’. In: J. Rich & A. Wallace-Hadrill (eds.) City and Country in the Ancient World, London and New York: 147-168; Cf. Dio Chrysostom praised Ephesus, among others, for aspiring to gain honour and listed public building as an indicator of this, Discourse, 40.10-11. 4 F.S Kleiner (1972) ‘he Dated Cistophori of Ephesus’, MNANS Vol. 18: 17-32 (see 30-32); A. Burnett (1987) Coinage in the Roman World, London: 41-42; Bruun (2002): 26-29. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 27 Lyn Kidson he contribution that numismatics has played in studying Ephesus in the early imperial era can only be briely summarised here. he focus will be on assessing the impact of numismatics by sampling the use of this evidence by historians in two key areas: imperial policy and local Ephesian politics. he irst part of the article will discuss the minting and economic policies in Asia Minor of Augustus, Claudius and Hadrian and the role played by the mint in Ephesus. he second part of the article will focus on the civic coins minted in Ephesus and how they promoted the city’s aspirations to be the province’s economic and religious centre. he Cistophori and Augustus’ Economic Programme Ephesus had a long history of minting coins, and in Roman times played a role in the minting policy of the Roman administration.5 While some gold was struck in Asia Minor, it appears that Ephesus principally struck silver cistophori.6 he cistophorus had its origins in the Pergamene kingdom in the 2nd century BCE. F. S. Kleiner and S. Noe argued that the cistophorus came into being ater Eumenes II defeated the marauding Galatians in 167 BCE.7 Many cities awarded Eumenes II extensive honours for saving them from the barbarians. Eumenes II claimed descent from the deities Dionysius and Heracles and these were an obvious choice of coin types.8 he cista mystica, featuring grapes and ivy leaves, were allusions to Dionysus (see Fig. 1), while the club and pelt referred to Heracles. It was at this time that the weight standard changed from the Attic to a new cistophoric standard.9 his change is harder to explain but suice to say that the cistophorus was intended to be a silver tetradrachm of about 12.60grams.10 Ater Ephesus and Pergamon were organised into the province of Asia Minor under Republican Rome in 133 BCE, they continued to mint on the cistophorus standard.11 Antony in turn struck cistophori in two series in 39 BCE at Ephesus.12 Ater the defeat of Antony, Octavian quickly began minting coinage in Asia Minor.13 Although absolute assurance is not possible, it appears that Octavian struck a large series of cistophori in 28 BCE at Ephesus with the title ‘libertatis p(opuli) R(omani) vindex’ and a Pax on the reverse (Fig.2; Sutherland 1970 10a, 5 RPC 1: 431; Kleiner, 17-18; A. R. Bellinger (1979, org. 1956) ‘Greek Mints under the Roman Empire’. In: R. A. G. Carson & C.H.V. Sutherland (eds.) Essays in Roman Coinage presented to Harold Mattingly, Aalen: 137-148. 6 RPC 1: 431. 7 F. S. Kleiner & S. Noe (1977) he Early Cistophoric Coinage, New York: 16-17. 8 bid.: 17. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid.: 17. 11 Bruun (2002): 26-28; Burnett (1987): 41. 12 RPC 1:377. 13 bid. 28 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Minting in Ephesus: economics and self-promotion in the Early Imperial Period c. 28 BCE).14 However there is good evidence for assigning to the Ephesian mint a large series of cistophori struck from 27 BCE until about 20 BCE. his group (Sutherland’s Group VI) contains die linked types indicating the continuity of the coinage.15 he types on the reverses include capricorn, corn-ears, and a garlanded altar decorated with deer. he imagery of the garlanded altar suggests that it represents the altar of Artemis, who was regularly portrayed with a deer standing either side of her (Fig.3; RIC 1 479/482, c. 25-20 BCE).16 C.H.V. Sutherland argued that the Augustan cistophori constituted a large coinage for the time: ‘[F]rom the examples which still survive 355 obverse dies can be recognized – enough to have produced some four million coins (equivalent in value to twelve million denarii) at a conservative estimate.’17 he role of numismatics is crucial here as Alfred Bellinger explains: ‘[Augustus had a series of plans] involving a number of mints and showing, for the irst time, [my italics] an imperial conception of the monetary needs of the Roman world. Greek mints were used to produce unmistakably Roman coins, many were allowed or encouraged to continue the issuing of their own types and an intermediate class appeared…’18 A. M. Woodward suggested, based on the types, that mints at Chios, Pergamon and Ephesus were operational.19 Although the amount of coin production at each mint is impossible to estimate, Sutherland’s approximation is useful in that it shows that each mint was minting a large number Fig. 1. Cista Mystica, obv. from 2nd Century BCE. Fig. 2. Cistophorus with Augustus, obv. & Pax, rev. Fig. 3. Augustus, obv. & altar, rev. 14 Sutherland (1976) he Emperor and the Coinage: Julio-Claudian Studies, London: 54. 15 Sutherland (1970) he Cistophori of Augustus, London: 29-33; 125-127. 16 Sutherland (1976): 54. 17 Ibid.: 26. 18 Bellinger (1979): 140. 19 A. M. Woodward, ‘he Cistophoric Series and Its Place in the Roman Coinage’. In: R. A. G. Carson & C.H.V. Sutherland (eds.), Essays in Roman Coinage presented to Harold Mattingly, Germany: 149-173. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 29 Lyn Kidson of coins. Some scholars have wondered whether Augustus had the authority to order minting in the senatorial province of Asia Minor, but Sutherland has argued convincingly that Augustus was able, through the mechanisms he established, to order the issue of coinage as he saw it; and importantly, through his agents, to provide guidelines for the devices on the coins of each mint.20 What Augustus had ‘brilliantly’ achieved, according to Kenneth Harl, was ‘a set of interlocking currencies – imperial, provincial, and civic – that welded together the iscal and commercial life of the Mediterranean world.’21 Harl explains that cistophori were the link between the imperial Roman denarii and the local bronze coinages crucial for the payment of taxes.22 he large issues of cistophori minted by Augustus (with only a small top-up by Claudius) served the province for nearly 150 years before Hadrian minted another large series of issues.23 he importance of this wealth of information about the iscal policy and inances of Asia Minor has been largely overlooked by historians.24 At the 1994 symposium on Ephesus, whose papers are collected in Ephesos: Metropolis of Asia (1995),25 no numismatists are represented among the archaeologists nor is the numismatic evidence for the economic life of Ephesus discussed.26 Similarly, Beate Dignas, in her otherwise comprehensive work Economy of the Sacred in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor (2002), overlooks the work of numismatists, relying almost entirely on inscriptions.27 his neglect is unfortunate since a combined study of the coinage of Ephesus and the inscriptions that 20 Sutherland (1976) discussing Grant’s question ‘by what authority, judicially speaking, did he [Augustus] thus coin silver in the senatorial province of Asia?’: 27. 21 K. W. Harl (1997) ‘Greek Imperial Coins in the Economic Life of the Roman East’. In: J. Nollé, B. Overbeck, and P. Weiss (eds.), Internationales Kolloquium zur kaiserzeitlichen, Münzprägung Kleinasiens (1994 Munich, Germany), Milan: 223-229 (quote p. 223). 