RARE GOLD COIN and POCKET WATCH - Should I Separate or Keep Together

Rare Gold Coin Watch Fob (Two specimens known) 1668-A Louis XIV,
Louis d'or (Dr/4 no. 366)

Pocket Watch with historical value associated with the political history of Guatemala.
Watch, likely Bernard Poitevin circa 1880's (approx), No. 6110.
Signed: V. Lejeune, 16, Rue de la Banque, Paris. Movement is by Louis B Audemars.

Here's a link to the images of the watch and coin fob:
http://s589.photobucket.com/user/trueshooter/library/Juan Aparacio Pocketwatch
and a link to information concerning the coin:
http://www.coinfactswiki.com/wiki/France_1668-A_louis_d'or

My dilemma is that I'm considering selling the watch and fob, and I'm unsure whether I should keep them together, or sell them separately.
The watch was custom made for Juan Aparicio, who was later jailed and shot by political influences (most likely, Interior Minister Manuel Estrada Cabrera), during the administration of then President Reina Barrios. His story is in Spanish and can be found at this link:
http://www.elperiodico.com.gt/es/20130307/opinion/225654

I'm considering selling the pieces, possibly through Heritage. But I'd like some insight into whether I should keep the pieces together or offer them separately.
Numismatists at the local coin shop, and a couple watch collectors I know have shared the following:
Most coin collectors are interested in coins and not watches. Therefore they will most likely bid on the coin with little regard for the watch. On the other hand a collector of watches might not want to spend an extra few thousand dollars to buy a watch simply because it has a rare coin attached, in spite of its' provenance. And a collector of historical memorabilia is less apt to be interested in the rarity of a coin than the historical reference to Juan Aparicio. So to accrue the best price it benefits me to split up the set. But that goes against my grain. Even though I am narrowing my market by keeping them together, and maybe even compromising the eventual remuneration. Although it would bum me out if for the sake of historical integrity I sold the set to someone who later breaks it up and makes a profit on my moral conscience.

So I'm a bit conflicted and would appreciate further insight.
Thanks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Have you contacted Heritage? What do they recommend?

 

I strongly advise against removing the coin unless it's a very rare date. On it's own, it's just another damaged Louis d'or, but in it's current form it's an interesting antique.

 

It would be a sin to separate the two. Sell them if you must, but these are special pieces.

 

Kind of reminds me of the recent ASE Anniversary Sets where collectors sold the five coins separately. Come to think of it, isn't this the same reason a lot of vehicles are stolen? The parts are more valuable than the car? It will be a moral decision on your part. In a world where money motivates people, your right to assume someone else will eventually separate the two. History verses a possible monetary gain; your call.

 

Just got back in this evening after a very busy day and was happy to have received so many very good suggestions. Thank you. Putting them in the same auction together, wow, great. This would ease my moral conscience a bit. Both pieces might just well end up together anyway. Either way, at least all concerned parties would be apprised of the option to bid on both pieces. Thank you.

 

In this particular instance I have yet to seek Heritage's advice, although I'm in communication with them concerning a collection of Central American coins which they will auction for me probably the beginning of next year. But having heard from this forum, I will at least approach the subject better prepared. Thanks to all who have shared their insight.

 

As I mentioned, there are only two known specimens of this year (this one may be the third), and this one is in very good condition, I'd say AU58 (approx). From close examination of this 1668 Louis d'or, it's obvious it was seldom worn. But I've decided in order to preserve transparency I will send it for certification. Considering its' rarity, this assures any interested buyer of the coin's (and seller's) integrity. Thank you for your input.

 

I am so with you on this position. But it seems to me inevitable someone will eventually see greater value in breaking up the set, unless someone is motivated to purchase both at an auction which offers each individually. I see Peter's advice as being the most realistic. If the market truly sees the value in keeping the set together, they will both be purchased by the same buyer. Sage advice. Let the market speak.

 

I'm so glad Peter elucidated me. It absolutely makes sense. The market will ultimately rise to make the call. Anyone purchasing the set might well break it up. But if offered individually at the same auction, each apprising bidders of the connection between them, anyone purchasing one would want the other in order to preserve provenance and add value to the other. If that call is not made, then whoever would have purchased the set would have most probably broken it up anyway. So in my mind, I can still accrue the maximum potential remuneration while making available the option to anyone interested in preserving provenance. Brilliant. Thank you Peter. This option at least offers me some alleviation of conscience.

 

Why are they together whats the connection

 

The connection between the watch and the coin is the same as if Charlie Chaplin's Hat and Cane were offered at auction. They have value together or separately. But for many each piece maintains greater value in respect to provenance if kept together. In this case these were both worn together (watch and fob), owned by Juan Aparicio. This might not mean much to North Americans, but the people who will most connect with the provenance will be people who connect with the story. The provenance will most likely resonate more with the Spanish speaking or those of Latin American heritage.

The story is provocative. In his day Juan Aparicio was a Captain of Industry in Guatemala in the same manner as John D. Rockefeller was in the United States. He was an important figure in commerce having vast holdings and great wealth. One of his positions was as Director of the Bank of the West, a Blue-blood (his family lineage traced from the Conquistadors), he had political influence and yet in spite of his position and wealth a man for the people. He was jailed by the newly elected President when the candidate whose campaign he financed lost. His wife went to plead his case. The president promised to release him, but the Minister of Interior intercepted the message of amnesty and Juan Aparicio was shot. The reason, years earlier a servant who worked for the Aparicio family was accused of stealing flatware and jailed. When the son of this servant became Minister of Interior, he saw his opportunity for revenge. There is obviously more to the story and many more dynamics involved, but this at least touches on enough of his history to offer a glimps. But imagine his wealth. The family used 18kt gold flatware as well as sterling, and the watch is ostentatious enough, but to use a rare coin (it was rare even in his day), and use it as a watch fob.

At any rate, I've been trying to accrue insight from both watch and coin forums alike. I think I've finally figured out what I will do. The market will ultimately rise to make the call. Anyone purchasing the set might well break it up. But if offered individually at the "same auction," each apprising bidders of the connection between them, anyone purchasing one would want the other in order to preserve provenance and possibly add value to the other. If that call is not made, then whoever would have purchased the set would have most probably broken it up anyway. So in my mind, I can still accrue the maximum potential remuneration while making available the option to anyone interested in preserving provenance. I see it as a brilliant idea offered by Peter T. Davis. Thank you Peter. This option at least offers me some alleviation of conscience.

 

Thank you for thst intresting info.
My last two questions are what is a fob and how did you you come buy owning this.

 

Encyclopedia Britannica: watch fob, short ribbon or chain attached to a watch and hanging out of the pocket in which the watch is kept; the term can also refer to ornaments hung at the end of such a ribbon or chain. Until World War I and the development of the wristwatch, most watches designed for men had to be carried in the pocket. About 1772 the fashion of carrying a watch in each waistcoat fob pocket was introduced (though one watch was usually false); watch fobs consisted of chains supporting seals. By the beginning of the 19th century, the fashion for elaborate masculine jewelry had passed, and all that remained of the watch fob was usually a simple chain.

I was introduced to coin collecting when I was 8 by my grandfather who was an avid collector of watches and coins, and an attorney for the Aparicio family beginning around the 1930's. When he passed among his collection he left the watch, coin, and two books written by Edgar Juan Aparicio y Aparicio. The books are written about the lineage of notable Spanish families (among them the Aparicios), traced from the time of the Conquistadors. The titles are:
1. Conquistadores de Guatemala y Fundadores de Familias Guatemaltecas
2. Los Gutierrez Marroquin y Sus Descendientes