Waterloo Medal

(Pistrucci)

The Waterloo Medal was

designed by Italian-born
sculptor Benedetto Pistrucci.
He worked on it from 1819 to
1849, when the completed
matrices were presented to
Britain's Royal Mint. The medal
was commissioned by the
British Government in 1819 on
the instructions of George IV
while Prince Regent; copies
were to be presented to the
generals who had been
victorious in the 1815 Battle of
Waterloo, and to the leaders of
Britain's allies. As most of the
intended recipients had died by
1849, and relations with
France had improved, the
medals were never struck,
though modern-day editions
have been made for sale to
collectors.
Waterloo Medal
United Kingdom

Obverse

Design The four rulers

of the nations
triumphant at
the Battle of
Waterloo,
surrounded by a
mythological
allegory evoking
peace

Designer Benedetto
Pistrucci
In 1816, the Prince Regent had
first suggested a medal to be
presented to allies and
commanders from Waterloo.
The Royal Academy proposed
work by John Flaxman, one of
its members, but Pistrucci,
whose responsibility it was to
engrave the dies, refused to
copy another's work, and
brought forth designs of his
own. The Prince Regent and
William Wellesley-Pole, Master
of the Mint were impressed by
Pistrucci's models, and he
gained the commission.
Pistrucci fell from grace at the
Royal Mint in 1823 by refusing
to copy another's work for the
coinage, and he was instructed
to concentrate on the medal.
He likely concluded that he
would be sacked if he
completed it, and progress was
extremely slow. Health issues
also played a part. He stayed
on at the Mint, the medal
uncompleted, despite repeated
calls from Masters of the Mint
to finish the project. In 1844,
the Master, W. E. Gladstone,
reached an accord with
Pistrucci and the medal
matrices were eventually
submitted in 1849. Due to their
great size, 5.3 inches
(130 mm) in diameter, the Mint
was unwilling to risk damaging
the matrices by hardening
them, and only electrotypes
and soft impressions were
taken. Pistrucci's designs have
been greatly praised by
numismatic writers.

Inception
On 28 June 1815, ten days
after the Battle of Waterloo in
June 1815, the victorious
general, the Duke of Wellington
proposed to Frederick, Duke of
York that bronze medals be
presented to the British
soldiers at Waterloo, silver to
their officers and gold to the
sovereigns of the victorious
nations, and to their generals
and ministers. Wellington's
brother was William Wellesley-
Pole, the Master of the Mint,
and Wellesley-Pole at once
ordered designs prepared for
the soldiers' medal. In early
1816, it was decided that
officers and soldiers alike
would receive their medal in
silver, and it was produced in
large numbers by the Royal
Mint for the military. The Royal
Academy was taxed with
recommending a design for the
gold medal; they selected a
sketch by Sir John Flaxman,
but no action was immediately
taken.[1]
William Wellesley-Pole, by Thomas
Lawrence

In 1816, George, Prince

Regent (later George IV),
pressed the idea of a
commemorative medal to be
presented to the victorious
generals and national leaders
of the Battle of Waterloo.[2] It
was decided to give this medal
in gold to the heads of state
and in silver to the victorious
generals. Others to be
honoured would receive the
medal in bronze.[3] Flaxman's
design was to be used.[4]

Wellesley-Pole in 1819
instructed Benedetto Pistrucci
to engrave Flaxman's work to
make steel dies for the
medal.[5] Pistrucci, an Italian
who had come to Britain in
1815, was performing the
duties of Chief Engraver of the
Royal Mint.[6] He believed he
had been promised the title,
which as a foreigner he was
ineligible for, and this would be
a longtime grievance for him.
Pistrucci refused to engrave
Flaxman's model, unwilling to
copy the work of another
artist. This refusal angered the
Royal Academy. Pole instead
asked Pistrucci to prepare a
design of his own, and in a day
he had produced wax models,
about which the Prince Regent
was enthusiastic. In August
1819, Pole received
instructions from the Treasury
to employ Pistrucci to produce
the medal. The fee was
£2,400, to be paid in
instalments. Pole promised an
advance that would allow
Pistrucci to bring his family
from Rome.[5] According to
Carlo Milano in his article on
Pistrucci for the Royal Mint,
"The Waterloo Medal could not
be compared to any previous
medal: it was much bigger and
its iconography more
complicated than had ever
been seen before in the history
of medallic art. But Pistrucci
believed that it could be done
and immediately began to
work."[7]

