Further Notes
The Rarest of the Rare: Unique and Very Rare Gold Coins of the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek
Pierre H. Nortje (November 2024)
Introduction
In 2022, The Rarest of the Rare: Unique and Very Rare Gold Coins of the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek was published.
In the introduction, the author wrote “…to be included in the book, the (ZAR) coins must meet only two requirements: Firstly they must have been struck in gold and secondly, they must be unique or nearly so – the rarest of the rare thus”.
The author also stated that “After consulting with many leading South African numismatists and various sources, some of the coins are still a mystery. In a few cases, pictures of the coins either do not exist or are extremely difficult to access. The current ownership of virtually all the coins is also not known to us. Some of these coins may even be hiding in long forgotten collections waiting to be identified for what they are and enter the coin market again. The project was not easy with many gaps still to be filled. Hopefully, as was the case with the publication of the booklet on the Menne Half Pond in 2021, when only AFTER its publication new information (and pictures) came to light, the same will happen with some of the coins described in this book”.
In the past two years, new information has indeed come to light, which is why the author decided to write this follow-up.
In the original book, the following ten coins were discussed: -
The Gold Threepence of 1894
The Gold Sixpence of 1897
The Gold Half Crown of 1892
The Menne Single Shaft Half Pond of 1892
The Proof Half Pond of 1894
The Blank Half Pond of 1900
The Proof-like Burgers Pond of 1874
The “Single 9” overstamp 1898 Pond
The Veld Pond Pattern of 1902
The Blank Veld Pond of 1902
In this paper, the author will reveal new information on three of the above coins and provide information on two that were not included in the book.
The gold half crown of 1892
This coin was discussed in chapter 5 of the book. The following as background: -
“When the gold half crown was exhibited in 1967 in Durban it was stated in the convention report that the coin was one of two known, the other being in the famous Baldwin collection in London. This is most probably incorrect, as there is no record (as far as we know) of such a coin being in the Baldwin collection, but a half crown in copper of 1892, as mentioned before, did form part of this collection of South African patterns. Neither a picture of it nor the current ownership of the gold half crown of 1892 is known to us. It is also not graded by either the NGC or PCGS”.
In October 2024, the Western Cape Numismatic Society was contacted via their website by a person by the name of Lukas Cloete, a South African currently residing in England. Cloete said he recently visited the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, England. In their coin collection was a coin that he took pictures of and forwarded to the author. It was a gold ZAR half-crown of 1892.
The author initially thought that this was the specimen that was in the collection of Sir Geoffrey Edgar Duveen that was sold by Glendinings in 1963. It was then owned by the British coin dealer G.E. Hearn who sold it to a Durban gynaecologist, Dr. Jacob Isaac “Jack” Sneider. It was then sold in 1972 by Sotheby’s in London which was the last known time we could track the provenance of the coin.
But to our surprise, it was not the same coin as the one in the Ashmolean collection. So, there were indeed two specimens of the coin as was stated in the Durban exhibition’s publication in 1967.
We contacted the Ashmolean who informed us that their coin was bequeathed to them by a person by the name of Bernard Eckstein in 1948.
Sir Bernard Eckstein (1894–1948) is described by nationalgallery.org.uk as “…the last of a great trio of Empire pioneers in Africa, the other two being Sir Julius Werner, and Sir Alfred Beit … [who] played a most important role in the development of the gold and mining industry in South Africa”.
The museum also informed us that the coin weighs 20.96 grams and has a diameter of 33.4 mm. Interestingly enough it has a medal alignment (as normal Kruger coins have) whereas the unique copper half crown of 1892 and both the copper and gold sixpences of 1897 have a coin alignment – their obverses being upside down to their reverses.
The Proof Half Pond of 1894
This coin was discussed in chapter 7 of the book. The following as background: -
“Levine (1974:75) wrote that this is an unrecorded proof, similar in every respect to the ordinary coin, but struck on a proof blank. He says that the lettering on the coin is crisp and proof-like, but the coin must have gone in circulation for a short time as there are signs of wear on it. The coin was on display at the 5th South African Numismatic Convention that was held in Johannesburg in 1974. A picture of the coin is shown on page 11 of Levine’s book”.
A junior member of the Western Cape Numismatic Society, Joel Potgieter, told us that at the 2023 Cape Coin Show, Nick Yiannakis, a collector from London, showed him the coin that was slabbed and graded by NGC as MS 62.
