The Journal of the Medal Collectors of America Volume 15 • Number 3 May • June 2012 Editor John W. Adams jadams@ahh.com Producer Tony Lopez Photography Bob Williams Member Contacts Barry Tayman, Treasurer 3115 Nestling Pine Court Ellicott City, MD 21042 bdtayman@verizon.net Benjamin Weiss, Webmaster benweiss.org@comcast.net MCA Officers David Menchell, President dmenchell@aol. com Skyler Liechty, Vice President skyier. liech ty@gmail. com Anne E. Bentley, Secretary abentley@masshist. org Annual Membership Dues: $55 w/Hard Copy Edition $25 w/Electronic Edition Table of Contents ^ Presidents Message From the Editor 2 3 Tribute and Truth: Two Sides to Everything 4 Jane McAdam Freud designs a medallic tribute to her father Marcy Leavitt Bourne Truly an Historic Medal 7 Congress Honors a Revolutionary War Patriot John W. Adams Alex Shagin Creates Medal Honoring 11 Pioneer American Aviator Arthur Welsh A Jewish Historical Society Art Medal Mel Wacks Exhibition of Greek Medals at 12 Princeton University Library New Princeton University Numismatic Collection on display Alan Stahl Check out our MCA Website: Medal Collectors AMERldA WWW.H E DA LCO LLE CTORS .ORG Letters to the Editor Betts Medal Boys Club Calendar : Philadelphia ANA World's Fair of Money Philadelphia Convention Center 3:00 - 5:00, Room 104 A, August 7-10, 2012 13 18 WWW.MEDALCOLLECTORS.ORG President's Message <*?. Welcome to the latest addition of the Advisory. As we head into the summer season, many of us look forward to the largest numismatic event of the year, the annual ANA World’s Fair of Money, being held this year in Philadelphia from Tuesday, August 7 th through Saturday, August 11th. As with previous ANA conventions, MCA will be actively involved at the show. Our annual convention meeting is scheduled on Thursday, August 9 th from 3 to 5 PM. With the enthusiastic involvement of several of our members, we plan on having a round table discussion on various aspects of medal collecting. For the first time, we will also be arranging for a club table. For those of you who have yet to attend an MCA meeting, this would be a great opportunity to meet the MCA officers and other members. I, along with other Board members, will be manning the MCA table, and would welcome the chance to say hello and talk about medals and other aspects of the hobby. Don’t forget to look at the schedule for the Numismatic Theater and other presentations held throughout the week; there are usually several talks held during the convention on topics of interest to medal collectors. And be sure to look at the exhibit area. Speaking as an ANA judge and frequent exhibitor, there are many superb exhibits each year in all areas, with the medal category usually dominating in terms of number of exhibits and quality of the material shown. This may be as good a time as any to put in a plug for the exhibitors’ and judges’ program at the ANA. Fve been involved for a number of years as both an ANA judge and exhibitor. It’s not difficult to get certified as a judge in one or more categories, and the judge’s program is a great way to get more involved with the ANA, working with fellow numismatists, with only a small expenditure of time and effort. In addition to the obvious perks, such as receiving a judge’s medal and gaining access to the convention floor, there is the satisfaction of demonstrating your expertise and sharing your knowledge in your area of collecting interest. I would also encourage anyone who is an enthusiastic collector to share that enthusiasm by exhibiting material from your collection. Yes, it requires a bit of work organizing and creating an exhibit of the caliber of those seen at the ANA, but nothing is quite as rewarding as getting accolades from fellow collectors who have enjoyed viewing your exhibit. And last but not least, there is the bourse, probably the largest numismatic bourse in the world, with hundreds of dealers, a number of whom deal exclusively with exonumia, including medals. This is a unique opportunity to find unusual items not readily available otherwise. Don’t forget the numismatic book dealers where you can find that important reference book to enhance your collecting knowledge. So there you have it. I hope to see many of you this summer in Philadelphia. Enjoy the hobby and share your passion with others. • -David Menchell Meet Your Fellow MCA Members Join us in Philadelphia! At the American Numismatic Association World’s Fair of Money August 7-11, 2012 Philadelphia Convention Center Philadelphia August 7- 1 I Medal Collectors of America Philadelphia Meeting Thursday, August 9, 2012 3:00-5:00 PM Room 104 A www.worldsfairofmoney.com Page 2 From the Editor <*?. We are pleased to welcome Marcy Leavitt Bourne to our pages. An accomplished writer from the other side of the Atlantic, Marcy manages to bring a medal to life in the most striking fashion. Once drawn into the article, the reader will exit feeling an intimate acquaintance with the subject, the artist and the writer. The artist, Jane McAdam Freud, has wrought a striking object and Ms. Bourne helps us to understand the powerful emotions that gave birth to this burst of creativity. Seldom has a work of art been so well presented to a viewing public. The other full length article in this issue, one penned by ye editor , also attempts to traffic in the spiritual dimensions of a medal. In this case, the reader, once informed of the salient historical facts, is asked to ponder a series of documents and a medal as a whole - as a gestalt, if you will. Once the boundaries of the whole have been established, it then becomes possible to travel back in time and obtain an intimate understanding of the mindset of a person who lived over two centuries ago. Tony Lopez and Skyler Liechty’s article on the Sovereign of the Seas medal in our last issue has created a bit of a furor. Those who maintain that the medal references the claim of Charles I to Dominion of the Seas, not a specific ship, have advanced strong arguments to buttress this traditional belief. We will not shrink from controversy because, by weighing competing claims, education always comes out the winner. The Letters to the Editor contain some representative thinking and, in due course, the author of the article will want to speak again. For those who can’t get enough of the issue, we recommend a new book: Sovereign of the Seas , by James Sephton. It provides an account of the design, construction and operation of the vessel in question to a level of detail that we would have not thought possible. The MCA Advisory is becoming the product of too few people. We need more authors of articles and more writers of features. Regarding the latter, how about “My Favorite Medal” or “Pending Auction Sales” or “A Visit to XYZ Institution”? As we draw near to press time, we learn that, on June 30 th , Presidential Coin will be offering, among other consignments, Ken Traub’s complete (!) collection of A.N.S. medals. [Our own Scott Miller has written a definitive book on the ANS medals and it is now in the late stages of publication - Ed.] We would much appreciate one of our members posting us on that event. And how about EBay? Bargains, fakes and the unexpected are a constant diet on that website; surely there are listings worthy of comment. Enough said. We need once again to trumpet MCA’s first- ever Club medal. It seems that, in the last issue, we failed to give members directions on how to purchase. You can buy a medal(s) by sending a check payable to me (John W. Adams) at 162 Farm Street, Dover, MA, 02030. The price on the silver medal is $200 and $25 will bring you a bronze. Alas, we will no longer be offering a PayPal alternative for payment of dues. The goldang gummint will force us to fill out forms and retain accountants if we persist in offering this simple convenience. ® ~ John W Adams 2012 MCA Silver Medal Page 3 Tribute and Truth: Two Sides to Everything By Marcy Leavitt Bourne W hat is truth? To tell the truth. We hold these truths to be self evident. It is a conundrum for any artist: how to transpose an individual truth into a universal one through a work of art. The much admired British sculptor and medal- maker Jane McAdam Freud has addressed this in her head, in writing and interviews, and with her hands, especially since the death last year of her father, the renowned portrait painter Lucian Freud. As she says, 4 all art is about life and death at some level’. The medal Truth is a tribute to her late father, and forms part of a trilogy of portrait medals. The first of these was a commission