Design
The centre of the obverse
depicts the four allied rulers:
George, Prince Regent
(although not king, he was
exercising the monarch's
powers due to the illness of his
father, George III), Emperor
Francis I of Austria, Tsar
Alexander I of Russia and King
Frederick William III of
Prussia.[3]

Aside from the rulers, who are

seen grouped in profile,
Pistrucci's design for both
sides is entirely allegorical,
with the subject the treaty of
peace concluded after
Waterloo. At top of the obverse
Apollo is seen in his chariot; he
restores the day. Following the
chariot are Zephyr, who
scatters flowers, symbolic of
peace, and Iris. The carriage
flies in the sky towards Castor
and Pollux, representing the
constellation Gemini and
symbolising the period of the
Zodiac when Waterloo took
place. The twins are armed
with spears, and are meant as
the apotheses of the victorious
generals, Wellington and
Blücher. Themis, the goddess
of justice, appears before the
rulers, a reminder that justice,
more than power, secures their
rule. Under her are seen the
Fates, their subservient
position meaning that human
fate will henceforth be
determined by justice.
Opposite Themis, behind the
rulers, is a man armed with a
club, seated under an oak tree,
he represents power. Beneath
him are the Furies, symbolising
that human actions and
passions are subject to power,
and at the bottom is a figure
representing night, fleeing.
[3][8]

The reverse has at centre

equestrian figures meant to be
Wellington and Blücher, with
Victory between them, guiding
them to battle. They are in the
Grecian style, similar to
Pistrucci's earlier St George
and the Dragon design for the
sovereign coin. At the top of
the reverse is Jupiter. Taking
up the rest of the
circumference of the medal are
19 figures of giants whom
Jupiter has struck down; they
are the defeated enemy and
number one for every year of
the war.[3][8]

Pistrucci placed inscriptions on

the wax model that he did not
keep for the final version of the
design. Above the royal heads
was seen their countries, thus:
ANGLIA (England) AUSTRIA
RUSSIA PRUSSIA and below,
FŒDERE JUNCTIS (Joint
League). On the reverse he
placed above and below the
figures in the centre:
WATERLOO and 18 June 1815
(the date of the battle). These
inscriptions were restored on
the version of the medal struck
by the Royal Mint in 2015 for
the bicentenary of the battle.[9]

Delay
In 1822, Pole informed George
(who had succeeded to the
throne as George IV in 1820)
that £1,700 had been paid to
Pistrucci, and that the work on
the dies was at an advanced
stage.[7] King George had
strongly disliked the depiction
of him Pistrucci had prepared
for his coinage. Soon after this,
he ordered a new one to be
based on a portrait by Francis
Chantrey, and Pistrucci refused
the instructions to prepare the
dies, again declining to copy
the work of another artist. The
resulting furore endangered his
position, causing him to be
excluded from further work on
the coinage, and Pistrucci was
instructed to concentrate on
the Waterloo Medal. By 1826,
part of one side had been
completed.[10] With Pistrucci's
role at the Royal Mint now
controversial, according to the
Royal Mint Museum, "his
progress was slow—and
deliberately so since he feared
that, having put himself
beyond the pale by his
obstinate behaviour, the Royal
Mint would sever its
association with him as soon
as he handed over the
dies."[11]