22 Harl (1997): 223; Also see K. Hopkins’ (1980) discussion of the economic sophistication of Asia Minor, ‘Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire (200 B.C. – A.D. 400)’, JRS, Vol. 70: 101-125; Also C. Howgego’s (1992) remarks on the payment of taxes in Egypt are pertinent as the economies of Asia Minor and Egypt were highly monetised, ‘he Supply and Use of Money in the Roman World 200 B.C. to A.D. 300’, JRS, Vol. 82: 1-31 (see p. 23). 23 Harl (1997): 223. 24 As early as 1940 Sutherland furnished a persuasive apologetic for the use of coins by historians, “he historical evidence yielded by the coins of Greece and Rome is abundant, concise, essentially practical, and easily assimilated,” ‘he Historical Evidence of Greek and Roman Coins’, Greece and Rome, Vol. IX. 26: 6580 (quote p. 65). 25 H. Koester (ed.) (1995) Ephesos: Metropolis of Asia – An Interdisciplinary Approach to its Archaeology, Religion, and Culture, Pennsylvania. 26 his is particularly evident in L. M. White’s (1995) paper, ‘Urban Development and Social Change in Imperial Ephesos’, whose task was to “depict the panorama of change in Roman Ephesos through the media of archaeology and social history”. In: Koester (ed.), Ephesos: Metropolis of Asia: 27-70 (quote p.28); Cf. Mireille Corbier (1991) in her more general discussion of the relationship between cities, their territories and taxation in the Roman Empire also overlooks numismatics, ‘City, territory and taxation’, City and Country in the Ancient World: 211-239. 27 B. Dignas (2002) Economy of the Sacred in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor, Oxford. 30 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Minting in Ephesus: economics and self-promotion in the Early Imperial Period record the amounts expended on buildings works could provide data for the inances behind Ephesus’ building boom.28 he Cistophori and the Promotion of Augustus’ Image Did Augustus and his successors use imperial coinage for propaganda purposes? he usefulness of the word ‘propaganda’ in describing Roman Imperial iconography has been keenly discussed.29 In 1982 Barbara Levick challenged the conventional idea that the types gave insight into how the Emperor himself wanted to be viewed by his subjects.30 She argued that it was the imperial oicials in charge of minting who made the decisions about types, so it is better to see the types as ofering symbols of respect to the Emperor. Andrew Wallace-Hadrill (1986) conceded that the Emperor did not oversee the minting processes personally, but argued that Levick’s suggestion robs the types of their persuasive function and disconnects them from what is obviously an imperial policy of persuasion through monumental sculpture and public rituals.31 Levick (1999) responded to Wallace-Hadrill’s criticism by moving away from any irm assertion about the role of the types concluding: he lack of resolution between conlicting views on the question of coins and publicity may be instructive…[the men who engaged in the struggle for power] would have been able to say what the types and legends ‘meant.’ But they might not have wished to be too clear about what it meant to have one’s head on a coin, where one’s peers stood in relation to that, or whether designs were intended to sway public opinion.32 his seems to miss Wallace-Hadrill’s point, which is backed by rather persuasive evidence, that Augustus selected the types on his coinage to promote certain messages about his new form of administration.33 It is not that Augustus was informing the public 28 A. Zuiderhoek (2005) ‘he Icing on the Cake: Benefactors, economics, and public building in Roman Asia Minor’. In: S. Mitchell & C Katsari (eds.), Patterns in the Economy of Roman Asia Minor, Wales: 167-186. 29 G. G. Belloni (1974) was sceptical about coins as propaganda ‘Signiicati storico–politici delle igurazioni e delle scritte delle monete da Augusto a Traiano’, ANRW Vol. II, 1: 997-1144; But A. Wallace-Hadrill (1981) argued for coins as imperial propaganda, ‘he Emperor and His Virtues’, Historia Vol. 30: 298323; B. Levick (1982) argued for a reappraisal of the function of coin types, ‘Propaganda and the Imperial Coinage’, Antichthon, Vol. 16: 104-16; C. H. V. Sutherland (1983) raised doubt about the use of the English word ‘propaganda’ in ‘he Purpose of Roman Imperial Coin Types’ Rev. Num. 6e série Tome 25: 73-82; cf. F. Millar (1984), ‘State and Subject: the Impact of Monarchy’. In: F. Millar & E. Segal (eds.) Caesar Augustus: Seven Aspects, Oxford & New York: 37-60. 30 For a summary of Levick’s (1982) argument see A. Wallace-Hadrill (1986), ‘Image and Authority in the Coinage of Augustus’ JRS 76: 66-87. 31 Wallace-Hadrill (1986): 68. 32 Levick (2002, org. 1999) ‘Messages on the Roman Coinage: Types and Inscriptions’. In: Roman Coins and Public Life under the Empire: 41-60 (quote p.58). 33 Wallace-Hadrill (1986) concludes his study of Augustan coinage saying, “What emerges as the central feature of autocracy is the urge to monopolize all symbols of authority”: 85. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 31 Lyn Kidson about his authority since they knew this already, nor was he persuading them from one course to another; rather, Augustus was promoting a view of himself that was best for his subjects. Sutherland sums up this tactic nicely, ‘For the Romans, it was not only an end in itself, as an economic Fig. 4. Mark Antony, obv. & Cista Mystica, rev. necessity in a uniied world: it was also a shrewd and adroit means to another end, namely, the formation of public opinion on matters of Imperial policy.’34 his surely is the essence of the English word ‘propaganda,’ – ‘information… used to promote a political cause or point of view,’ and best describes Augustus’ self-promotion strategy.35 Wallace-Hadrill observed that ‘Octavian’s victory at Actium brought in its wake a momentous change in the physical appearance of Roman coinage...’36 It is the stark change in types used on the cistophori that provide an indication that Augustus had some inluence in the selection of types. hese types deine Augustus’ image over and against that of his rival Antony (Fig.4).37 While there is some possibility that Augustus may have let the decision of the types to his agents, his ‘hands on’ approach to shaping his image as princeps lends credence to the idea that he intervened in the minting process.38 he types used on the coins point to a crating of a certain message to the Asian populace. As already mentioned, enormous numbers of coins were minted, and it seems that Ephesus was the irst to mint coin with Augustus’ head on the obverse and Pax with a wreath on the reverse (Fig.2). he message on the reverse is plain enough: Augustus has brought peace where Antony brought civil war. While there was experimentation elsewhere with the head of Augustus on the reverse, this irst issue of cistophori establishes this pattern of types in Asia Minor.39 Issues most likely struck at Ephesus bear reverses with capricorn, corn-ears and the altar of Artemis. he bunched corn-ears speak of prosperity. he capricorn was Augustus’ natal star sign and is being used as a 34 (1940): 76. 35 Concise Oxford English Dictionary (2006), Oxford. 36 Wallace-Hadrill (1986): 70. 37 Sutherland (1976): 26; Wallace-Hadrill (1986): 76. 