30.07.2015 Views

The numismatic chronicle and journal of the Royal ... - IndianCoins.org

The numismatic chronicle and journal of the Royal ... - IndianCoins.org

The numismatic chronicle and journal of the Royal ... - IndianCoins.org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

THE QUARTEK-ANGEL OF JAMES I. 219his or her titles; but that on <strong>the</strong> reverse underwentconsiderable variation.<strong>The</strong>se we need not notice except tomention that Mary adopted for her angels <strong>and</strong> half-angels<strong>the</strong> legend, "A domino factum est istud et est mirabile,"more or less abbreviated.Elizabeth followed her sister'sexample, but on her quarter-angel completed her titles" Et Hibernie Kegina Fidei." On <strong>the</strong> present coin thisstereotyped design is ab<strong>and</strong>oned, <strong>and</strong> we have in itsplace a plain royal shield <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> legend " Tueatur unitaDeus." This design <strong>and</strong> legend are mere adaptationsfrom o<strong>the</strong>r coins. <strong>The</strong> shield is <strong>the</strong> same as that whichoccurs on <strong>the</strong> twopence <strong>of</strong> James I <strong>of</strong> his first coinagebearing <strong>the</strong> mint-marks, a thistle or a lis ;<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> legendis taken from <strong>the</strong> quarter-sovereign, which is <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> samedate <strong>and</strong> issues. As compared with that <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> obverse<strong>the</strong> workmanship <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reverse is very inferior, almostrude, <strong>and</strong> it gives one <strong>the</strong> impressionthat <strong>the</strong> die washurriedly made <strong>and</strong> for a particular purpose or occasion.To account for this it has been suggested that perhaps<strong>the</strong> angel <strong>and</strong> its parts were struck ei<strong>the</strong>r on <strong>the</strong> occasion<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> King's coronation or on that <strong>of</strong> his visit with <strong>the</strong>Queen to <strong>the</strong> Mint on March 13, 1604 ;but <strong>the</strong> presence<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> mint- mark, a " flower de luce," toge<strong>the</strong>r with <strong>the</strong>absence <strong>of</strong> any specimens from <strong>the</strong> trial <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Pyxon May 22, 1604, renders this suggestion absolutelyimpossible.From <strong>the</strong> evidence <strong>of</strong> this quarter-angel <strong>and</strong> also fromthat <strong>of</strong> contemporary documents, it be taken as amaycertainty that some time during 1604 <strong>the</strong> angel<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>half-angel were also struck ;but <strong>the</strong>ir non-existence, s<strong>of</strong>ar as we are at present aware, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> great rarity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>quarter-angel, would suggest that <strong>the</strong> coinage was a verylimited one. On this point also we are not without some

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!