According to Howard Linecar in

his book on British coin
designs and designers,
"Pistrucci held the cutting of
these dies [for the Waterloo
Medal] as a bargaining counter
in his relentless efforts to
obtain the post of Chief
Engraver at the Royal Mint".[12]
Pistrucci asked each new
Master of the Mint for
appointment to the position,
until in 1828, amid Treasury
concerns about how much
money was being paid
Pistrucci, he was made Chief
Medallist, a new position, at a
reduced salary; William Wyon
became Chief Engraver.[13]
Milano wrote, "the Italian artist
took this as an act of hostility
by his enemies."[7] At about
this time, Pistrucci contracted
an illness that affected his
vision, slowing his work.[7]

The net result was that little

work was done on the
Waterloo Medal. In 1832, the
Master of the Mint, Lord
Auckland, noted that the dies
had been long delayed.[7] In
1836, the new Master, Henry
Labouchere, also complained
about the delay, feeling the
medal could be finished in 18
months. He offered Pistrucci
extra payment if he would take
on four apprentices and finish
the Waterloo Medal. Pistrucci
declined.[14]

Completion, appraisal
and later versions
I propose to call in person on Mr
Sheil, Master of the Mint, for the
purpose of presenting to him my
respects on the 1st day of
January next year 1849, and at
the same time to place in his
hands the two matrices of the
great Waterloo Medal, given me
to execute by the late Lord
Maryborough[a] when Master of
the Mint, and on which I have
employed the same diligence and
perseverance which I have given
to the most finished works which
have issued from my hands.
 Benedetto Pistrucci, 1848[15]

In 1841, a new Master of the

Mint, William Ewart Gladstone
was appointed. Gladstone
thought highly of Pistrucci and
corresponded with him in
Italian, but was unwilling to
grant him any new
commissions while the
Waterloo Medal remained
outstanding.[7] By 1844, the
continued expense of Pistrucci
was a concern to the Audit
Office. Gladstone restored cuts
in Pistrucci's pay that had been
made for failure to train an
apprentice, and offered him a
bonus of £400 to complete the
medal.[16] Pistrucci was to
work solely on the one project.
He vacated his home at the
Royal Mint,[7] moving to Old
Windsor, where he set up a
workshop to attempt the
medal's completion. Although
Pistrucci worked constantly on
the medal during some
periods, he was slowed by a
fall in his cottage, which
incapacitated him for much of
1846. On 1 January 1849,
Pistrucci submitted the
matrices of the medal to the
Royal Mint, and was paid
£1,500.[17]

Pistrucci submitted a lengthy

letter of advice to aid in
hardening the dies, with
commentary on other matters
interspersed; he had the letter
published in the numismatic
press. The matrices were each
submitted in two pieces, a ring
and core, and Pistrucci
cautioned that successfully
making dies from them was no
certainty, "an accident
produced by carelessness or
inattention might in one
moment entirely destroy the
whole work, and without
remedy".[15] The matrices were
5.3 inches (130 mm) in
diameter;[18] Mint officials did
not think they could be
hardened and converted to
dies without the likelihood of
major damage.[3] A few
electrotypes were made from
the matrices, along with some
soft impressions, but no
medals were struck.[12]
Improving relations between
Britain and France made
presentation of medals
recalling Waterloo impolitic.[7]
Linecar noted that by then "all
the great men to whom it was
intended that a specimen of
the medal should be given
were dead, save only the Iron
Duke".[12]

Pistrucci was embittered by the

experience. He stated in an
1850 letter to William Richard
Hamilton:
I have nobody in the world
to tell about my
frustrations. It is not by
chance that I put my name
[on the Waterloo Medal]
under the thread that the
Fate is cutting. I knew that
after the completion of the
medal this would have
happened. I have done
more than my duty, the
dishonest will have their
triumph over me for a brief
time, and I hope that one
day their names will be
covered in shame. My
daughters are looking after
the dies of the great medal
from time to time to make
sure that they don’t rust, I
can swear that I have not
looked at them for more
than six months because I
don’t have the strength of
doing so. They have ruined
my good health and they
are the reason of all my
 troubles.[7]