from the Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths, but the Truth medal which followed is the one she says is 4 for myself, and that will be the focus here. (1.) In expressing her loss through artistic endeavour, McAdam Freud throws a wide net that pulls on our own unconscious losses. Figure 1: Truth , Obverse; 2011, 12.5cm x 11 cm BAC Castings, London In a recent radio interview, when asked how she would categorize herself, the artist slipped away from being labeled to say she considered that she was a 'contemporary artist’, one who works in many different media. (2.) After studying at Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design in London, she went on to the Royal College of Art, and later received a scholarship to study in Rome, where she explored the medium of the modern art medal. The British Art Medal Society commissioned the medal Picasso in 1982, and McAdam Freud has been an active member of BAMS ever since. (3.) She is a visiting lecturer now at Central Saint Martins, where she is involved in the BAMS Student Medal Project each year. (4.) Her work can be found in any number of private and public collections, including the British Museum, the National Museum Prague and the Brooklyn Museum New York. She participates in workshops in many countries, recently in the Middle East, and exhibits widely: solo shows at the New York Psychoanalytic Society and the Ashmolean Museum, among others, and, in January 2012, at the Freud Museum in London, which featured a large sculptural portrait head of her late father, as well as the medal Truth. (Fig. 1) When Lucian Freud died in July 2011, it marked both the ending and the beginning of Jane McAdam Freud’s relationship to her father. Although he was no longer present, he now became a focus of her art. This is the kind of paradox that she delights in, explaining that: 4 the concept of the medal itself is Figure 2: Truth , Reverse suited to pairing and I have a predilection for two- sided work, comparing one with the other. Conflict is a part of nature. There may be a contrast of extremes, and in between is a grey area where you get the real nature of something.’ She finds working in relief on a medal the perfect way to explore this dichotomy, the creation of a nexus from contradictions. BAMS had hoped for some years that Lucian Freud might agree Page 4 to sit for a medal for the society, but he always told his daughter that work came first, and he was utterly driven in his work. In fact he had said that when he was on his ‘last legs’ he might consent, but as McAdam Freud says, ‘how do you ask someone if they are on their last legs’. He became bedridden for only the last few weeks of his life, and Jane McAdam Freud spent many hours by his bedside, keeping him company, photographing him and filling a notebook with drawings of her father as he lay dying, drawings that he saw. These became the source of her trilogy of medals, including Truth . The medal is, as she says, basically commemorative. It is both about memory and loss, and about life and celebration. On the obverse is a portrait of Lucian Freud which is largely based on one drawing, but it has been arranged to fit a medallic shape and size that is comfortable to hold in the hand. His head rests against a pillow, which seems gently to hold him; similarly, the medal contains him within parameters he cannot escape. It is yet a powerful head, though clearly much diminished, the eyes deeply set and the skin of the throat loose. These are eyes, however, that are still observing the world, no matter how closed in it has become. In the hand, the texture is compelling. On the reverse is carved the word ‘TRUTH’, for she says if there was one thing he taught her, it was to be true to herself. As McAdam Freud said, ‘I wanted it to be something to do with myself and my father, I like working with words, and the word truth fitted the bill here.’ (Fig. 2) To understand how significant this medal is for the artist, it is perhaps important to know that the father-daughter relationship here was lost for many years in her childhood and adolescence, and regained in adulthood, another dichotomy. Making the medal was an act of catharsis. Working on a portrait continues to keep her father alive, and is a way of understanding how she felt about him. For the viewer, the combination of the medal with the deathbed drawings becomes a way for all adults to reach into themselves and also rediscover feelings, possibly long unconscious, of memory and loss around a parent. In this way, what begins as a personal memorial becomes a broader all-encompassing artistic construct. McAdam Freud began, some months after her father’s death, with her small six inch square notebook, in which she had made drawings, (fig.3) One of these is a full frontal view, while those for Truth led to a medallic portrait that is more like two thirds. In this drawing of the whole face there is such depth of feeling it is almost hard to look at: the artist’s own feelings emanate from her rendition of the head, drawn in pencil with immense loving care, and seemingly this is reciprocated from the subject himself. It is like seeing two aspects at once. Written along the bottom are the words in capital letters, ‘SEE YOU’. This can of course be read as a farewell, rather than goodbye, suggesting a future coming together, even if in the mind, or in dreams. It is also a card- player’s phrase, which could imply, ‘I think I know you now’. Figure 3: See You , notebook drawing, pencil, 15cm square The hand on the medal is taken from another drawing in her small notebook, where her father’s head rests back on the pillow, (fig. 4) The positions of head and hand have been altered slightly for purposes of the composition, and this then dictated the shape of the medal. “It took on its own image in the end.” She has opened the hand out, so that the viewer is drawn back in, whereas often her father’s hands were Figure 4: Notebook drawing, pencil, 15cm square Page 5 tightly closed. ‘It could be the hand of fate, life and death, beckoning you. It is quite important and is associated with creation, it’s spiritual, the hand that gives life, the hand that takes. He was there at my birth, which was quite unusual in the 1950s.’ The larger, profile drawing is twelve inches square, and has been used on one of the other medals (fig.5). Of these three drawings it is perhaps the least frail appearing, and some of that powerful presence is expressed in Truth. Figure 5: Notebook drawing, profile, pencil, 31cm square In making a medal, Jane Me Adam Freud works from a drawing to plasticine, on any small flat surface so that she can carry it around and work on it wherever she finds herself. She makes many of her own modeling tools, usually from steel: a file with the back ground off and rounded, a small spear, like something found in a doll’s house, a tool with tiny teeth cut into it for cross-hatching, and for lettering, a piece of square steel rod, with ground ends to maintain equal thickness. Words and lettering are very significant to her, including words within words. Interestingly, the cutting of letters involves loss, as one must pare away to reveal the word. Her father’s art, she says, was his truth, the only thing that he truly wanted to do. She wrote for the Student Medal Catalogue, and exhibition, which includes Truth : ‘The assumption with the concept of truth is that there are truths to be discovered or created, however the deeper we go the more complicated things seem.’ (5.) Within the word ‘truth’ Me Adam Freud explains is ‘rut’, among other definitions a ‘groove or furrow’ and ‘established practice’. The life of Lucian Freud was one which followed a professional furrow that often allowed no room for familial commitments. There is another word, though, contained in ‘truth’, and that is ‘truth’, which is ‘compassion’. Certainly this is present in the creation of this medallic tribute by his daughter. The medal, cast in bronze (at the moment only for herself), has been left with the finish on it with its mottled surface, as it came from the foundry ; the reverse has been burnished, but no one area is polished to distinguish it from another, nor patinated; it is true to its making and material. This seems apt. The lettering is not especially deep, but the elongated capital letters of ‘truth’, firmly enclosed in a circle, set it apart from the organic shape of the reverse. It could be an insignia, or seal. For a medal, McAdam Freud says, one needs space, room to get the features in, so it cannot be too small. It needs to be large enough to read easily. A cast medal is more porous and loose, more uniform, so areas do not have to be polished, whereas a struck medal may have small, compacted details that need to be brought up to help the reading of the low relief. She comments that it was ‘very difficult to place him on the medal, to lay him to rest, but I knew he would love it’. This small, powerful talisman cannot help but reverberate with psychological echoes of Freud the analyst, that explorer of the unconscious. In making real her own exploration to find solace in the form of a medal, Jane McAdam Freud has given us a window on our own thoughts and feelings concerning, life and death, tribute and truth. # Notes: 1. All quotations unless otherwise stated are taken from a conversation with Jane McAdam Freud, 12 May 2012. 