This page has been validated.
2
MEDAL

process, and were usually worked over by the chaser afterwards; indeed, it was not until the beginning of the 16th century that dies, hitherto used only for coins executed in low relief, were employed for larger and bolder work. The medallists of those days always cast in bronze or lead, and only proceeded to use silver and gold as a luxurious taste began to demand the more precious metals. There is little doubt that the material to be preferred is dull silver (mat or sablé—sand-blasted), as the work, with all its variations of light and shade, can be better seen in the delicate grey of the surface.

The medal, properly considered, is not sculpture. Vasari was happy in his definition when he described the medallic art as the link between sculpture and painting—that is to say, painting in the round with the colour left out. Less severe than sculpture, it need not be less dignified; it is bound down by the conventions of low relief, and by compulsions of composition and design, dependent on shape, from which sculpture, even when the relief is the lowest, is in a great measure free. In the medal, otherwise than in sculpture, elaborate perspective and receding planes are not out of place. The genius of the modern Frenchman rebelled against the rule that commonly governed the medal during the decadence, and has triumphed in his revolt, justifying the practice by his success. The modern medal and the plaquette aim at being decorative yet vigorous, reticent and dignified, delicate and tender, graceful and pure; it may be, and often is, all these in turn. Imagination, fancy, symbolism, may always be brought into play, allied to a sense of form and colour, of arrangement and execution. By the demonstration of these qualities the artist is to be differentiated from the skilful, mechanical die-sinker, who spreads over the art the blight of his heavy and insensitive hand and brain. So with portraiture. Accurate likeness of feature as well as character and expression are now to be found in all fine works, such as are seized only by an artist of keenly sensitive temperament. It is thus that he casts the events and the actions of to-day into metallic history, beautifully seen and exquisitely recorded; thus that the figure on the medal is no longer a mere sculpturesque symbol, but a thing of flesh and blood, suave and graceful in composition, and as pleasing in its purely decorative design as imagination can inspire or example suggest. It is thus that the art, while offering easy means of permanent memorial, has afforded to men of restricted means the eagerly seized opportunity of forming small collections of masterpieces of art at a small outlay.

France.—In France the example of Oudiné, coming after that of David d’Angers, did much to revolutionize the spirit animating the modern medallist, but Chapu, by his essentially modern treatment, did more. To Ponscarme (pupil of Oudiné) is chiefly due the idea of rendering mat the ground as well as the subject on the medal, the suppression of the raised rim, and the abandonment of the typographic lettering hitherto in vogue, together with the mechanical regularity of its arrangement. Degeorge, with his semi-pictorial treatment, was followed by Daniel Dupuis, whose delicate and playful fancy, almost entirely pictorial, makes us forget alike the material and the die. J. C. Chaplain is unsurpassed as a modeller of noble heads, including those of four presidents of the French Republic—Macmahon, Casimir-Perier, Faure and Loubet—and his allegorical designs are finely imagined and admirably worked out (see Plate); but L. Oscar Roty (pupil of Ponscarme) is at the head of the whole modern school, not only by virtue of absolute mastery of the technique of his art, but also of his originality of arrangement, of the poetic charm of his symbolism and his allegories, the delicate fancy, the exquisite touch, the chasteness and purity of taste—wedding a modern sentiment to an obvious feeling for the Greek. Though expressly less virile than Chaplain, Roty is never effeminate. To Roty belongs the credit of having first revived the form of the plaquette, or rectangular medal, which had been abandoned and forgotten along with many other traditions of the Renaissance (see Plate). Alphée Dubois, Lagrange, and Borrel must be mentioned among those who are understood to engrave their own dies. Followers are to be found in Mouchon, Lechevrel, Vernon, Henri Dubois, Patey, Bottée (see Plate)—all sterling artists if not innovators. Medallists of more striking originality but less finish, and of far less elegance are Michel Cazin, Levillain (who loves as much as Bandinelli to make over-display of his knowledge of muscular anatomy), Charpentier, and their school, who aim at a manner which makes less demand of highly educated artistry such as that of Roty or of Chaplain. It is learned and accomplished in its way, but lumpy in its result; breadth is gained, but refinement and distinction are in a great measure lost. It may be added—to give some idea of the industry of the modern medallist, and the encouragement accorded to him—that between 1879 and 1900 M. Roty executed more than 150 pieces, each having an obverse and a reverse.