38 As to doubt about the control of minting in the provinces see K. W. Harl (1987) Civic Coins and Civic Politics in the Roman East: A.D. 180-275, Berkeley: 18; However, Werner Eck (2011) makes it very clear that Augustus was intensely involved in shaping his image, see especially chapter 14, he Age of Augustus. Trans. D. L. Schneider, Malden, MA: 142-143; Cf. R. A. Kearsley (2011) ‘he Imperial Image of Augustus and His Auctoritas in Rome’, Ancient History: Resources for Teachers Vol. 38.1: 89-106; E. S. Gruen (2005) ‘Augustus and the Making of the Principate’. In: K. Galinsky (ed.), he Cambridge Companion to the Age of Augustus, Cambridge, UK: 13-32: 13-32; D. Sailor (2006) ‘Dirty Linen, Fabrication, and the Authorities of Livy and Augustus’, Transactions of the American Philological Association, Vol. 136.2: 329-388. 39 Wallace-Hadrill (1986): 71. 32 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Minting in Ephesus: economics and self-promotion in the Early Imperial Period personal badge.40 In Pergamon, coins were struck with Augustus’ other personal badge, the sphinx. It is fascinating, however, that the types are not conined to the Emperor but include types referring to Asia Minor. From the mint at Ephesus coins depict the altar of Artemis and from Pergamum the temple of Commune Asiae (Fig.5; RPC1 2219/2).41 he conclusion that can be drawn is that Augustus was anxious not only to promote himself in a very personal way as the issuing authority, but he wanted also to show his willingness to recognise the civic identity of his subjects. Yet this concession was limited. he Roman architectural imagery that appeared on certain cistophori was a relection of Augustus’ personal victories (these were most likely minted in Pergamum).42 In particular, the Arch of Augustus in Rome, which commemorated the battle of Actium, appeared as a type (Sutherland, Group VII. 446a-478a).43 In sum, all the new Augustan types entirely replaced the Hellenic cista mystica type which had been minted on Antony’s coinage throughout Asia (Fig.4).44 It seems that Augustus, right from the irst, was sending the message that he was now the authority in Asia Minor. Fig. 5 Augustus, obv. & Commune Asiae temple, rev. Fig. 7. Hadrian, obv. & Artemis, rev. Fig. 6. Claudius, obv. & Artemis in temple, rev. Fig. 8. Hadrian, obv. & Artemis with deer. 40 Wallace-Hadrill (1986): 76. 41 Sutherland (1976): 26. 42 Sutherland (1970): 102-104. 43 Sutherland’s Grp VII (1970) included the Arch of Augustus, the Mars Ultor and the temple of Commune Asiae. Sutherland was able to show that these types were minted together through die links: 33-37; 102104. he temple of Mars Ultor (Rome) was erected at Augustus’ own expense on his private land as a fulilment of a vow he made before the battle of Philippi where he defeated the assassins of Caesar; Eck: 142-143; 44 Sutherland (1970): 113. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 33 Lyn Kidson he iconography of Artemis on the cistophori saw a development from Augustus to Hadrian. As has already been mentioned, the altar of Artemis appears on the cistophori issued by Augustus. his is only indicated by the deer on the facade. Whether this is a deliberate choice by Augustus or his representative is unclear. But when Claudius minted his cistophori, Artemis herself makes an appearance (Fig.6; RPC 1 2222/1, 4154 CE). It is under Hadrian however, that Asian themes predominate on the cisophori.45 he cistophori from Ephesus predominantly feature either Artemis on her own or Artemis lanked by two deer (Fig.7&8). Only on the coins minted at Ephesus does the city name appear regularly.46 he appearance of Artemis and other deities relects Hadrian’s concern to recognise the importance of the province’s indigenous cults. here was some tension between the cities in Asia Minor because they were vying for recognition and honours. It appears that Hadrian’s answer was to recognise the various deities while forming a cohesive identity for the Greek cities through the establishment of the Panhellenion in Athens ater his eastern tour.47 hrough this strategy, which appears to include the selection of coin types, Hadrian was attempting to control inter-city rivalry. However, the cities were utilising all means, including using coins as propaganda vehicles, to proclaim their virtues and honours against their rivals. It appears that Ephesus took full advantage of its minting privilege to promote itself on the provincial coinage issued with the authority of the Emperor. he Local Civic Coinage of Ephesus he work of numismatists has been used to demonstrate that the Ephesians designed civic coins to promote their claim to honour over that of other cities.48 Ater Octavian’s defeat of Antony in 31 BCE, the Koinon of Asia (or the Assembly of Imperial Cults) quickly requested permission to establish a cult in Pergamon for Octavian.49 he cult was dedicated to Rome and Augustus, which set a precedent for further cults. In 26 CE permission was granted for another cult, one for the Senate and Tiberius. Eleven cities, including Ephesus, competed for the honour. Competition was intense because 45 Metcalf (1980): 127. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid.: 128. 48 S. J. Friesen (1993) utilises the work of B. Pick (1906) ‘Die Neokorien von Ephesos’ in Corolla Numismatic: Essays in Honour of Barclay V. Head, London: 234-44; And Josef Keil (1919) “Die erste Kaiserveokorie von Ephesos,’ Numismatische Zeitschrit N. F. 12: 115-120, Twice Neokoros: Ephesus, Asia and the Cult of the Flavian Imperial Family, Leiden: 53. 49 Ibid.: 7. 34 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Minting in Ephesus: economics and self-promotion in the Early Imperial Period the honour would bring great economic and social beneits.50 Pergamon was ruled out because it already had the cult of Augustus, and so was Ephesus as it was the custodian of the main provincial cult of Artemis.51 Smyrna won the right and issued coins proclaiming, ‘Hallowed Sebaste [and] Senate; [coin] of the Smyrnians”.52 ‘Sebaste’ was the direct translation of Augustus into Greek.53 During the reign of Domitian (81-96 CE), the Ephesians too won the honour to have the Cult of the Sebastoi. Before this, in about 65/66 CE, they had declared on a civic coin: ‘of the neokorate Ephesians’ (RPC 1:438 nos. 2628, 2627).54 his is the irst ever reference to the neokoreia on a coin.55 Neokoros normally referred to the temple warden (from the Greek verb ‘to serve’ or ‘tend’), but here they were extending the word to mean the city as the warden or guardian of a cult.56 his could be referring to the city as the neokorate of Artemis, but Barbara Burrell argues that the temple image does not appear to be that of Artemis.57 She suggests that the word ‘neokoros’ used on the coins refers only to the Cult of the Sebastoi and not to the temple of Artemis.58 She proposes that the temple was for the cult of Nero, although this is far from certain. In 68 CE Nero was declared a public enemy and his cult condemned; this coin should therefore date to the short period in which Ephesus was the neokoros of this emperor’s cult. Without doubt, however, the Cult of the Sebastoi was established under Domitian, and this seemed to include not only Domitian but all the emperors of the Flavian dynasty.59 Scholars had thought that ater the establishment of the Cult of the Sebastoi, Ephesus started calling itself “twice neokoros” on its coinage (RPC 2: 165 nos F 1064, F 1065, RPC 1: 433).60 But Burrell, utilising the work of Barnett and Klose, conirms that these coins had been recut in modern times in an efort to make obscure coins more valuable.61 hey are therefore useless in shedding light on the Ephesian coinage under Domitian. here is, however, evidence that the Ephesians were still using the title “neokoros” under Trajan 50 Ibid.: 18. 