The well-known ZAR collector, Thomas van der Spuy informed us that at the recent Cape Coin show on 9 November (2024), he bought an 1894 Half Pond from a Swedish visitor. The coin shows full proof finishes on the obverse, but the reverse is proof-like. Unfortunately, he could not provide us with pictures as the coin is currently banked in South Africa whilst he resides in Mauritius.
The Veld Pond Pattern of 1902
The coin is described in chapter 11 of the author’s book. The following as background: -
“In J.T. Becklake’s Notes on the Coinage of the South African Republic (1934: 10) he says that prior to the final approval of the pair of dies actually accepted for the striking of the Veld Ponde, another pair of dies was used but was not accepted. “Mr. Pienaar retained one test piece only, struck from the original pair of dies – all the other test pieces and the dies themselves were then destroyed. This interesting and unique piece is illustrated in Fig.5. It will be acknowledged that the later dies were greatly superior in design and artistic merit to the earlier pair tested…”
The black and white picture in Becklake’s booklet is the only close-up one we could find on the piece, and it was also not clear what happened to it in the intervening years. We thought that it may be in the ABSA museum but correspondence with their curator, Dr. Paul Bayliss, confirmed that the piece was not in their museum.
After the book was published, we were contacted by a Gauteng coin dealer who informed us that she owned the piece. She had it slabbed and certified by Sangs who described it as a “Gold Test Piece for the 1902 Veldpond”.
ZAR coin experts like Werner Lamprecht from Gauteng, who examined the piece, indicated that the reverse of the piece shows the features of the so-called 4th type that Becklake describes in his article on Veldpond counterfeits that was published in De Nummis (Number 2, 1956). In his book The Coinage and Counterfeits of the ZAR (1974: 106), Eli Levine calls it the “Missing Z stroke variety”.
In the picture below, the designs of the two coins (a fake and the test piece) on the left are the same, while the one to the right is a genuine coin. Note some of the similarities/differences indicated.
In the following two pictures, one can spot differences between the original brooch and the Sangs certified test piece.
Note the two gold balls in the picture provided by Becklake in his 1934 booklet and also the absence of the pin. However, we believe that there were probably later alterations to the brooch itself, and the two pieces are indeed the same.
In his booklet, Becklake clearly states that both Mr. Pienaar and Mr. Kloppers who were involved in the minting of the coins, confirmed that only one pair of dies were used.
So how is it then possible that the reverse of the test piece is undoubtedly similar to a known fake variety?
Firstly, the piece shown in Becklake’s publication and the Sangs-certified piece may not be the same coin. However, we believe it is, as although Becklake’s picture is not that clear, from what we can see, nothing indicates the opposite. Sangs has also certified that it is the same piece.
Secondly, is there a possibility that the coin in Becklake’s picture is not the original pattern, but a coin later produced, inserted in the brooch and then inscribed by Pienaar as a gift to his wife?
In his book Money in South Africa, CL Engelbrecht (1987:83) shows a picture of photos taken at Pilgrim’s Rest (where the minting took place) during the war by Alex Marshall. A piece of a copper ruler is shown which Engelbrecht describes as “… used in the workshop and on which the design for the pattern coin was engraved. On the right are lead impressions of the designs”.
What is confusing about the “lead impressions” is that the two obverse pictures shown in Engelbrecht’s book are not the same design as can be seen in the following picture.
If these were indeed original impressions struck at Pilgrims Rest, then Becklake was wrong when he wrote that …
“… prior to the final approval of the pair of dies actually used, another pair was tested but was not accepted. Mr Pienaar retained one test piece only, struck from the original pair of dies. All other test pieces and the dies themselves were then destroyed.”
For it to make sense, Becklake was referring to gold test pieces only and not those struck in lead. Eli Levine (1974: 36) also shows a picture of an example struck in brass.
This brings us to the following issue: -
If one looks at the copper ruler “… on which the design for the pattern coin was engraved” it is without question the same impression shown on two of the lead pieces: -
This is clearly NOT the same piece shown in Becklake’s (and the Sangs certified specimen’s) picture.
If Engelbrecht is correct, then Becklake is wrong and the piece that Pienaar gave to his wife, was not the original test piece.
