Looking for Jacques Schulman B.V., Amsterdam (Auction 130), 28.4.1919

[Roman Collector]

Hello, friends! I hope you can help me with some research. I'm looking for an illustration (or even the description if a photo is not available) of an aureus of Faustina the Elder with the PIETAS AVG reverse type cited in RIC as number 395b. 
 

 

After an exhaustive internet search, I have not been able to find another specimen of this aureus in any museum collection or auction sale and I'm not sure the coin exists as described in RIC. This would have been in Schulman's Auction 130, held 28 April 1919. 

I know it's a longshot to look for a 105-year-old auction catalog, but I was wondering if any of you know if this catalog is digitized and available online or perhaps have access to a print copy and can post an illustration? 

Thanks so much! 

[ominus1]

..i have 5 Schulman catalogs...but they are recent, RC...why not contact the Schulman  auctionhouse?...they may have what you're lQQking for...:)

[Sulla80]

32 minutes ago, Roman Collector said:

Hello, friends! I hope you can help me with some research. I'm looking for an illustration (or even the description if a photo is not available) of an aureus of Faustina the Elder with the PIETAS AVG reverse type cited in RIC as number 395b. 
 

 

After an exhaustive internet search, I have not been able to find another specimen of this aureus in any museum collection or auction sale and I'm not sure the coin exists as described in RIC. This would have been in Schulman's Auction 130, held 28 April 1919. 

I know it's a longshot to look for a 105-year-old auction catalog, but I was wondering if any of you know if this catalog is digitized and available online or perhaps have access to a print copy and can post an illustration? 

Thanks so much! 

I am no help on the Schulman Catalog from 1919 but thought this link citing the BM entry and a catalog of images of Faustina coins might be useful to you.

[Roerbakmix]

Perhaps @AnYangMan.

[Anaximander]

Searching for a catalog from 1919 is quite a quest. Before today, I had never heard of an auction house by the name of Schulman. I instinctively turn to rNumis (the website).  I didn’t find anything. I do recall seeing a thread about researching provenance through coin catalogs, and after poking around a bit, I found it and a trail to the ANS donum database. I didn’t find the link to the discontinued database at the Ashmolean Museum (or was it the Fitzwilliam Museum?). 

At the ANS site, I see references to several Schulmans.  Not a surprise! A catalog from 1919 and, to peer closely at @ominus1’s photo, 2024, we’re necessarily looking at a multigenerational firm.

   

Having different searches and different sorts, I see a gap between 1915 and 1920. So close, but no cigar. 

PS: the thread with provenance info is here. 

Edited June 30 by Anaximander
Added provenance thread link.

[ominus1]

24 minutes ago, Anaximander said:

Searching for a catalog from 1919 is quite a quest. Before today, I had never heard of an auction house by the name of Schulman. I instinctively turn to rNumis (the website).  I didn’t find anything. I do recall seeing a thread about researching provenance through coin catalogs, and after poking around a bit, I found it and a trail to the ANS donum database. I didn’t find the link to the discontinued database at the Ashmolean Museum (or was it the Fitzwilliam Museum?). 
 

at the ANS site, I see references to several Schulmans.  Not a surprise! A catalog from 1919 and, to peer closely at @ominus1’s photo, 2024, we’re necessarily looking at a multigenerational firm.   

Having different searches and different sorts, I see a gap between 1915 and 1920. So close, but no cigar. 

...well, that's in the neighborhood! 🙂

[AnYangMan]

Thanks for the tag @Roerbakmix. Yes, we have an annotated copy of sale 130, but unfortunately that is not what we are looking for. It is the only sale in 1919 and there's only two ancients, none pictured:

Instead I suspect a price list, but those are horribly indexed. I checked LXXI till LXXVI, which should be all pricelists from around 1919. No match. Not sure what they are referencing!

[Anaximander]

In reading the “Sales and Collections” list in RIC III (page xi), the reference to Schulman is shown as May 31st, 1927. Could the RIC III 395 reference be pointing to lot #1919 from the 1927 auction?

[Sulla80]

46 minutes ago, Anaximander said:

In reading the “Sales and Collections” list in RIC III (page xi), the reference to Schulman is shown as May 31st, 1927. Could the RIC III 395 reference be pointing to lot #1919 from the 1927 auction?

Great thought, and not lot 1919 from 1927 ....

https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k30453965/f131.item

and not #130 either from same auction

Lots of Faustina's but it isn't #919 either

some Faustinas in 1926

 

 

Here are the "a" and "c"  variants...with AVGVSTA or AVG in obverse legend...https://numismatics.org/ocre/id/ric.3.ant.395Aa?lang=sv

https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2013345

[Roman Collector]

Oh, wow!!! I can't thank you guys enough for all the effort you put into researching this!! This group is THE BEST!!! 

It definitely appears that Mattingly and Sydenham were in error in citing Schulman for the existence of the DIVA FAVSTINA variety of the PIETAS AVG aureus reverse type. I was skeptical that such an aureus exists as described and now I'm convinced it does not. 

Thanks again!!! 

[Anaximander]

5 hours ago, AnYangMan said:

Instead I suspect a price list, but those are horribly indexed. I checked LXXI till LXXVI, which should be all pricelists from around 1919. No match. Not sure what they are referencing!

An astute observation, @AnYangMan.  I examined RIC III's Notes (which include references and provenances) for instances of Schulman. Here's what I learned:

The authors' convention is to refer to auctions as "Sales," an example of which would be "Martinetti Sale." Usage of the word "Cat." is extremely limited. I saw only a single reference outside of Schulman, which was to "Florange Sale (Cat. X), 1925, lot 95." 

There are nine references to Schulman, of which five are identified as "Sales" and three as "Cat" (including our initial line of inquiry). That leaves one, #7, that is ambiguous, as simply "Schulman (1927), 480."  References to "Cat." are never identified as "lot."
Antoninus Pius
1. p. 44 #149. Schulman Sale March 17th, 1908, lot 2132.
2. p. 74 #395. Schulman Cat., 1919
3. p. 133 #857. Schulman Sale May 1925, lot 152.
4. p. 172 #1219. Schulman Sale (Laugier) May 13, 1913, lot 234. 
5. p. 192 #1383. Schulman Sale March 17, 1908, lot 2188.
Marcus Aurelius
6. p. 252 #476. Schulman Cat. (1912), 168.
7. p. 290 #964a. Schulman (1927), 480.
8. p. 297 #1056a. Schulman Cat. (1927), 477.
Commodus
9. p. 368 #206. Schulman Sale, Ordones Col., lot 804.

My conclusion is that AnYangMan is on firm ground, looking for a Fixed Price List (to use modern parlance) and not an auction sale.  The time frame for item 2 may or may not be 1919.  As @Roman Collector says, it could be all made-up!  I believe the "Sales and Collections" citation of Schulman "May 31st, 1927" that I dredged up earlier refers to item 7, not our item 2. 

I'd like to say that I'm really, really, impressed by @Sulla80's catalog resources and photo editing acumen.