51 B. Burrell (2003) Neokoroi: Greek Cities and Roman Emperors, Leiden: 60. 52 Friesen: 20. 53 Ibid.: 2-3. 54 Ibid.: 53. 55 Burrell: 60. 56 Keil’s conclusion, Friesen: 53. 57 Burrell: 60-61. 58 Ibid. 59 Flavian dynasty – Vespasian (69 CE- 79 CE) and his two sons Titus (69 CE-81 CE) & Domitian. Ibid.: 61. 60 Friesen: 56. 61 Burrell: 65; Burrell cites Burnett (1999) ‘Buildings and Monuments on Roman Coins’: 140-141 & D. Klose (1997) ‘Münz-oder Gruselkabinett?’ In: Nollé, Overbeck & Weiss (eds.), Internationales Kolloquium: 253264 (see 257 & 261 f.note 3). JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 35 Lyn Kidson (98 CE – 117 CE).62 At this same time, Pergamon also started using the word neokoros to refer to itself.63 Ater Pergamon received a second provincial cult from Trajan, the city came to be described as, ‘the council and the people of the irst and second neokorate of the Pergamenes.’64 Similarly, Ephesus declared itself ‘twice neokoros’ on its coinage when it received a second provincial cult under Hadrian (117-138 CE).65 One coin has two temples facing each other, serving as the symbol of the neokoria, with the inscription ‘Ephesus twice neokoros’ and dates from sometime ater 128-129 CE.66 It is clear that the Ephesians were using their coinage to declare their honour and prestige among the rival claims of other provincial cities. Augustus had used coinage for promotion of his image; so too the Ephesians used their civic coinage for propaganda purposes. his article has sought to describe the impact of numismatic studies on the study of Ephesus in the early imperial period. It is evident that numismatics has an important role to play in understanding Ephesus as an economic centre and in its evolving identity as a leading city in Asia Minor. he work of numismatists in understanding the economy of Asia Minor has been largely overlooked, and this is unfortunate because the role of coinage in the economic life of Ephesus was crucial. In particular, it is demonstrable that Augustus, subsequent emperors, and Ephesus itself, exploited its economic and propaganda potential to the full. Acknowledgements I thank the British Museum for supplying images for Figure 2, Museum No. G.2207; Figure 3, Museum No. 1872,0709.369; Figure 5, Museum No. G.2215; Figure 6, Museum No. 1844,0425.460.A - http://www.britishmuseum.org/. I thank Walter Holt for providing photographs for igures 1&4– http://www.oldmoney.com.au. I thank Associate Professor Kenneth Sheedy for his assistance, and permission to use photographs for Figures 7 and 8 from the Gale collection, ACANS. Lyn Kidson has recently completed an MA in Early Christian and Jewish Studies at Macquarie University. She is currently volunteering as a research assistant in the Australian Centre for Ancient Numismatic Studies, where she is curating the Hansen Collection of Roman Imperial Coins. 62 Burrell: 66. 63 Inscription during Trajan’s reign, Friesen: 58. 64 My translation of the inscription AvP 8, 1.395, Ibid. 65 Burrell: 69. 66 ‘[ΕΦΕСΙΩΝ] ΔΙС [ΝΕ]ΩΚΟΡΩΝ’, Paris 684; Burrell: 69. 36 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 Peter Lane S. Schlank & Co Ltd (Schlank) was the leading medal maker in South Australia for over eighty years, with the company’s lengthy career starting during the year of Queen Victoria’s Jubilee in 1887.* It is therefore surprising that out of all the medal makers in Australia, Schlank is one of the least known among medal collectors today.1 A signiicant reason is that in the early years it oten did not stamp a maker’s mark on medals. he founder, Salis Schlank, was an entrepreneur, and under him the business thrived. On his death it passed to his widow, then through several generations of the family. A few years before the business closed it was taken over by a non-family member, who was a member of the Numismatic Society of South Australia. he letterhead used by Schlank during the First World War reveals it was ‘manufacturing jewellers, gold and silversmiths, diamond setters, electroplaters, gilders and medallists’. Enamelling work was a specialty and the jewellery factory trade mark was a crown. he business premises were located at 17 Chesser Street, of Grenfell Street, Adelaide Salis Schlank, (born Salis Schönlank, and sometimes incorrectly spelt as Silas Schlanke) the founder of the business, was a native of Chooziesen in Prussia who arrived in South Australia in 1860. In 1872 he became a partner in Messrs P Falk & Co, wholesale jewellers of Manchester, Melbourne and Adelaide, and was manager of the Adelaide branch. It appears he was related to P. Falk, as his mother’s maiden name was Falk. When he became a partner, the Adelaide side of the business employed ive people, and within six years it had grown to sixty.2 Early in 1887 the Secretary to the SA Commissioner of the 1888 International Melbourne Exhibition made enquiries in Adelaide to strike medals for this event, but the quotes * 1 I would like to thank the Art Gallery of South Australia, Peter Fleig, Barrie Newman, John Lewis Schlank, and Walter Bloom. I am fully responsible for the content. When a recent search of State Government records involving the South Australian Numismatic Collection was undertaken, new evidence of attribution was unearthed. Whilst only involving a small number of medals, the discovery was important. A summary of these documents appears towards the end of this article. 2 South Australian Register 8 Nov 1878 p 4. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 37 Peter Lane were not competitive compared to those of Stokes & Martin of Melbourne. Schlank, being mindful of the proit to be made from this major event by striking medals, nevertheless ‘purchased a very powerful press, thoroughly capable of doing the work and becoming acquainted with the position of afairs’.3 In May 1887 he announced that he was relinquishing his interest and leaving P Falk & Co in three months. He planned to go into the business of striking medals. He made this rather early announcement because he wanted to make everyone aware before they placed medal orders for the 1888 Melbourne International Exhibition. He even cabled the Adelaide Mayor, Edwin T Smith, and the Secretary to the SA Commissioner of the Exhibition, John Fairfax Conigrave, as both were in Melbourne at the time and among other things were planning to order medals there. A screw press installed at his premises was fully operational to strike medals of all sizes; it was ‘the very one that was used to strike medals for the Sydney, New Zealand, and Joubert & Twopenny Adelaide Exhibitions.’4 he press was purchased in Melbourne, but there was diiculty installing it into his premises as it weighed about eight tons! Its power was recorded as ity tons: his power is obtained by the large circulation of a large wheel weighing 31 ½ cwt., the centre of which, revolving on a screw, and thereby attaining increased velocity as it descends, strikes with great force the die over which the metal is placed. he rebound caused by the shock, and the balancing of the wheel allows the immense weight to be screwed up again with very little diiculty.5 he press could be operated by just two men. Conigrave was invited to see the machine working so he could see irst-hand that it could do the job adequately and he was told that medals would cost no more to be struck in Adelaide than Melbourne. Schlank was promised space at the Exhibition, but he was later told he had to pay a royalty and closer to the event, was advised there was no space available for him. Apparently he did display his wares there and won a bronze medal for it.6 Orders for medals came looding in. As at 22 July 1887, Schlank had struck ‘no fewer than 32,500 jubilee medals, and the work is still going on.’ It appears that none bore his maker’s stamp — a lost opportunity to promote the business — and frustration to later numismatists. Les Carlisle in his monumental work Australian Historical Medals 1788-1988 (Sydney 2008), records a total of thirty medals for the years 1887 and 1888 as ‘maker unknown’, of which many may have been minted by S Schlank & Co. 3 South Australian Advertiser, 10 May 1887 p6. 4 South Australian Advertiser, 10 May 1887 p6. 5 South Australian Advertiser, 10 May 1887 p6. 6 he South Australian Advertiser 10 May 1887 p6. 38 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 A tender for the 1887 South Australian Jubilee medals was won jointly by AW Dobbie of Gawler Place, Adelaide and S Schlank & Co.7 he South Australian Register on the 8 June 1887 recorded the details: We have had an opportunity of examining the medals ordered by the Mayor and City Corporation for distribution amongst the Sunday-school scholars in commemoration of the Victoria Jubilee. hey have been manufactured conjointly by Messrs. Schlank and A. W. Dobbie, and are decidedly a credit to the city cratsmen. he medals are the size of a penny, and are made of copper, gilt or silvered. On one side is the Queen’s head, clearly and boldly deined, with the words “Victoria R. Jubilee,” encircled by a beading, and on the other is represented the Adelaide Jubilee Exhibition building, with the title above and below, while outside is the inscription “South Australia’s Jubilee, June, 1887.” he building and lettering are very cleanly cut and the whole workmanship is excellent. he dies were the work of three engravers, and the medals may be seen, at Mr. Dobbie’s shop in Gawler-place. he medals are struck by one operation by means of a powerful piece of machinery in Mr. Schlank’s establishment, both faces being impressed at one stroke. he Adelaide order is for 10,000, and 1,000 Western Australia medals of a similar kind are being struck for the Corporation of Albany, and a number are to be made for Strathalbyn, Port Pirie [C 1887/61], Port Wakeield, Milang and other municipalities, each of course bearing an appropriate inscription. Carlisle was unable to attribute the Port Pirie medal. He records that the Adelaide, Albany and Strathalbyn medals were struck by Stokes and Martin. He bases his attribution on the Stokes and Martin’s day book records. It appears that Port Wakeield and Milang did not proceed to have medals struck as none are known to exist. hus it would appear that at least some of Schlank’s ‘orders’ were in fact mere requests for quotes rather than orders. In 1888, among Schlank’s requests for medal work, the company received and fulilled an order for forty-eight large and twenty-seven smaller medals for the Wentworth Pastoral and Agricultural Society Show. hey also supplied medals for the largest show outside Adelaide, which was run by the Gawler Agricultural Society.8 During the irst two years of establishing his own business Schlank also manufactured all kinds of things from his business premises which he then called Beaver Factory (ater his wife’s maiden name). hese items were diverse: household medicines, insect powder, jewellery, electroplating, gilding, and four horse-power engines. he most prestigious item he made during this period was a Mace for the Legislative Council of 7 he South Australian Advertiser 31 May 1887 p5. 8 South Australian Register 1 September 1888 p5. JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 39 Peter Lane Western Australia.9 he products were made under the Beaver Brand and its registered trademark depicted an American beaver. Schlank also imported and in one instance ofered coins for sale: TO NUMISMATOLOGISTS FOR SALE, COMPLETE SET of JUBILEE COINS. In velvet-lined case. Apply Beaver Factory, Chesser-street.10 Schlank along with many other South Australian businesses exhibited at the 1888 Victorian Exhibition. He displayed ‘a case of all sorts of ingenious and useful manufactured condiments and other toothsome stufs’.11 Probably the irm’s irst die sinker was Daniel Deeley hompson of Southwark, who worked for Schlank for some 35 years before he died in 1908 at the age of sixty-ive. Deeley was considered ‘an exceptional workman. His specialties were in making gold swivels, silver cups, and medal work; also he was an expert steel die cutter.’12 He was a respected hard worker; sadly in his last year he was frequently away sick and as a consequence he believed he was worthless to the irm and his friends. his depressed him and lead him to commit suicide by cyanide poison. In one of his pockets the police found a note, ‘D. hompson, Southwark, Too old and slow.’13 Schlank made a number of medals in association with Dietrich Schmidt, who was an engraver of Gawler Place, Adelaide. On Schlank’s 28mm Wentworth Pastoral Agricultural & Horticultural Society medals dated 1888 (engraved date) his name appears on the piece as ‘D. Schmidt for S. Schlank’14 On another medal by that society, same size and date (also engraved date) as ‘Schlank & Schmidt’15 A similar undated medal minted around the same period for the same Wentworth society, 42mm in size, simply records the maker on the medal as ‘S. Schlank’.16 Schmidt worked in association with at least one other silversmith in Adelaide; in 1868 Firnhaber produced a medal and it was engraved by Schmidt.17 9 he Inquirer & Commercial News (Perth) 29 February 1888 p3. 10 South Australian Register 7 July 1888 p8 11 South Australian Register 3 Aug 1888 p5. 12 he Advertiser 24 Jan 1908 p8. 13 he Advertiser 17 January 1908 p8. 14 Noble Numismatics Sale 70 (July 2002) lot 936 15 Noble Numismatic sale 98 (November 2011) lot 2191 16 Noble Numismatic sales 98 (2011) lot 2187 17 he South Australian Advertiser 2 March 1868 p6. 40 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 In February 1885 Schmidt’s business failed and all his assets were sold.18 As the medals with Schmidt’s name on them were engraved with the date, 1888, it would appear the dies were cut earlier. his concept of using the same dies (or batch of medals) and simply engraving an appropriate date is cost efective as it avoids making new dies each time. An 1888 advertisement showing business premises and company trademark Gawler Agricultural Society uniface medal by S. Schlank and D. Schmidt. Art Gallery of South Australia accession number 8866 All the Wentworth medals were made from silver sourced from the Broken Hill mines making it among the earliest use of local silver.19 Schlank struck medals in bronze, silver and even in leather. Medals of the same design made of leather were awarded at the 1905 South Australian Chamber of Manufactures Exhibition. At least two leather medals were awarded for making clay objects using a potter’s wheel at the exhibition. One was for the best and the other for the worst amateur. he Chamber’s President J.M. Reid, who ran a tannery and who came up with the idea, won the best prize, for a spittoon. he worst was won by L. Grayson for something even he had no name for.20 John Reid made another medal and it depicts his tannery and was probably also struck by Schlank as it made all the medals for the Chamber of Manufactures exhibitions and Reid had a long and close association with that organization.21 Schlank also collaborated with other engravers or used their dies, namely 18 South Australian Register 5 February 1885 p4. 