2. The Radio Two Arts Show with Claudia Winkleman, London, 18 May 2012. 3. British Art Medals, 1982-2002 , Philip Attwood, The British Art Medal Trust, London 2002, page 10. 4. The New Medallists , Marcy Leavitt Bourne and Melanie Vandenbrouck-Przybylski, The British Art Medal Trust, London, 2012, pages 61 and 72. 5. Contemporary Art Medals: The BAMS Student Medal Project 2012, editor, Marcy Leavitt Bourne, page 49 [Jane McAdam Freud is the great granddaughter of the famed analyst, Sigmund Freud -ed.] Page 6 Truly an Historic Medal By John W. Adams T he Stack’s Bowers catalogue of September 14- lb, 2011, contains a remarkable offering. Lot 84 is a Major General Nathanael Greene medal in bronze - a rara avis in itself - but also included were three documents and an envelope, each dating to 1788. The documents and the envelope established the original owner of the medal as Lieutenant Colonel Lewis Morris, Jr. We know the original owners of a very few other Comitia Americana medals, among which the gold medals awarded to Washington, Gates, Wayne and Greene; we know also that the set of silver medals now in the Cabinet of the Massachusetts Historical Society was presented to George Washington by Thomas Jefferson in 1789. However, the Morris medal has now become the only bronze Comitia Americana medal that can be traced to its original owner, as well as being the only one in private hands. These attributes make the piece a rarity to be sure but, far more than rarity, the combination of medal and document offers a glimpse into the past not heretofore possible. NATHANAEL GREENE 1783 Portrait of General Nathanael Greene From life by Charles Wilson Peale Nathanael Greene was one of three officers to serve the entire eight years of the Revolutionary War. He hastened to Boston from his native Rhode Island in June, 1775, fully a month before George Washington arrived to take charge of the American forces. In August, 1776, he was appointed one of four newly minted major generals. Subsequently, he fought at the battles of New York, Brandywine, Germantown, Rhode Island, Trenton and Monmouth. In between, he served tours as Quartermaster General at Valley Forge and Commandant of West Point. So dependable and versatile was he that Washington appointed him to head the Courts Martial for the unlucky Major Andre. Beyond doubt, Greene’s greatest contribution to the cause was his service in the South. The British had taken Savannah in 1778 and then Charleston in early 1780, capturing General Benjamin Lincoln’s army in the process. Alarmed at the prospect of losing this important territory, Congress appointed General Horatio Gates ( a political favorite) to lead a force to recover lost ground. In the battle of Camden, South Carolina, in August 1780, Gates was routed by an inferior force under Lieutenant General Lord Cornwallis. The position in the South was in tatters. Under the circumstances, Congress was happy to defer to George Washington in the naming of a new leader in the South. His immediate choice was Nathanael Greene, who was then faced with the daunting challenges of 1) building a Continental army in States that preferred to contribute militia only; 2) supplying his forces, with no money and little credit to do so; 3) linking with local irregular forces, such as those led by Marion and Sumter; 4) dealing with Loyalists; and 5) defeating superior British arms. Although he lost all three major battles that he fought in this campaign, he outmaneuvered the enemy over a five state area, sapping their strength and causing them to cede the countryside as they retired to strongholds on the coast. Cornwallis consolidated his troops on the peninsula at Yorktown, where the seminal battle of the war took place just one month after Greene’s “loss” at Eutaw Springs. With no dramatic victories to claim, Greene gets little credit for the quality of leadership, as well as the administrative skills, that were required to get the job done. The British were unstinting in their admiration of the man, as was his Commanding Officer, George Washington, and as were the men who served under him. Lieutenant Colonel Lewis Morris, Jr. was one of these latter; his story unfolds below. Page 7 THE GREENE MEDAL Congress, the Comitia Americana, promptly voted Greene a medal for his performance at Eutaw Springs in 1781. Given the indecisive nature of that battle, it is clear that Congress was voting the award for the brilliance of the eleven month campaign that had preceded the particular engagement. He had succeeded in pulling Congress’ chestnuts (in the form of the unfortunate appointment of Horatio Gates) from the fire. Nathanael Greene Medal, the specimen that belonged to Lewis Morris, Jr. Obverse Procurement of the medal fell to David Humphreys, who made a contract with Augustin Dupre in December, 1785. The dies were actually completed under the supervision of Thomas Jefferson, our then ambassador to France, in February 1787. The choice of Dupre insured that the execution would be of the highest quality although, because Greene died in June 1786, the recipient would never comment on his likeness on the obverse of the medal. In COMITIA AMERICANA and RELATED MEDALS ' John W. Adams and Anne Bentley provide a census including one gold, two silver and 13 bronze specimens of the Greene medal 1 . The authors note that Congress voted to transmit some of the bronze medals (they record that 23 were actually made) to members of Greene’s staff; they go on to cite two officers, Fewis Morris, Jr. and Nathaniel Pendleton, who acknowledged the generosity of Congress in expressing their thanks 2 . Adams and Bentley leave open the question of just how many pieces were put to this use and how many were distributed to other dignitaries of one stripe or another. The estimable Duke de Foubat provides an answer. In his opus, The MEDALLIC HISTORY of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, 1776-1876, he records a letter from John Jay, the then Secretary of State, to just five officers who were “formerly aids of the late General Greene”: Major William Pierce, Nathaniel Pendleton, Esquire, of Georgia, Fieutenant- Colonel Fewis Morris, Major Thomas Shubrick and Major Hyrne of South Carolina” 3 . Thus, five of the bronze medals were sent to Greene’s staff and 18 were distributed elsewhere. Nathanael Greene Medal reverse (Photos courtesy Bob Williams) The census referenced above lists 13 bronze medals and “Lot 84” brings the total to fourteen. Doubtless, there are a few more in hiding. If only 23 were made, the survival rate of these medals has been exceptionally high, indicating that they were treasured by their recipients. As will be shown, none treasured the Nathanael Greene medal more than Lewis Morris, Jr. LIEUTENANT COLONEL LEWIS MORRIS, JR. Lewis Morris, Jr. (1752-1824) was born in Morrisania, the family manor that occupied much of the modern day Bronx. Lewis Morris, his father, was a Signer of the Declaration of Independence, a member of the Continental Congress and a brigadier general in the New York State militia. Gouverneur Morris was his uncle and Robert Morris, the financier of the Revolutionary War, was his great uncle. By any standard, the family can be considered prominent. Page 8 Colonel Lewis Morris of Morrisania by Rembrandt Peale. Gibbes Museum of Art. Lewis Morris, Jr. was one of ten children, three of whom served as officers in the Revolutionary War. His own service in the War embraces a period from July 1776, when he entered the Continental Army as a major, where he soon became an aide to Major General John Sullivan, to June 1779 and from that month onward to the War’s conclusion, when, now promoted to lieutenant colonel; he was aide-de- camp to Major General Nathanael Greene. Under