Fosdinovo. Luigino. Trade imitation?

[Levantiner]

Well, I am not exactly in the "uncirculated only" camp Frankly, I hadn't even noticed the hole. What harm does it do to know this coin once jangled on ladies' clothes? It just says the coin was appreciated and adds to its history.

Peter

The fact that it was holed added to its appeal for me, for the very reason you highlight.  The usual saying goes "buy the book before the coin"......I have developed a different philosophy I buy the story rather than the coin!  IMHO its the story that actually reflects a coins true value( not necessarily monetary).

[Levantiner]

Nice speculation, but not so. Here is the verdict of a well known Dutch numismatist:

Half schelling Zwolle, imitating a half ecu or douzain in the name of Louis XIV. Occurs with dates 1662 and 1664. Responsible mint master was Arend van Romondt. Die sinker must have been Claes Hanssen.

This piece, known as Purmer Zw67 en VdW237, 238, was of course not meant for circulation in the Republic, but was probably destined for Mediterranean trade. The type is not mentioned in the report on the trial of the pyx, but this makes sense, because an imitation of a foreign coin was outside the jurisdiction of the federal government. The coin should be silver, with a weight of 2.26 grams and a diameter of 20 mm. If not, please let me know.

Literatuur:
D. Purmer, Handboek van de Nederlandse provinciale muntslag 1568-1795 II: Gelderland, Friesland, Overijssel, Groningen, Amsterdam, 2009
H. van der Wiel, De stedelijke muntslag van Zwolle, Vriezenveen 1994.

If I understand the above correctly, the Zwolle mint master could produce imitations of foreign coins at will and without supervision. Confusing.

Peter

This post had me thinking hard about the reference (D.Purmer)   I saw one( 2 volumes) for sale on Abe books. It arrived today although its in Dutch its a brilliant reference.  It wasn't cheap @ €95.00 plus postage.  What has me intrigued is it seem to be the only reference, that I have read, that notes there are two dates for the striking of Zwolle Luigino or rather  Half Schelling( am I right in assuming that schelling is schilling?).   All the other references I have seen just mention/record the 1662 strike  So I anticipate that the 1664 strike is extremely rare.  I really like the reference And from my perusal so far I would say no one interested in European coins would find it disappointing. Is H.van der Wiels book equally worthwhile,or does one need to be fluent in Dutch?. BTW might this thread be better placed under France( I'm probably just nit picking?)

[Figleaf]

Sorry I didn't know you were in the market for these books. Both v.d. Wiel and Purmer are offered on this page. Scroll down to MODERN WORLD COINS - BENELUX. Books are arranged by author's last name. Alternatively, do a text search for Zwolle on the page.

I don't have either book, so can't tell you. If memory serves, if you have Purmer, you don't need Van der Wiel. It is best to give him a quick call at +31 546 561 322 or write an email at this address: info@mevius.nl. Johan is a really nice and reliable seller. You can pay him without fees by a EUR transfer with BIC and IBAN.

Peter

[Levantiner]

Time for an update on this old thread. Particularly on the Zwolle mint strike.  I have learnt a lot since this thread was started.   Zwolle is recorded as having struck the coin in 1662  and 1664  yet as far as I know know one has ever seen an example dated 1664. I was at the ANA summer seminar and  was discussing the coin and mentioned  the fact that  there seemed to be no documentation of any one finding a 1664 dated Zwolle mint Luigino.   Some  then suggested that perhaps the Zwolle mint just reused the 1662 dies,  its an interesting speculation.

[Figleaf]

Re-use, perhaps, but my favourite scenario is not "hey, we have this ole die lying around, let's use it again and save some money". Dies were still unhardened and hammering took a quick toll on them. My alternative is that the Ottomans had approved at least some of these coins, maybe with pictures in the decree, and the Zwolle coin was one of them. To avoid a lengthy and frustrating process of approval of the same coin with a different date, the Zwolle mint simply used the same date again (and made new dies as required).

Peter

[Levantiner]

Could possibly be but   using other Luigino as anecdotes the rarest  varieties are often the ones that were the least acceptable in the Levant.  The Avignon strikes are documented as being disliked( particularly an example with a crucifix on it)  and they are rare generally rated R1-to R5.   The Zwolle mint coin is a rare beastie so  we could surmise that it wasn't  a successful design as far as the  Levantine Customers were concerned.   

Actually some one might be able to advise me on the rarity scale.....in the main reference (French language) R1-R5 and C are given as ratings but there is no Key/Legend provided in the book to indicate what R1 ( and so forth) means. I am guessing  a five point scale was used(I am much more familiar with  7 point rarity scale) would a 5 point scale be  the "norm" in French numismatics? tthe highest rarity rating found in the reference is R 5

[Figleaf]

The traditional rarity scale is C(ommon), S(carce), R(are), RR, RRR and RRRR, but there never was any agreement on what that means.