19 he South Australian Advertiser 1 September 1888 p5. 20 he Advertiser 21 April p4. 21 Noble Numismatics sale 93, April 2010, lot 2041 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 41 Peter Lane Generic Agricultural medal by R.C. and SC. Art Gallery of South Australia Generic Agricultural medal by A.H.W. Art Gallery of South Australia Wimmera District Pastoral Agricultural Society by J.H. SC and G. Crisp. Art Gallery of South Australia George Crisp of Melbourne, Julius Hogarth (J.H.) of Sydney and Melbourne, A.H.Wittenbach and Co. (AHW) of 108 Elizabeth Street Melbourne, and R. Capner (R.C.) of Elizabeth Street Brisbane. In 1889 Schlank appears to have ceased making foods and drugs and decided to let two upper lats in the Chesser Street building by which time he renamed his premises the ‘Crown Jewellery Factory’. he advertisement To Let stated it was opposite the German Club. One lat measured 40 x 52 feet and it had ixtures and the other 43 x 68 feet and 42 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 was suitable for manufacturing purposes.22 Schlank’s second-hand screw press that had served the irm admirably was probably used to make the thousands of 1919 World War I Children’s Peace medals before it gave up. It was replaced by a slower man-powered stirrup drop hammer. he operator of this hammer, pulled down on a length of rope to raise the weight which supplied the force to a falling die when stamping a medal. Typically, as with many other factories, the original screw press was let lying around, dusty and in broken pieces, for many decades on the shop loor.23 he die engraver for the World War I Children’s Peace medal was William Coward. hese 1919 medals were undoubtedly Schlank’s largest order: 75,000 — every child in Australia received one, though other interstate makers also struck this medal. Most of the Schlank Children’s Peace medals bore the engraver’s initials ‘Wm C’ and Schlank marks ‘SS & CO.’ or ‘SS & CO LD’ and some of these marks had dots ater the initial. For details on these marks and the medal itself a substantial article appears in JNAA Volume 13 (2002) pp. 48-72. It appears that William Coward (Jnr) worked for Schlank during WWI and for a few years ater. Coward ran his own business as a die cutter before and ater with varying degrees of inancial success. He undoubtedly had an arrangement to have his medals struck at Schlank and possibly others. Coward advertised in Sands and McDougall’s Directory for South Australia in 1913 claiming he was an expert engraver, chaser, die sinker, and medallist who had obtained awards for excellence of workmanship at the Adelaide Chamber of Manufacturers exhibitions held in 1900, 1905 and 1910 (two silver and one bronze medal and four certiicates). hese South Australian directories show that he was continually moving his business address in Adelaide. In 1901 he was an engraver ‘of Charles Street’, 1903 at 53 Hindmarsh Square, and in 1906 in Rundle Street, 1909 Twin Street, and in 1913 Hindmarsh Building, 2nd Floor room 9, Grenfell Street. For the years 1913-22 he is only recorded at his private residence, the irst year in Parkside and later at 110 Irish Harp Road, Prospect, (now listed as 442 Regency Road). It is most likely during those war years and for a few years ater that he worked for Schlank. In 1923 he again set up shop, this time in James Place and two years later he had moved to 18 York Chambers 2nd loor, Gawler Place. In 1929 he only had his private address recorded. In 1930 he described himself as an engineer and had a room in Edments Building, 64 Rundle Street, and remained there until his death on 21 May 1943.24 Another employee, and undoubtedly the most famous, was Jack Ellerton Becker (19041979) who was later knighted. He gained an apprenticeship, mainly due to being a 22 South Australian Register 19 October 1889 p8. 23 he Mail 3 May 1947 p8. 24 Chronicle (SA) 27 May 1943, p10 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 43 Peter Lane 1905 South Australian Chamber of Manufacturers medal awarded to William Coward Jnr for Hand Engraving on Metals (uniface electrotypes) neighbour of Michael Schlank.25 Becker was an entrepreneur and at the age of 16 he gave music lessons, raising enough money by this activity to visit America. He became a salesman at Allan’s music shop, but made his fortune in property. He purchased 7,000 acres of arid land in the Ninety Mile Desert in the South East of the State and when it became viable for farm land through the introduction of trace elements he sold it for 40 times more than he paid for it; and did not pay tax as he claimed he had purchased the land to farm. He later purchased 12,666 acres to the north of Adelaide and promptly sold it to the State Government for nearly six times the price. he land was wanted to build the satellite city of Elizabeth. He again avoided paying tax as he successfully argued his intention was to use it too for farming purposes. In 1961 the Academy of Sciences was in inancial diiculties and the Prime Minister agreed to give Becker a knighthood if he was prepared to donate £200,000 over ten years. In 1962 the Science Centre’s (CSIRO) headquarters was named Becker House.26 At the age of 31 Salis Schlank married 19 year old Laura Beaver on 21 September 1870 in Melbourne. It was a double Jewish wedding with Laura’s older sister Evelyn also marrying Julius Salenger, a warehouseman. he minister was Rev. Moses Rintel of the East Melbourne Hebrew Congregation. he Beaver sisters were born in Manchester England, and the family arrived in Australia in 1869. heir father was Louis Beaver who was in the jewellery trade. It would appear that the Salis Schlank marriage was arranged, as his mother was related to the Falk’s in Manchester, a Salis’ business partner, where Laura had been born, and the fact she lived in another colony. Salis was living in Gawler Place Adelaide when he married. It would also appear the Beavers were aluent as they lived on the Esplanade at St Kilda, a fashionable seaside address in suburban Melbourne. 25 Museum Victoria’s website S. Schlank Co 26 Australian Dictionary of Biography: http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/becker-sir-jack-ellerton-9466 44 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 S Schlank & Co staf in 1908 Michael Schlank circa 1908 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Alfred Gregory, die engraver, circa 1951 45 Peter Lane S. Schlank & Co Staf picnic 1951 At the time of Salis’ death on 3 July 1892 they had four boys and ive girls.27 His widow ran the business and in 1905 it became a public company. She was the managing director and her four sons managed diferent areas of the business. A photograph of staf and management taken in 1908 shows that at least 28 people were working in the business at that time; only one wore glasses! In 1910 one son let the business and in 1918 Schlank’s widow Laura died. In 1927 another son let, and the following year another son. his let just Michael Schlank, the eldest son, to run the business, which he did until his death in 1950. Michael’s only son, Dudley, then ran the company. In Dudley’s time a number of annual staf picnics were held in the Adelaide Hills in February; at least one was held at Silver