Sullivan, Lewis Morris, Jr, fought at Brooklyn, Trenton, Princeton, Brandywine, Germantown and Rhode Island. Under Greene, he fought at Springfield, Guilford Court House, Hobkirk’s Hill and Eutaw Springs. In short, he fought in almost every important battle of the war, from beginning to end. As he wrote his sister in 1781: “Eleven times have I been exposed to the fire of the Enemy and through the Mercy of God have always escaped the Danger while many of my friends have closed their period 4 .” Whereas Morris served as a staff officer, his Commander in Chief considered him fully capable of assuming a line command. In December, 1777, George Washington wrote: “I shall strongly recommend the formation of Corps of Light Infantry. . . I know there will be many competitors for such Posts, and I am determined to decide in favor of those, who appear in every view best qualified and who will give the most general satisfaction. Col. Morgan, Colo. Butler and Major Morris who have so eminently distinguished themselves in the Light Corps established this Campaign (e.g Trenton) , will undoubtedly claim a preference” 5 . This is high praise indeed. Morris did not get (or accept?) a command, but he was singled out to perform special services for Washington and maintained a close personal friendship long after the conclusion of hostilities. After resigning from the Army in 1783, Morris settled in Charleston, South Carolina. There he married Ann B. Elliott of Accabee Plantation, South Carolina. The then Miss Elliott is said to have hidden the Lieutenant Colonel when, with the war still active, he was paying a social call and British dragoons arrived at the plantation hot on his trail 6 . The happy couple produced ten children, one of whom was named “George Washington”. Morris lived a life of apparent ease, owning both the plantation and a house in Charleston. He was to serve five terms in the South Carolina Assembly and one stint as the State’s Lieutenant Governor. Revolutionary War Era Portrait Miniatures of Colonel Lewis Morris, Jr. in uniform and his wife Anne B. Elliot At the National Portrait Gallery THE NEXT 224 YEARS The author purchased Lot 84 through the good offices of John Kraljevich, who was kind enough to deliver by hand the medal and documents to the eager purchaser. Days later, the documents were at the Massachusetts Historical Society in the loving care of the multi-talented Anne Bentley. Anne gave each of the documents a bath, followed by de-acidification and minor repairs. THE DOCUMENTS: 1) Authorization by Congress to distribute bronze medals to Greene’s staff, dated 10/26/1787, written by Charles Thomson, Secretary of Congress. 2) Two page handwritten letter of transmittal, dated 2/19/1788, from John Jay, Secretary of Foreign Affairs, to Lieutenant Colonel Lewis Morris, Jr. 3) The envelope, franked by John Jay with his integral wax seal having Jay’s personal Arms from his signet ring, and addressed to Morris; this had contained the transmittal, the authorization and the medal. Page 9 4) The Draft on two pages of scrap paper of Morris’ letter to Congress expressing his appreciation and deep sense of the honor received. Long term storage was the next major issue. The story cried out to be told and retold, so the challenge became storage AND display. The alternative selected was to mount the lot: at first, a 25 inch display was planned, with see-through panel, so that the display could be reversed to see the back of Morris’ letter, page two of Jay’s transmittal and the reverse of the medal. This idea was discarded in favor of a 40” by 40” panel in which all could be seen without the need to handle anything: The documents are mounted, with narrow white borders, on acid-free matte. Facsimiles of the back sides of two documents are added; the medal is displayed at the center, obverse showing; below left is an explanation of the Greene medal; below right is a “translation” (by the inimitable Anne Bentley) of the scrawled draft of Morris’ letter to Congress and bottom center is a summary of the significance of what the observer is viewing. The whole is protected by UV-resistant glass wrapped in a stout frame. To be added in a separate frame to the right and left will be enlarged photos of the obverse and reverse of the medal. Some will ask the question: why go to the trouble? The obvious answer is stewardship - the owner of any artifact of history is morally bound to preserve it. The less obvious answer is the gestalt of it all. Any sensitive person standing in front of the Morris material will be driven to ponder: why was the matter worthy of letters from our Secretary of Foreign Affairs and our Secretary of the Congress? Who was Nathanael Greene and why did Congress vote him a &+ jtKv an iy t/ ye to, txjty.y NixdqJ ■ &&***£■ J-OtMt&rr v tn-tftctw t t Art. • / / - rtr, t . ‘llU-rttwjv acr&i ta *’<■ vJa .yjM. •, /ft ot i z yttitr/ l x.tmJ. A+'i t n (. <JAoa* * tf'tr lie,< zfi*r /If p r , P ,1 . yfifu/l flfl ep-f tW/. rfyr {ft as February 19, 1788 transmittal letter sent from John Jay to Lewis Morris, Jr. along with the medal medal for a relatively obscure action? And who was Lewis Morris, Jr. and what must he have thought as he opened a letter containing a medal with a likeness of his revered superior, now deceased. Emotions must have cascaded through the man, ranging from tears to nostalgia to exhilaration. And then Morris’ thinking crystallized: the principles for which we fought are vital, thought he, and they need to endure; those who did the fighting made many sacrifices and the remembrance of their patriotism needs to endure. These have not been passing events but, rather, are stones that form the foundation of a great nation. It is given to me - Lewis Morris, Jr. - to explain all this in an unmistakable, indelible fashion to future generations without limit. I will preserve these documents and I will bind those who follow with a sacred oath to preserve these documents that all may know certain inalienable truths. The important truths, of which these historical treasures are a symbol, must never be allowed to fade from memory We are honored to be acting under the orders of so gallant an officer. * A CKNO WLED GMENT . We are indebted to Tony Lopez for a plethora of citations regarding Lewis Morris , Jr., many of which were used herein. 1 COMITIA AMERICANA AND RELATED MEDALS, p. 160 2 Ibid, p. 158 3 THE METALLIC HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 1776-1876. Vol. I, p. 56 4 Rutherford, Livingston. FAMILY RECORDS AND EVENTS , New York, 1894.Letter 4/29/1781, Morris to his sister, p.208 ff. 5 Library of Congress, Letters of George Washington. Letter from Washington dated 12/27/1777. 6 APPLETON’S JOURNAL, April 1 1876, p. 420 Page 10 Alex Shagin Creates Medal Honoring Pioneer American Aviator Arthur Welsh By Mel Wacks T he Jewish Historical Society of Greater Washington is issuing art medals commemorating pioneer American Jewish aviator Arthur Welsh (1881-1912). The medals are being issued in conjunction with a public reception, symposium and exhibition on June 12 th at 7:00 PM at the College Park Aviation Museum in College Park, Maryland — almost exactly a century after his tragic death while testing a military plane at the College Park airfield. The event is free to the public, and will feature speakers and the dedication of a commemorative sign honoring Welsh’s unique place in aviation history. The large 2 %” art medals, sculpted by noted medalist Alex Shagin and minted by Medallic Art Company, feature a portrait of the young aviator and the quote “Welsh taught me everything I know,” from the autobiography of Henry H. (Hap) Arnold, who later became a five-star General and the U.S. Army Air Chief of Staff during World War II. Medals are available in limited editions of bronze (180 maximum), silver-plated bronze (150 maximum) and gold-plated bronze (50 maximum), at the issue prices of $50, $75 and $100, respectively, including a Certificate of Authenticity and a stand. Orders can be placed by calling 818-225-1348. Laibel Wellcher was bom on August 14, 1881, in Russia, one of six children. In 1890 the family immigrated to Philadelphia, where Laibel attended public school and Hebrew school until the death of his father. In 1898, after Laibel’ s mother remarried, the family moved to Washington. A few years later, Laibel joined the Navy, giving his name as Arthur L. Welsh. After serving on the U.S.S. Hancock and U.S.S. Monongahela, he received an honorable discharge as a Seaman. In 1909, Arthur Welsh resolved to become a pilot after