Cameo of Pistrucci (ca. 1850, by his

daughter, Elisa)

Linecar said of the Waterloo

Medal designs, "that they were
one of the most magnificent
examples of the die-sinker's
art there can be no doubt".[12]
Roderick Farey, in his 2014
study of the artist, stated,
"Pistrucci's genius is clearly
apparent in the design".[3]
Milano summed up Pistrucci's
matrices, still in the possession
of the Royal Mint, as
"undoubtedly among the finest
pieces in the history of
European medals, and a
testimony to the genius of their
creator".[7] Pistrucci's
biographer, Michael A. Marsh,
described the medal as "the
finest piece of intaglio work by
any engraver".[16]
In 1990, the Royal Mint struck
a reduced-size collector's
version in bronze for the 175th
anniversary of the battle.[3] It
struck one in silver, also for
collectors, for the 200th
anniversary in 2015, with
Pistrucci's inscriptions from
the wax models restored.[9] In
2014, as part of the
preparations for the battle's
bicentenary, the
Worcestershire Medal Service
(Queen Elizabeth II's official
medallist), on behalf of the
London Mint (a private firm)
prepared full-size versions in
silver. They were presented to
the ambassadors of Austria,
Russia and Germany (as
successor to Prussia), with the
Queen to receive one later, and
were also made available for
sale to the public at £3,900
each. Sir Evelyn Webb-Carter,
chairman of the Waterloo 200
Committee described the
medal, weighing 4.5 pounds
(2.0 kg), as a "thumping great
thing".[19]

Notes
a. The ennobled William
Wellesley-Pole.

References
1. Craig, pp. 283–284.
2. ODNB.
3. Farey October 2014, p. 51.
4. Marsh, p. 23.
5. Marsh, pp. 23–24.
6. Farey September 2014,
pp. 51–52.
7. Milano.
8. Marsh, p. 25.
9. "2015 Great Britain 8 oz
Silver Battle of Waterloo
Medal" . APMEX. Retrieved
1 January 2018.
10. Craig, p. 296.
11. "Waterloo Medal" . Royal
Mint Museum. Retrieved 15 July
2017.
12. Linecar, p. 96.
13. Craig, p. 297.
14. Marsh, pp. 30, 40.
15. Marsh, p. 49.
16. Marsh, p. 48.
17. Marsh, pp. 48–49.
18. Craig, p. 298.
19. Farmer, Ben (11 November
2014). "Britain's Waterloo
allies awarded medals – 199
years late" . The Telegraph.
Retrieved 13 July 2017.

Bibliography
Craig, John (2010) [1953].
The Mint (paperback ed.).
Cambridge, United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0-521-17077-2.
Farey, Roderick (September
2014). "Benedetto Pistrucci
(1782—1855), Part 1". Coin
News: 51–53.
Farey, Roderick (October
2014). "Benedetto Pistrucci
(1782—1855), Part 2". Coin
News: 51–52.
Linecar, H.W.A. (1977).
British Coin Designs and
Designers. London: G. Bell &
Sons Ltd.
ISBN 978-0-7135-1931-0.
Marsh, Michael A. (1996).
Benedetto Pistrucci: Principal
Engraver and Chief Medallist
of the Royal Mint,
1783—1855. Hardwick,
Cambridgeshire: Michael A.
Marsh (Publications).
 ISBN 978-0-9506929-2-0.
Milano, Carlo. "The Talent
and the Temperament" .
Royal Mint Museum.
Retrieved 12 July 2017.
Pollard, Graham. "Pistrucci,
Benedetto" . Oxford
Dictionary of National
Biography. Retrieved 3 July
2017. (Subscription required
(help)).

External links
Museo della Zecca di Roma
page on the Waterloo Medal
(in Italian)
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org
/w/index.php?title=Waterloo_Medal_
(Pistrucci)&oldid=846390391"

Last edited 1 hour ago …

Content is available under CC BY-SA

3.0 unless otherwise noted.