Lake at Mylor and another at Gorge Picnic Grounds, with over 70 attending. During the 1950s the business grew and in 1958 Dudley moved the medal and badge making side of the business to 6 Little Rundle Street, Kent Town and at the same time modernised the showroom in Chesser Street. A year later a further site was found and used as a warehouse at 52 Rundle Street, Kent Town. Numismatic Society of South Australia badge At the end of 1964 Dudley passed the management to his son John Lewis Schlank — the fourth generation of Schlank. John was in his early twenties at the time and only remained there for a short time before going to live in England 27 South Australian Register 5 July 1892 p3 46 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 for a few years. Shortly ater his return he went into the antique furniture trade, and for the past thirty years he has traded as Maylands Antiques on Magill Road, Maylands, South Australia. In 1965, the NSSA’s membership enamel badge depicting an Adelaide pound was designed by Maurice Keain (the NSSA Honorary Secretary and later a president of the NAA), and was made by Schlank. he die cutter was Alfred J Gregory.28 By the later half of the 1960s business was in decline. 52 Rundle Street closed down in about 1967 and in January 1969 the company was delisted from the stock exchange. A large portion of the shares were acquired by Geofrey W Tomlinson, who by the end of the year took over the business completely. In 1971 the company purchased an empty factory premises at 15 Lyons Parade, Forestville, an inner southern suburb of Adelaide, and transferred all the minting equipment and dies to that site. his was rather fortuitous as within weeks of the move the Chesser Street property burnt down. Tomlinson closed the business immediately ater the ire. Alan J Olson, a former managing director of Schlank, who some years earlier set up his own badge and medal business, purchased all the assets at Forestville. he company itself was then used by Tomlinson to acquire property. he era of the Schlank family and their name passed into the annals of the manufacturing of medals and badges in Adelaide. Geofrey W. Tomlinson When James Hunt Deacon, the numismatologist at the National Gallery of South Australia, died, Tomlinson along with others applied unsuccessfully to the Gallery to succeed him. Tomlinson later studied law at the University of Adelaide, and when he completed his course, he let the State and practiced law in rural Victoria. Some years later he attempted unsuccessfully to become a Board member of BHP. hroughout his life he had an interest in Australian banknotes. In 1952 Tomlinson became a member of the Numismatic Society of South Australia (NSSA) and held a number of council positions and was at one time its journal editor. He wrote two books, the irst was Australian Bank Notes 1817-1963 (Melbourne, 1963), and the second was South Australian Paper Currency of the Banks of Issue 1837-1910 and Private Note Issues 1836-1875, (Adelaide 1973). hey were printed concurrently in the Australian Numismatic Journal, (NSSA publication) Volumes 24-26, 1973-75. Writing about Schlank in 1971, Tomlinson claimed that ‘many thousands of badges, buttons, and medals were struck, the great majority of which were enamelled.’ He also stated ‘For over 35 years Alfred Gregory was their die engraver who worked directly on 28 Keain MB he Society’s Membership Badge, Australian Numismatic Journal, Vol 16, No.2 p17, April-June 1965 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 47 Peter Lane dies, and F. Crawley made a few dies using a pantograph machine.’29 he South Australian Numismatic Collection’s papers When Alfred Chitty was the numismatist of the South Australian Numismatic Collection from 1912 to 1917, he wrote to Laura Schlank in July 1915. Chitty asked for her late husband’s 76mm bronze 1888 Melbourne Exhibition Commissioners medal that he won. She willingly donated it. Chitty was delighted and wrote, ‘I am pleased that our eforts are crowned with success.’30 Following on from his success, in March the following year, he asked for details of medals which the company had struck. Schlank was unable to provide this information and suggested that he make an appointment to come to the oice and factory. Ater Chitty called on the company he noted: I found them most obliging and willing to help. hey have presented to the Board a most valuable lot of Bronze Medals (30 as on the back of this [correspondence]) and one WM badge of South Aust Railway Ambulance. hey were going to lend these but I argued them to present them which they have done. hey have also loaned 11 silver medals for cataloguing purposes say a few days. hese I have individualised them to ofer to the Board for silver value (I venture to express the opinion that the Board would be sure to purchase here at that price. Messrs. S. S & Co. are striking (from dies they have) specimens of some ½ doz medals of early S.A. Exhibition &c for presentation to the Board omitted in the above report.31 Chitty recorded the medals presented: 1 Royal Agricultural Society of South Australia, Gawler Agricultural Horticultural Society: twenty awarded to James Martin, one awarded to W.J. Jafer [?] and two unnamed; one each for St Peter’s College, and Prince Alfred College, plus six other medals.32 Within a week of Chitty’s visit, Schlank advised that the weight of their silver medals was 18 ozs. 12 dwts. and the metal content was valued at £2.6.6. Chitty advised the Board that they were South Australian and ofered at a bargain price.33 During Chitty’s visit he saw a gold Indian Mohur, and they later ofered it at ‘practically’ gold value; 35/-.34 In June 1916 the company kept its promise and gave the Collection ive uniface restrikes 29 Tomlinson G.W. Oldest South Australian Medallist, Australian Numismatic Journal Vol 22, p8-9. Numismatic Society of South Australia, Adelaide, 1971 30 State Records GRG 19/5/18517 July 1915 31 State Records GRG 19/5/21093 April 1916 32 State Records GRG 19/5/21093 April 1916 33 State Records GRG 19/5/21110 April 1916 34 State Records GRG 19/5/21141 April 1916 48 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 Wentworth Agricultural Society uniface medals Art Gallery of South Australia accession numbers: 8485 and 8486 GPO Adelaide (PMG Department) World War One appreciation medal to E.H.H. Chambers Art Gallery of South Australia accession number 33688 acquired Girl Guides Association, 1943 Way College medal for chemistry Art Gallery of South Australia which were referred to as ‘replicas of Medalion [sic] Dies’. hey were struck in copper gilt: and Chitty latter described them as: Reverses of the Wentworth Agricultural Society Prize, Royal Agricultural & Horticultural Society, Queen Victoria Jubilee Angaston 1887 Jubilee and the obverses of the Gawler Agricultural Horticultural and Floricultural Society and Head of Queen Victoria 1887.35 Schlank in June quoted to buy scrap copper, bronze and silver from the Collection - the worn coins, but the ofer was not satisfactory.36 In 1959 the company donated more medals: Way, Scotch College, F.W. Reid Memorial, Metropolitan Regatta (Adelaide), John Lewis, Kings College, South Australian Chamber of Manufactures, S.A. Amateur Athletics Association, 1914-18 GPO Adelaide (damaged), a pattern show and a pattern reverse design. Plus ive badges: BHP, IKS, C.O.R, Fire Control Oicer, Pope Products.37 Schlank family - other interests Salis Schlank had an interest in prospecting for