watching Orville Wright’s public demonstrations of the Wright Military Flyer, and he was later accepted as a student. In March 1910, Welsh entered the first class of the Wright Flying School in Montgomery, Alabama. A few months later, he trained directly under Orville Wright at Huffman Prairie, near Dayton. Welsh became a tmsted and skilled pilot — a notable achievement given the difficulties of flying a Wright plane. By summer he had become a flight instmctor at the Wright Flying School in Dayton Ohio and part of the first Wright Company exhibition team. Throughout 1910 and 1911 Welsh participated in exhibition flights around the country for the Wright Company and quickly established several American records for speed and altitude. At the International Aviation Meet at Grant Park in Chicago in August 1911, Welsh won a $3,000 prize as the first aviator to fly more than two hours with a passenger. August 3, 1906 photo of Arthur Welsh at the controls of a Wright Biplane In May 1912, the Wright Brothers sent Welsh to the U.S. Army Aviation School at the College Park Airfield in Maryland to serve as a civilian test pilot for a new plane on order from the War Department. Welsh made 16 official test flights of the new Wright C airplane during May and June 1912. On June 11, 1912, Welsh, accompanied by Lieutenant Hazelhurst, made a final attempt to meet the loaded-climb test. Taking off at 6:00 PM, the plane climbed to about 200 feet and then dove downward at a steep angle to gain momentum to assist the climb. The airplane stalled and crashed into a field of daisies. Both men were killed instantly, the first fatalities at the College Park airfield. Orville Wright and Lieutenant (later General) Henry H. Arnold were pallbearers at the funeral. 1 Page 11 Exhibition of Greek Medals at Princeton University Library By Alan Stahl T o showcase its recent acquisition of a collection of more than 120 medals of modern Greece, the Princeton University Numismatic Collection has installed an exhibition of a selection of historically important pieces in the Boyd Room of the Department of Rare Books and Special Collections in Firestone Library. The exhibition has been curated by Mary Thierry, Princeton Class of 2012, who has been working in the Numismatic Collection for the past three years and has taken the University’s graduate seminar in numismatics. The medals will be on display for an indefinite period during hours when the department is open to the public. Commemorative of Howard Douglas, High Commissioner of the Ionian Islands, bronze, 1842, by H. Lampros The collection was put together by a private collector in Athens and purchased by Princeton with funds from the Stanley J. Seeger Hellenic Fund and the Townsend-Vermeule Fund. It is believed to be the largest collection of Modern Greek commemorative medals in an American public collection. Commemorative of the Cretan Revolution, the Arkadhi Massacre, silver, 1866, by Wilhelm Pittner Among the highlights of the collection and the current exhibition are a set of medals froml836 by the Austrian engraver Konrad Lange, who also engraved early coin dies for the newly established Greek Republic, and participation medals of the early Olympics, including the national Greek games that preceded the establishment of the International Olympic Games in 1896. George I, Olympic Presentation Medal, bronze, 1870, by Jean Auguste Barre The public is invited to attend a celebration of the opening of the exhibition, and the graduation of its guest curator, on Thursday, May 31, at 4 p.m. in the Boyd Room. The Department of Rare Books and Special Collections is open to the public Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., closed holidays. # Prize medal of the International Exposition, Athens, 1903, gilt bronze, by Hond, Paris Further information can be obtained from Alan Stahl, Curator of Numismatics, at or (609) 258- 9127 or e-mail stahl@princeton.edu Page 12 Letters to the Editor Sovereign of the Seas Medal From: Victor England Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 To: Adams, John Subject: Note from Victor at CNG Hi John Thanks for sending along the March-April MCA Advisory Nice article which I have sent on to Julia for comment or additions if any to our article One item that needs to be clarified; the author of the article is Julia Trocme - Latter in our London office with input from Eric, myself and others. My contribution to the whole affair was stumbling across the article in the Sussex Journal. If possible could I get an additional copy of this issue and a couple of copies of what was published back in October Jeremy Bostwick from our office will be submitting membership info on our behalf as well. The piece will be exhibited in Philadelphia for any members wishing to view it. Best Victor • • • • Comments on The Sovereign of the Seas Medal by Tony Lopez and Skyler Liechty in the March-April, 2012, issue of the MCA Advisory. (By Ben Weiss) The major thrust of this interesting and informative article, with its accompanying documentation (and some speculation), is that Nicholas Briofs medal of Charles I, now generally referred to as Dominion of the Seas, was not issued in 1630, as stated by Hawkins, et al. (Hawkins, E., Franks, A.W., and Grueber H. A.: Medallic Illustrations of the History of Great Britain and Ireland to the Death of George II, Vol. I, 256/41, The British Museum, 1885, reprinted by Spink and Son, Ltd., Eng., 1969.) and more recently by several others, but rather at a later date. Indeed, an examination of some older literature, published some 83 years earlier than Hawkins' standard reference of the period, supports this view. In particular, John Pinkerton (Pinkerton, J.: Medallic History of England. Illustrated by Forty Plates. Printed, at the Oriental Press, by Wilson and Co. Wild Court, Lincoln's Inn Fields: For E. Harding, No. 98, Pall-Mall; and J. Scott, St. Martin's Court, Leicester-Fields. London, 1802) used the same argument as did Hawkins, in that both referred to a particular smaller medal (counter, jeton) of the same subject, which is clearly dated, and which both authors say provides the date for the larger (58 mm), undated Dominion of the Seas medal by Briot. However, the two small medals have different dates! That referenced by Hawkins (MI, I, p. 257 # 42 and 43) is clearly dated 1630, as Lopez and Liechty point out. However, the counter referred to by Pinkerton (p. 47, # 5) is just as clearly dated 1639. Pinkerton (p. 47) describes this counter as follows: "5 is a counter on the same subject [Dominion of the Seas], and with the same legend; but an important circumstance, the date, is added, 1639." He lists the two larger "Dominion of the Seas" medals together (i.e., Charles I, with and without the ruff) (p. 46, #'s 4 and 7 and illustrated as line drawings on plate XVI, corresponding to photographs in Eimer 118 and 136, and MI, 256/40 and 285/97, respectively). The chronological placement of the two large and one small medal in Pinkerton suggests he believes that all were issued in 1639. On the negative side of Pinkerton's purported conclusion is that the larger medals show three rows of guns whereas the smaller medal shows only two. Interestingly, and perhaps importantly, the small 1639 Dominion of the Sea medal is not listed in either Hawkins or Eimer, but both of these authors’ list two varieties of the small 1630 medal. It might be added that neither the larger nor smaller medals in Pinkerton's drawings suggest "the figurehead of King Edgar on horseback", although there is evidence on one of the larger medals of a figure on the bowsprit, presumably a sailor. As details are often left out of line drawing copies of medals, the absence of King Edgar does not necessarily refute the authors' assertion that the ship depicted on the reverse of this medal is the Sovereign of the Seas; nor does it lend support for their conclusion. In either case, the authors are to be commended for their thorough and provocative re-examination of this historically important medal. Page 13 • • • • From: Tony Lopez Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 To: Ben Weiss Cc: Adams, John; Skyler Liechty Subject: Re: MCA Advisory- Comment Hello Ben, I had a chance to take a closer look at your comments. Have you ever seen an actual example of the smaller 1639 medal? Of course, we were aware of Pinkerton from the references used in our article, but were not able to locate a copy to determine specifically what it said that was being challenged by Disraeli. Still, after seven months of struggling to