Austria.—The two leading medallists of the Austrian school are Josef Tautenhayn (see Plate) and Anton Scharff, both highly accomplished, yet neither displaying the highest qualities of taste, ability and “keeping,” which distinguishes the French masters. About 330 pieces have come from the hand of Anton Scharff, Stefan Schwartz, Franz Pawlik, Staniek, Marschall and J. Tautenhayn, junior, are the only other artists who have risen to eminence.

Germany.—A characteristically florid style is here cultivated, such as lends itself to the elaborate treatment of costume, armorial bearings, and the like; but delicacy, distinction, and the highest excellence in modelling and draughtsmanship—qualities which should accompany even the most vigorous or elaborate designs—are lacking in a great degree. Professors Hildebrand and Kowarzik have wrought some of the most artistic works there produced.

Belgium.—Although sculpture so greatly flourishes in Belgium, medal work shows little promise of rivalling that of France. The influence of the three brothers Wiener (Jacques, Léopold and Charles)—good medallists of the old school—has not yet been shaken off. The remarkable architectural series by the first-named, and the coinage of the second, have little affinity with the spirit of the modern medal. Lemaire has perhaps done as well as any, followed by Paul Dubois, J. Dillens (a follower of the French), G. Devreese and Vinçotte (see Plate)—whose plaquette for the Brussels Exhibition award (1887) is original, but more admirable in design than in finish.

Holland.—In Holland not very much has been done. Patriotism has called forth many medals of Queen Wilhelmina, and the best of them are doubtless those of Bart van Hove and Wortman. Baars is a more virile artist, who follows Chaplain at a distance. Wienecke is interesting for the sake of his early Netherlandic manner; the incongruity is not unpleasant.

Switzerland.—The medal is also popular in Switzerland. Here Bovy is the leader of the French tradition and Hans Frei of a more national sentiment. The last-named, however, is more remarkable as a revivalist than as an original artist.

Great Britain.—In England only two medallists of repute can be counted who practically confine themselves to their art—G. W. de Saulles, of the Royal Mint, best known by the Diamond Jubilee medal of Queen Victoria and by his medal of Sir Gabriel Stokes, and Frank Bowcher (see Plate) by that of Thomas Huxley. These artists both cut their own dies when necessary. Emil Fuchs, working in England in the manner of the French medallists, but with greater freedom than is the wont of the older school, has produced several examples of the art: the medals commemorative of the South African War and of Queen Victoria (two versions), all of 1900; and many portrait medals and plaquettes of small size have come from the same hand. Besides these, the leading English sculptors have produced medals—Lord Leighton, Sir Edward Poynter, Hamo Thornycroft, T. Brock, Onslow Ford, G. Frampton and Goscombe John; but, practising more continually in sculpture, they do not claim rank as medallists, nor have they sought to acquire that class of dexterity which constant habit alone can give. Alphonse Legros, who has cast a certain number of portrait medals, is usually included in the French school.

United States.—Among American medallists Augustus St Gaudens (see Plate) is perhaps the most prominent; but he is not, strictly speaking, a medallist, but a sculptor who can model in the flat.

Authorities.—F. Parkes Weber, Medals and Medallions of the 19th Century relating to England by Foreign Artists (London, 1894); Roger Marx, “The Renaissance of the Medal in France,” The Studio (vol. xv. 1898); M. H. Spielmann, “Frank Bowcher, Medallist, with some Comment on the Medallic Art,” The Magazine of Art (February 1900); Spink & Son’s Monthly Numismatic Circular (passim), 1892 onwards (in English, French and German); Roger Marx, Les Médailleurs français depuis 1789 (Paris, 1897); Les Médailleurs français contemporains (Plates) (Paris, 1899); La Monnaie de Paris à l’Exposition Universelle (Paris, 1900); Cent ans de numismatique française (2 vols., 1893–1895); F. Mazerolle, L. O. Roty: Biographie et catalogue de son œuvre (Paris, 1897); J. F. Chaplain: Biographie et catalogue de l’œuvre (Paris, 1897); Dr H. J. de Dompière de Chaufepié, Les Médailles et plaquettes modernes (in Dutch and French) (Haarlem, 1897); A. R. v. Loehr, Wiener Medailleure, 1899. (Vienna, 1899); A. Lichtwark, “Die Wiedererweckung der Medaille,” Pan, 1895, pp. 34–40; 1896, pp. 311–318; Die Moderne Medaille (a monthly magazine, passim) (Vienna); L. Forrer, Biographical Dictionary of Medallists, vol. i. A–D. (London, 1902).  (M. H. S.) 

Medals as War Decorations

Although the striking of medals to commemorate important events is a practice of considerable antiquity, yet the custom of using the medal as a decoration, and especially as a decoration to do honour to those who have rendered service to the state