Peter

[Levantiner]

How sure are you that the Zwolle mint produced the Luigino by hammering?  I ask because it is often reported that one of the reasons the Luigino was so successful in the Levant was that it was  one of the first, if not the first,  milled coins seen in the Levant. I have an example  of the Zwolle mint strike and it certainly, as worn as it is, looks like it is a milled coin

[Figleaf]

While there is no documentary evidence that the coins were minted in Zwolle, the use of similar dies in another mint would have been a major scandal (as were the Dutch ducats minted in Poland). In general, Dutch mints were slow to mechanise - regular coins show evidence of mechanisation only a century later) and the second rate mints, like Zwolle, were even slower. They were continually in danger of being closed down, so an investment in unproven, newfangled machines the minters hated would have been unlikely to the point of impossible.

That did not prevent 17th century Dutch mints from producing regular weight coins for exports for centuries. Coins for exports were produced purely for seigniorage and if the seigniorage require quality, it could be done, but the less the better, of course.

Peter

[Levantiner]

There is documentary evidence!!! I refer you to Purmer   'Handboek van de Nederlandse Provinciale Muntslag  1568 -1795 Deel II  page 319  catalog entry Zw 67!! 

States
" Imitatie van de 1/12 ecu of douzain van Lodewijk XIV. Deze munt was neit bestemd voor de binnenlandse circulatie,maar bedoeld voor de handel in het gebied rond de Middellandsee. Als zodanig is de gebruikelijke benamining "halve schelling" merkwaardig"

My understanding, from other references, is that the Zwolle mint records are clear on the production of this coin, the only thing is it was not reported in the official coin tables... but its striking as a private issue was recorded!

[Pellinore]

There is documentary evidence!!! I refer you to Purmer   'Handboek van de Nederlandse Provinciale Muntslag  1568 -1795 Deel II  page 319  catalog entry Zw 67!! 

States
" Imitatie van de 1/12 ecu of douzain van Lodewijk XIV. Deze munt was neit bestemd voor de binnenlandse circulatie,maar bedoeld voor de handel in het gebied rond de Middellandsee. Als zodanig is de gebruikelijke benamining "halve schelling" merkwaardig"

Just a little help with the translation from Dutch in the above remarks:

Handbook of the Dutch Provincial Coinage 1568 -1795 Vol. II p. 319 page catalog entry Zw[olle] 67:

'Imitation of 1/12 écu or douzain of Louis XIV. This coin was not intended for domestic circulation, but for trade in the area around the Mediterranean. As such, the usual name "half schelling" is remarkable'

(an écu is translated as 'crown', but the word means 'shield')
(douzain = 12)
(a schelling is a medium Dutch silver coin of 6 stuivers)

[Pellinore]

It's nice to discover a very informative thread here on a coin I just acquired (picture follows later). I'm interested in coins from the county of Orange in France because of its portraits of Dutch Stadtholders (who weren't portrayed on Dutch coins, the Netherlands being a Republic). The background story I had found is this amazingly extensive Italian Wikipedia article (read it with Google Translate; mind you, the word 'zecca' can have the meaning 'tick', but it also a 'mint').

These little silver coins are called 'petit louis' in French. I found it interesting that in general, either portraits of women were used on the coins, or portraits of young children with long hair, like Louis XIV (who ascended the throne when he was six), Giovanni Andrea Doria III of Loana (born 1653) or William III of Orange (who was 10 in 1660).

-- Paul

[Pellinore]

This is my luigino, or petit louis, I hope more will follow. It's a neat little silver coin, well made, measuring 20,5 mm and weighing 2,14 gr.
The portrait shows William Henry, Prince of Orange (1650-1702), here 11 years old.
-- Paul

[Pellinore]

Well, here it is, my second luigino, or petit louis, 1/12 écu. Measures 20,5 mm like the one of Orange, but it's severely underweight with only 1,67 gr.

It was coined in the name of Livia Centurioni Oltremarini (1616-1688), the wife of Filippo Spinola, count of Tassarolo. The escutcheon (shield) shows the usual three lilies, but with the lambel (armorial label) that means the coin was not issued in the name of the count but someone of lesser stature, his wife. And that was because the Levant wanted a long-haired woman portrait, not that of an adult man. By the way, I believe it's in fact the portrait of Marguerite, Duchess of Orléans (1615-1672).

-- Paul

[Figleaf]

This series throws light on trade with the Ottoman empire, but also throws up new questions. I would like to know how pretty unimportant mints got their coins into the Ottoman empire. In the case of Zwolle, I presume they went by Kampen and Amsterdam, a safe and established route. However, how did coins from Orange reach a (presumably Mediterranean) sea port? Shipping them out of Fosdinovo would have been quite risky, but the safe solution of taking them to Brindisi would have been costly.

Peter