piece together the article, we were unsuccessful at hunting down the Pinkerton reference, and needed to rely upon Hawkins and use Disraeli's comments about Pinkerton, and extend them to Hawkins since they also applied there. I really appreciate your filling in this important hole for us. Again, Pve never seen a small jeton with the 1639 date. Without hunting one down just now, let me ask, is it possible that the 1639 dated jeton does not exist? If one cannot be located, could it be a worn example of a 1630 jeton, where the 30 looks like a 39, was used by Pinkerton? Is the 1639 jeton pictured in Pinkerton? I am getting ahead of myself throwing out this theory but you know I will do my best now to actually find an example. Thanks again Ben for your important contribution to the study of this enigmatic series of medals. Best, Tony • • • • From: Ben Weiss Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 To: Tony Lopez Cc: Adams, John; Skyler Liechty Subject: Re: MCA Advisory- Comment Hi Tony, You are certainly wise to question whether the 9 in 1639 is really a 9 or a 0. The drawing on the medal could be interpreted either way until one looks carefully (and turns it upside down). It is a nine. But that's why I copied his text describing the medal... saying it is 1639. When I get a chance, I'll send you the page with the image of Pinkerton's copy of the medal (I don't think they did a lot of photography in 1802). I've never seen the actual medal (jeton) in person... just Pinkerton’s copy. I have to watch the Phillies lose another game to the Nationals now but I wanted to answer right away. Best wishes, Ben • • • • From: Ben Weiss To: Tony Lopez Cc: John Adams, Skyler Liechty Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 Subject: Re: MCA Advisory- Comment Hi Tony, First of all, don't ask me what I'm doing up in the middle of the night. Then I wonder why I'm so sleepy during the day. Anyway, I've been thinking about the Charles I issue and found another reference online which shows the small medal to which I am referring. The book has been digitized by Google. I put the reference in the reference section of my personal website, but you should be able to access the exact page from this link. It seems to be the same as that in Pinkerton's 1802 book. It shows both the larger and smaller medal, or jeton, if you like. Look carefully; the small one is dated 1639. Let me know if you have any trouble finding it. http://books. google. com/books/reader?id=W5JMAAA AcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&pg=GB S.PA46-IA5 Hope this helps, Awake in Wynnewood, Ben • • • • From: Ben Weiss Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 To: Tony Lopez Cc: Adams, John; Skyler Liechty Subject: Re: MCA Advisory- Comment— more Here is a description of another counter in Pinkerton (#11) dated 1628, alluding to the British Sovereignty of the Sea! ! The plot thickens. Page 14 http://books.google.com/books/reader?id=W5JMAAA AcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&pg=GB S.PA46-IA5 Ben • • • • Subject: MCA Advisory Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 From: Mike Shaw To: Tony Lopez Hello, Tony; Yesterday I finally had a chance to read your article about the Sovereign of the Seas Medal. Very interesting, and the kind of thing that should help all of us to keep our minds open and not blindly believe what has become "medal gospel.” Really enjoyed the article, and thoroughly agree with all the nice compliments in the President's Message and the Letters to the Editor. Regards, Mike • • • • From: Christopher Eimer Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 6:20 AM To: Adams, John Subject: MAC Advisory March-April 2012 John, I have just taken delivery of the March-April 2012 issue of MCA Advisory, and what a splendidly produced journal it is! The medallic coverage is wide- ranging and the interest that it is attracting is clear from the varied and growing correspondence. 6 The Sovereign of the Seas Medal’ by Tony Lopez and Skyler Liechty is an engrossing read and one which has reached a startling conclusion, calling upon a wide range of naval material in order to substantiate its principal claim. Such are my limitations that I would leave any reflections and comment to those with more specialized skills in the area of seventeenth-century British naval history. When first working on British Commemorative Medals and their Values, in the early 1980s, and cataloguing the large medal of Charles I by Nicholas Briot (Eimer 1 1 8) as being for the Dominion of Seas, and according it the date of 1630, 1 was following Edward Hawkins’s Medallic Illustrations (volume I, 256/40). My regard for this work is considerable, but this would not in itself prevent me from questioning an attribution, were such an instance to present or suggest itself. Every medal tells a different story and the interpretation of the subject-matter can be as challenging as it is interesting. The paper by Messrs Lopez and Liechty is a reminder of this, and it is hoped that their proposition will attract much interest and comment from the MCA readership. Best wishes, Chris • • • • From: Sim Comfort Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 To: Skyler Liechty; Tony Lopez Cc: Adams, John Subject: Trouble Ahead! Hi Tony & Skyler, I've been waiting for a book by James Sephton, 'Sovereign of the Seas' which arrived today. It was published just last year, so perfect timing! This book is a labour of love which has taken the author 40 years to write, and over that time he has certainly considered everything that is available. Having said that, I've already found that the author contradicts himself, e.g. he states that the figurehead located on the 'beak' is St. George slaying the dragon. Later he says it was King Edgar trampling the seven kingdoms of Britain and then he notes that St. George slaying the dragon is the figurehead of the Prince Royal of 1610. And it is more difficult because both the Prince Royal and the Sovereign had a pretty long beak. Sephton largely discredits Heywood as his pamphlet is filled with inaccuracies, but the detail regarding its publication is most interesting. Sephton does make a very important statement: 'Her [Sovereign's] rigging followed a similar pattern to that of her contemporaries, with four masts, including a small bonaventure mizzen mast... etc. ' 'In rig, she observed the close of the four-masted era. The bonaventure mizen mast, so usual in the largest warships since the beginning of the seventeenth Page 15 century, became obsolete, etc. By '1640 no four masted vessels remained in the Royal Navy . ' So, I think the premise that I would follow is that both Heywood’s book and the medal relate to Charles wanting to promote his new great ship, and that both were produced prior to the launching of the vessel, e.g. to take advantage of the event with commemoration objects available at the time. Sephton spends some time on Heywood, and there is no doubt that the pamphlet was printed prior to the launch of Sovereign. I was hoping that the only ship in Charles's fleet that had an equestrian figure on the beak was the Sovereign, but we can now see that the Prince Royal also had an equestrian figure at the beak and was also four masted. And as the medal isn't a fair representation of the armament and because both the Prince Royal from 1621 and Sovereign had three gun decks, it really presents an alternative ship. Tricky, but in my gut I continue to agree with you fully because the medal is so special that the launch of the greatest ship afloat would justify it and the story of Edgar and the seven kingdoms works so well with Dominion of the Sea, which may have been more appropriate at the time because the medal has a dual purpose, declare British sea power and back up the declaration with the launching of the world's most powerful warship. You might do a dig around and see when the earliest use of Dominion of the Sea is used in relation to the medal. I have to read all of Sephton's book first, just to make sure I have my facts straight and then will visit the NMM and have a mini-symposium which will include Barbara Tomlinson who is the keeper of all antiquities, but her speciality is medals, and Peter van der Merwe, who is the Greenwich expert on the Van der Veldes. Probably a few others will attend as the subject will certainly interest them. BTW, I attended a seminar on the War of 1812 at Saint Anne's College, Oxford on Saturday and had lunch with a keeper of the Bodleian and we talked about the medal and the Sovereign. He was most