gold in the Northern Territory of South 35 State Records GRG19/5/21430 June 1916 36 State Records GRG 19/5/21521 June 1916 37 Accession Register numbers 38979-38995 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 49 Peter Lane Australia and in the process purchased land at Palmerston in the Territory in 1885. his property passed to his widow and she in turn transferred it to Olive Marjorie Schlank in September 1914. Salis had other property holdings in the Territory, around the towns of Daly (320 acres), and the same acreage near Batchelor. Family stories that have been passed down the generations say all these properties eventually were sold by the government as land taxes were not paid over a period of years. Laura Schlank, in May 1901, purchased a patent for an invention for ‘improvements in Winnowing Machines’ from William Sutton, a watchmaker, of Hawker in the Flinders Rangers. he inancial success of this purchase is not known. Rachel (Racey) Schlank, a daughter of Salis and Laura, was involved in politics and became a founding member of the Women’s Branch of the Liberal Union and edited he Liberal’s Cookery Book, in 1912. While in England in 1914 she became a founder of the United Kingdom branch of Wattle Day, an organization that raised funds for the War Efort.38 When Racey returned to Adelaide she became the State secretary of that organization. One of the fund raising activities was selling tin badges to the general public on street corners.39 Michael Schlank, in the mid-1930s, took time of to develop and patent a ‘Machine for the separation of gold or other concentrate from sand or other material’. He formed a public company called the Cascade Gold Recovery Ltd and Patents were taken out in Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, Canada and South Africa. he arrangement was that Schlank would make the machines. Newspapers reported on the company from 1935 to 1939 with no adverse publicity. In 1940 an investigation conducted at the Bonython Laboratory, University of Adelaide, revealed that the machine was ineicient in extracting gold. He also patented and manufactured a silver sharpener for safety razors. Schlank’s numismatic legacy Schlank’s Germanic background has long been highly respected in South Australia. In 2012 the Art Gallery of South Australia put on an exhibition of local gold and silversmiths of the 19th Century and published a book titled Bounty. In the exhibition and accompanying book, Schlank’s medals are represented, along with medals and or jewellery by other Germanic immigrants; Bassé, Lellmann, Schomburgk, Firnhaber, Rettig (Carl Rettig was for a time the foreman of P. Falk & Co.’s Adelaide Jewellery Department when the business was run by Silas Schlank),40 Steiner, Myer and Wendt, whereas only three were of British origin; Muirhead, Mitchell and Payne. Schlank had a 38 he Register 24 Oct 1914 p8. 39 he Register 26 November 1914 p6. 40 he South Australian Advertiser 15 February 1887 p6 50 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) S. Schlank & Co Ltd: medal and badge makers of Adelaide 1887-1971 diverse jewellery business including making medals, however they are more known for their enamel badge making for which they received far more orders. While the Schlank business was established to make medals over 125 years ago and the family have ceased to have been involved in it for over 40 years, in spirit, if not oicially, it lives on through the irm Allan J. Olson Pty Ltd. Badges manufactured by Schlank Australasian Medical Congress, Adelaide 1937 Blair Athol Primary School Country Womens Association of South Australia Kadina Football Club members badge 1960 RSPCA Junior Branch South Australia SPF Service badge with two bars Clarkson Bowling Tournament celebrating 50 years in business 1911-1961 SA Wheat Growers Association JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 51 Peter Lane Peter Lane is the Honorary Numismatist at the Art Gallery of South Australia, Life member of the Numismatic Society of South Australia, Secretary of the Numismatic Association of Australia, and in 2013 he was appointed a numismatic expert examiner under the Protection of Movable Cultural Heritage Act 1986. Peter has been a regular contributor to this publication, Collectables Trader Magazine and has had articles published in the Australiana Magazine and the National Museum of Australia’s journal reCollections. He has been a recipient of the Paul Simon award, the Ray Jewell bronze medal and the Tom Hanley perpetual cup. 52 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Sterling and Currency Dealers in Australian Rare Coins & Notes Proud to Sponsor the NAA Journal Our website has a wide range of Australian coins and notes, each with a hi-res image in full colour, coupled with a detailed description regarding the item’s history, rarity and value. Street: Shop 22; 35 William St FREMANTLE; WA; 6160 Postal: PO Box 364; FREMANTLE; WA; 6959 Phone: 08 6468 2467 Fax: 08 9336 1433 ABN: 24 120 655 469 http://www.sterlingcurrency.com.au NAA Website http://www.naa-online.com The NAA website covers numismatics in Australia and New Zealand. It lists numismatic clubs and societies, dealers, institutions, conferences, exhibitions and a selection of publications. Simply the best. coinworks.com.au Collecting. Investing. Buying. Selling. Get in touch with the best in the business. The Coinworks team. Our website is a trove of numismatic treasures and the kind of advice and information that keeps you ahead of the game. Sign up for our free email newsletter or order the print version on the web. Or call for a personal consultation with the Coinworks team. 03 9642 3133 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) Past JNAA articles can be downloaded directly. You can join the NAA by downloading and completing a membership application form. 53 Del Parker Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum Australia I Specialist in Irish Rarities The Gale Collection of South Italian Coins by Kenneth Sheedy Buying and Selling 160p, 57 pls, 1267 coins illustrated. Sydney, 2008. An illustrated catalogue of the 1267 coins representing the mints of South Italy in the W. L. Gale Collection, donated to the Australian Centre for Ancient Numismatic Studies in 2007. for more information http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/acans/Publications.html enquiries http://www.oxbowbooks.com ISBN-13: 978-0-646-50210-6; ISBN-10: 0-646-50210-7 Ireland and the World Numismatic Literature All U.S. Coins Currency Gold Colonial and Ancient Material Estate Appraisal and Liquidation telephone: 1-214-352-1475 http://irishcoins.com PO Box 7568, Dallas TX 75209, USA Lower Ground Floor, Block Arcade 98-100 Elizabeth Street, Melbourne 3000 Phone: (03) 8677 8800 Fax: (03) 8677 8899 Email: [email protected] OVER 45 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE & KNOWLEDGE E Downies Australian Coin Auctions prides itself on... • providing clients with a wide range of coins & collectables • providing a friendly service that is second-to-none • ensuring you get the best return from your collection • catering for all collectables whether big or small • 45 years experience and over 300 sales • being the oldest and most respected name in Australian numismatics! Auctions held in February, July & October every year! For further information visit us online at www.downies.com/auctions 54 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) JNAA 23, 2012 (2013) 55 56 JNAA 23, 2012 (2013)