When Becklake’s booklet was published in 1934 (reprinted from the Numismatic Chronicle 5th series, volume XIV of the previous year) Pienaar was still alive and served as the chairman of the Union of South Africa’s Tender and Supplies' Board (see SA Government Gazette dated 14 September 1934). At that stage, the brooch must have still been in his and his wife Anna Susana’s (nee Joubert) possession, as she only died in 1936, and he in 1946 (Geni.com).
If he knew it was not the original test piece (pattern) why would he have lied about its provenance when Becklake consulted with him on the issue? As someone with a law background (earlier in his career he served as a magistrate), he would probably not even have considered it to misinform Becklake. A fading memory could also not have been the reason, as he was only in his mid-50s when Becklake’s booklet was published. As a matter of interest, when Anna died, Pienaar remarried and had a daughter with his new wife in 1941, when he was 64.
A medal struck for the centenary of the Trefoil Veld Pond Medallion and the Original Veldpond Pattern Dies. It is thought that these commemorative medallions were struck by the Gold Reef City Mint.
If the piece was indeed the original pattern, the following is the only speculative explanation we could give: -
The impressions on the copper ruler were done for making a third pair of dies. These were not used to strike the actual (gold) pattern but for striking base metal test pieces.
The reverse die (showing the ZAR monogram and date) of the actual pattern was somehow never destroyed and later used to strike fakes. The obverse die showing the words “Een Pond” on the pattern, was either destroyed or never used again.
There is also the possibility that the reverse of the pattern was somehow copied and new dies made thereof to strike the so-called number 4 fakes. But one would suspect that the counterfeiters would rather have copied a genuine Veldpond than a rejected pattern.
The piece stays an enigma, and we cannot, at this stage, provide a final answer.
The Gold 1896 Tickey
This piece was not known to us when the book was published in 2022. It was acquired in America in 2023 by Thomas van der Spuy, as mentioned above. It is certified and slabbed by NGC.
Like the gold 1892 half-crown, it also has a medal alignment.
According to a video on TikTok (April 2024) by Landon Coleske, the so-called multi-million rand coin was mentioned in a diary kept by a French mercenary who served as a bodyguard for Sammy Marks during the Anglo-Boer War. According to Coleske, the mercenary mentions that gold tickeys were struck in 1894, 1895, 1896 and 1897.
We have not been able to verify this: - In the biography of Sammy Marks by Richard Mendelsohn published in 1991 entitled Sammy Marks: The Uncrowned King of the Transvaal nothing is said about Marks having a bodyguard.
The only “French connection” we could find was the following: In the Rarest of the Rare (2022:14-20) is it mentioned that one of the two (possibly three) gold tickeys of 1894 was in the collection of Philip Ferrari de La Renotière that was sold in Paris in March 1922. It was later bought by the French dealer Louis Ciani and ended up in his sister’s collection after he died in 1929. It was later sold by Sink & Son to the S.A. Mint Museum. However, with the help of Derick Rabe, the webmaster of the WCNS, we located a copy of the Ferrari catalogue and can confirm that except for some Griqua tokens, there were no South African coins in the sale. Further numismatic auctions were held of his French and ancient coins, but we could not find information on this.
The Brockage Paul Kruger Pond
(Brockage refers to a type of error in which one side of the coin has the normal design, and the other side has a mirror image of the same design impressed upon it. Brockage errors are caused when an already minted coin sticks to the coin die and impresses onto another blank that hasn't been struck yet, pressing a mirror image of the other coin into the blank).
The author was unaware of the coin when his book was published in 2022. However, the existence of the coin was fairly well known in specialist collectors’ circles as a specimen was sold in June 2014 by Noonans Mayfair in London as lot number 565.
It was described as follows in their catalogue: -
Paul Kruger, Pond [1892-1900], obverse brockage, 7.78g/12h (cf. Hern Z44ff; cf. KM. 10.2; cf. F 2). Some rim and edge marks, probably as a result of the faulty strike, otherwise extremely fine and extremely rare £3,000-4,000. This lot was sold as part of a special collection, South African Coins, 1874-1902, from the collection formed by the late Dr. Frank Mitchell.
It sold for £10 000.00.
It was later owned by the Gauteng coin dealer Gary Leviton of Royal Gold and currently resides in the collection of Thomas van der Spuy who had it slabbed and certified by NGC. Van der Spuy told us that it is rumoured that a second piece may exist.
Request for Further Information
If any of our readers have further information regarding the coins mentioned in this paper, we would like to encourage them to get in touch with the WCNS.