excited at that prospect, so it just confirms that this project isn’t without interest. So, more later, just wanted to let you know where I am and the hurdles we face. Sim • • • • From: Tony Lopez Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 1 1 :07 AM To: Sim Comfort; Liechty Skyler; Adams, John Subject: Fwd: Fwd: Trouble Ahead! Hello Sim, I did do some fairly extensive research during the six+ months during which we wrote the article and some of it was specifically on the figure-heads. There are some contemporaneous drawings circa Anglo -Dutch Wars of the Royal Prince too and they show the stubby prow. Still this is a key to the investigation! I do have some important information on the figureheads for the Royal Prince and SOS somewhere here and will hunt it down. The Prince is not St. George or King Edgar, but one of the other sons of James I if I recall. Actually, the figurehead is apparently still in existence, but hidden away somewhere. I believe a lot of the confusion comes from Dutch painters who used a lot of creative license in combining elements from various ships in painting British ships. Also, given the date of Heywood, and the importance of the ship to Charles, - and the fact that he saw the ship - I don’t see how he can be dismissed or condemned by non-contemporaneous sources. This is the problem with most historic research - they pick and choose their gospels with no regard for the timing or source of what was written. I will be tied up most of today, but more to come... Best, Tony • • • • From: Sim Comfort Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 12:40 PM To: Tony Lopez Cc: Adams, John; Skyler Liechty Subject: Re: Fwd: Trouble Ahead! Thanks Tony, What we are looking for is the Prince Royal and Sovereign at dates up to the launch of the Sovereign. These ships went through a lot of change in their long lives, so for our premise to stand up, everything has to focus on the 1630s. Page 16 Looking forward to your further info. Best regards, Sim • • • • From: Tony J Lopez Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 To: Sim Comfort Cc: Adams, John; Skyler Liechty Subject: Re: Trouble Ahead! Sim, I completely agree with you; these ships were raseed on several occasions and it is critical to sorting out what they looked like and when. They found that lighter and faster trumps firepower and cut down many of the ships in the 1650 ? s prior to the Anglo-Dutch Wars including both the SOS (now HMS Royal Sovereign) and the Royal Prince. We found something showing that the bonaventure mizzen was removed actually the Sovereign of the Seas. My reasons are: * We now know that in 1621 the Royal Prince was also a three decked, four masted ship with a long beak which featured an equestrian figurehead, e.g. Saint George slaying the Dragon. * That the British monarch claimed the sea as his or her dominion goes back a long way, one can particularly note John Dee in 1577 and Elizabeth I changing her position from being involved in foreign land battles to looking to the Sea as her Dominion. * Therefore the references by Hawkins to both the Mare Clausum and the Coke / Boswell correspondence shouldn’t be considered as the springboard by which Charles declared his Dominion of the Seas, but as yet another attestation of that fact which the British monarch had maintained for a very long time. * Following that line of thought, the 1630 jeton is another manifestation of Charles asserting his Dominion. * I can well appreciate Hawkins linking both the jeton and the large Dominion of the Seas medal because they share essentially the same images (King and Ship) and for the reverse legend, exactly the same for both the from SOS in 1651 but the reference was unsubstantiated. I will work on hunting down that Royal Prince figurehead since it is the Holy Grail for this discussion. Best, Tony • • • • From: Sim Comfort Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 6:25 AM To: Tony Lopez; Skyler Liechty Cc: Anthony Payne; Adams, John; Christopher Eimer; Daniel Fearon Subject: Impasse Hello Tony and Skyler, I'm afraid that now I've reached an impasse regarding the premise that the ship pictured on the reverse of the Dominion of the Seas medal is jeton and medal: (Nor is that a limit to me, which is a boundary to the world). * Unfortunately the ship illustrated on the Dominion of the Seas medal is really a parody of a man-of-war in the 1630s and with our now understanding that the Sovereign of the Seas wasn't unique in her main features, although vastly larger in size and broadside, the image of the medal isn't accurate enough to reflect that. * And if Hawkins is right in linking the large medal with the 1630 date of the jeton, then the ship would appear to be the Royal Prince as the Sovereign of the Seas wasn't launched until 1637. So, although I really would have liked to see that the large Dominion of the Seas medal was created in conjunction with Heywood's pamphlet to celebrate the launching of the largest warship in the world, there just isn't the detail pictured in the reverse image of the ship needed to confirm that was this is indeed the Sovereign of the Seas and with the probable relationship between the jeton and the medal, this is made even more unlikely. Best regards, Sim Page 17 BETTS MEDAL BOYS CLUB Long before Medal Collectors of America came into existence, there was a splinter group called “Betts Medal Boys Club”. To call it a “group” or a “club” is perhaps over-dignifying four nut-cases who suffered from the same mania and who met just once and never again. Whereas they did not take well to the formality of an organization, they were in regular communication with each other, telling plenty of lies about what they intended to bid on or which up- country antiquarians were good sources of material and other such. Present day medal collectors will recognize the name, Lucien LaRiviere, whose landmark collection was auctioned by Bowers and Merena. Lennie Finn haunted the Boston coin dealers - we had a lot of them then - and every show that was in commuting distance. “Doc” Patterson was one of the best scroungers of all time; he had an immediately appealing personality that could talk an individual (or an institution) out of just about anything. He sold his impressive Washington material through a Presidential auction, but his Betts medals were sold privately, as were Leonard Finn’s. Betts Medal Boys Club* Meeting of 10/20/85 Springfield, MA Present for the first meeting of this to-become-hallowed organization were Leonard Finn (the organizer), Lucien LaRiviere, Dr- Paul Patterson John Adams. Brunch was convened promptly at 2 p*m. in Alberto a Restaurant* Following a generous repast r the group adjourned to a seventh floor suite in the Springfield Marriott# The membership produced an abundance of exhibition material- Dr* Patterson took first place for breadth, his treasures ranging from historic prints to correspondence associated therewith to a complete set ox Captain Cook medals, the latter containing all varieties in all known metals. Not to be outdone, Mr* LaRiviere won the Mississippi River award: between a dazzling array of John Law pieces and two Jefferson peace medals"Iarge and small “he bracketed 100 years of history relating to our nation's then-unexplored interior* Mr* Adams took the blue ribbon for weight, producing an estimated 10,278 medals of Admiral Vernon- Literacy is not a requirement for membership in the but, taking a chance, Mr- Finn produced a copy of the 1919 catalogue describing Milford Haven's collection of naval medals- When the prizes realized were read to them, all present wept and gnashed their teeth* With the sun setting on art afternoon that had fled all too quickly, the meeting was adjourned* A very special glow descended on the members as they made the long journey back to their respective homes. P.S. Mr* Finn is our senior collector # having purchased a Doggersbank medal in 1964- Mr* LaRiviere got started in 1968, hi s own curiosity as well as Ted Craige's enthusiasm having got the better of him- Dr. Patterson fell victim to the Letts disease at the 1969 ANA convention in Philadelphia, where he purchased silver and bronze William Penn Medals for $65 the pair* Mr- Adams was initiated in 1980 by John J* Ford. *The question of a permanent name has been referred to the Entitling Committee. Page 18 Stephen Pellegrini Passes Away Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 Fr om : Kathy Miller To: Barry Tayman I am writing to you about my brother, Stephen Pellegrini, who has been receiving your MCA advisory. Stephen passed away in September 2011, after a long illness. I am still going through all his things and realized that I had not notified you to cancel his membership and subscription. Sorry about that. My brother had many beautiful medals and we have decided to commission the sale of his collection through "Karl Goetz Medals” located at www.karlgoetzmedals.com. We would appreciate it if you would make mention of this in your newsletter or website, if it would not be inappropriate. Thank you, Kathryn Miller [We invite those members who knew Stephen well to send us their thoughts on the man and his hobby. Ed.] Dr. Fernando Chao Receives Honor from the National History Academy of Argentina From: Fernando Chao (h) Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 7:18 AM To: Adams, John; Regina Adams Subject: Academy My Dear friends: I ? m sending you two photos taken at the Academy of Argentina. The first one is when the president is putting a necklace around my neck. And the second when a colleague is presenting me. As he is an excellent friend, his opinions about me were totally undeserved. Of course I remembered both of you in my exposition and it passed quite well except for my three last grandchildren who fell quickly asleep while I was speaking about Vernon and Lezo. So their opinion is a good one: never invite them again so they won't suffer. My best remembrances for you two. Fernando [Shown above is our illustrious member, Dr. Fernando Chao (h), being inducted as a Corresponding Member into the National History Academy of Argentina. Following induction, he addressed the Academy on the subject of the Admiral Vernon medals.] Silver Horatio Gates Medals When Anne Bentley and I were writing COMITIA AMERICANA AND RELATED MEDALS , we asserted that no silver medals of Horatio Gates were made after the dies were transferred to the U.S. Mint. The ever-insightful Bob Julian writes to dispute our assertion, citing a January 3 rd , 1820 letter from Mint Director Robert Patterson to Thomas Jefferson reading as follows: “...When Mr. Burr was vice President of the U. States, he brought to the mint a pair of dies, for medals commemorative of General Gates’ capture of Burgoyne, with which at his request, Mr. Eckfeldt, now chief coiner, struck to deliver to him, twelve silver and a number of tin medals...” Point made. This is good documentation but, because the information is second hand as well as being 19 years old [the dies were brought to the mint in 1801], it is not unimpeachable. If 12 silver medals were indeed made, surely a half dozen or so would have survived. In fact, the only Gates medal in silver to appear in modern times is one from a die state characteristic of when the dies were in France. Anne and I would be happy to be proved definitively wrong by a flood of silver Gates medals that now come out of hiding. • • • • Page 19 From: Bob Julian Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 To: Adams, John Subject: Re: Gates in silver John: I have made a jpeg of the letter in question (from the fair copy in Archives Record Group 104) for your records. It probably would not reproduce well but could be copied off The letter dates from 1 820 not all that long after the striking. The information had to have come from Adam Eckfeldt as Mint Robert Director Patterson was not in office until July 1805. Sincerely, Bob • • • • From: John Adams To: Bob Julian Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 Subject: Gates in silver Good morning, Bob - Profuse thanks for the documentation on the silver Gates medals. Now, to really prove your point, show me one. Of the 23 Greene medals in bronze, we know of fifteen; silver medals should enjoy an even higher survival rate and yet the only silver Gates example to show its face in modern times is from the French die state. 'T'is a puzzlement... I will credit you with your discovery in the next issue. Again thanks, John Horatio Gates wearing his gold Comitia Americana medal Gilbert Stuart, Metropolitan Museum of Art From: Bob Julian Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 To: Adams, John Subject: Re: Gates in silver John: I quite agree that the whole matter is puzzling. I would think that Patterson got it right as he was a good friend of Jefferson's and was merely sending a polite letter. That Eckfeldt would have been in charge rather than Chief Coiner Voight is also a curious fact. If the Eckfeldt private account books for this period ever show up we will be able to confirm or deny the 1 820 claim. Sincerely, Bob • • • • From: John Adams To: Bob Julian Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 Subject: RE: Gates in silver Good morning, Bob - Again thanks. The Jefferson letter to the editor uses the same verbiage as another letter we quote in COMITIA AMERICANA. However, as much as he tries to blame the failure to make more medals on poor Short, this is pure cover-up. He had Congressional authorization to do the job PLUS authorized funds, confirmed by the bank that held them but, in preparing to return to the United States, he was too busy packing his innumerable purchases to create this national legacy. I am no fan of TJ. As always, John • • • • American Indian Peace medals in the War of 1812 From: Ben Weiss Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 12:13 PM To: Adams, John Subject: request for information Hi John, I am taking advantage (again) of your expertise and generosity in imparting your knowledge. Do you happen to know if there were any Indian Peace medals issued to the American Indians during the war of 1812? I thought this would make sense but for my purpose in an article I'm writing needs documentation, if it exists. Thanks so much and best wishes, Ben Page 20 • • • • From: Adams, John Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 To: Ben Weiss Subject: RE: request for information Hi Ben - Sorry, have been fishing. The Indians were almost all on the side of the Brits, so I would doubt that American medals were used for this purpose.. However, there are a fair number of James Madison medals- who knows? Are you acquainted with Michael Hodder? Best, John [Hi Ben - Madison peace medals are fairly common, so it seems likely that some awards had to do with the War of 1812. I called Michael (Hodder) and he could recall none with this specific provenance, nor could he recall any treaties of the period in which medals were mentioned. Sorry. John] • • • • Greek Medals at Princeton From: Alan M. Stahl Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 9:29 AM To: Adams, John Subject: RE: Exhibition John Here’s something that may interest MCA readers. As the literature on Greek medals is pretty weak, I’d appreciate any information your readers might have on these pieces which would help us to catalogue them. Best Alan Alan M. Stahl Curator of Numismatics • • • • From: Alan M. Stahl Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 9: 1 8 AM To: 'Adams, John' Subject: RE: Exhibition John, Thanks for the kind words. I’ll try to come up with something medals-oriented. I’ll be up in your neck of the woods for the Society Historia Numorum meeting on May 5. Any chance you can make it down here on May 6 for Lou Jordan’s talk? Best Alan Alan M. Stahl Curator of Numismatics • • • • From: Adams, John Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 9:29 PM To: Alan M. Stahl Subject: Exhibition Good evening, Alan - I just caught up with the E- Sylum after a week of fishing. If you would like some publicity for the project in The Medal Collectors Advisory, just send it along and I will be happy to publish it. Best, John Check out the New Official MCA Facebook page! Find us on ^ Uke Facebook http://www.facebook.com/pagesMedal-Collectors- of-America/23626537977 Page 21 3 n n - _ ® Si - 3 3© a da 50 2 " s ? e as « ^ 3 « © *:© !r H ■ *o & - Q.0* S' * : 3. ? t = = 3 ^ vs £ * 3 rp O’ 5 | = S g-ff Q. s "t SD CT 3 « sr 2! © 5 ?£ (JQ* »" © fP Q- £ £, fp — "i © q= 2 § 3 . ^ « 5. : » C/5 rp r> “i fp » S 0 ? 1 3 3 © S * | n §.i © -■ © ^ > © 3 vi © © fP ‘ ' 2. S' 2 S* > cr = ? ^ =■ c- g 2 © © ^ 3 *1 Cm «' r* as « 2 ^ o * * n * ;*= 2 3- ” S “l fP W Ml* s ar S- | g £ © El SB 2, © 3 dQ dQ ^ 2" *+ O » =" 2 ^ : c s ?" vs "* N* £t> S, ^ a sr- — © — S* sr -4 © © a© © = -4 1$ > ^2, | w 2 ® 2. 3 2. » S’ S fp ©‘. ~ 3 © 2, era 3 3 £■ . s-i ©- as 'l 3 n 2 * o O 1 nm . o ~ re 1,0 - <• ■ 2 3 2 o* 5‘ n -ft © © © "* da © S © vs V5 VI ft M n © <? ^ 7; "i » =* ^ 2 3 2- fp _* --p © V) S' > M o a ? © & ^ 7 ST 2 5* 3 © *3 r s* © 3 ©" 2 da © y © X In ft £. » 2 •* r fp 3 er 3 » g o __ "* 3 3- 7^ V)