Henri III double tournois under the Catholic League

[FosseWay]

This double tournois (dateless) is defying attempts to attribute it 

On the obverse, there is a U, or a horseshoe, below the king's bust. The end of the legend is worn but there is evidently a letter after POL. I think it looks like an X, which should mean Amiens, but I can't find mention of the horseshoe in connection with Amiens (or anywhere else).

On the reverse, there is no date (in itself a common enough feature) but also no mintmark/différent between TOVRNOIS and the cross at the top. However, there is something that looks like a letter Ö (with dots) between DOVBLE and TOVRNOIS, but inverted in relation to those words. This character appears on various illustrated examples I've found, but always on the obverse, after POL, where the X or whatever it is appears on my coin.

[Figleaf]

Be grateful for the horseshoe (Duplessy seems to take it for a moon.) The other distinguishing information is off flan. This is a very interesting catch.

Double tournois ND (1590 to around 1595), Poitiers. Posthumous issue (Henry III died in 1589) struck by the catholic league during the religious civil war after the end of the Valois dynasty that eventually brought Henry IV on the French throne. See scan for more information.

That said, the significance of the Ö between DOVBLE and TOVRNOIS remains unclear. You are right to expect the mint mark below the bust. Poitier's regular mark is a G.

Peter

[FosseWay]

Thanks for that, Peter.

I will try some more searching, now that I know I should be searching for croissant rather than fer à cheval 

The obverse seems fairly clearly a Ligue issue from your description. Do you agree with my reading of an X after POL and therefore attribution to Amiens? Or is the X "fossilised" and meaningless, with the crescent mark for Poitiers overriding any other?

But the reverse is confused. It's not just the Ö, but also the fact that the legend consists only of the words DOVBLE TOVRNOIS plus the Ö and cross. There is no différent remplaçant le millésime as the catalogue suggests.

[Figleaf]

Them was interesting times. Normally, mints would get detailed instructions on where to put what, eventually up to the point of getting matrixes from Paris, to be completed only with the date and local marks. The religious civil war created different circumstances. The Paris model is not a surefire guide to the Poitiers model.

Not that it is important, but I remain unconvinced of Duplessy's interpretation of the sign as a croissant. They have pointy ends. I prefer horseshoe.

I haven't found any pic of this type on the net. We could ask our distinguished colleagues at numismatique.com if you agree?

Peter

[FosseWay]

Ha, I think I've found it, searching on croissant for the mintmark:



(Image from cgb.fr)

From this, it would seem my coin is issued by the Ligue catholique at Bourges (mm Y, only the top half of which is visible on my coin, hence the confusion with X) and with the crescent below the bust. The Ö character (still unexplained) is also just about visible on the reverse of the CGB example, which also lacks the mintmark in place of the date mentioned earlier.

[FosseWay]

Please do go ahead and ask for expert opinion from numismatique.fr 

[Figleaf]

The Ö character (still unexplained) is also just about visible on the reverse of the CGB example, which also lacks the mintmark in place of the date mentioned earlier.

The dates would be missing on all posthumous issues. Taking into account that the Ö is between DOVBLE and TOVRNOIS on your coin, I think it is off-flan on the CGB coin.

Peter

[FosseWay]

It's just about visible on the GCB coin - you can see the two dots before the T of TOVRNOIS. I meant that I haven't seen any explanation of what the Ö means - it doesn't appear to signify a mint location (that function is served by the Y in this case), under whose authority it was struck (the crescent/horseshoe does this), or when (most doubles tournois have a date, including some that also have the Ö, while you also get dateless ones without the Ö).

[Figleaf]

Guillaume Hermann is intrigued and he came up with several more specimen. They put to rest my main concern: the apparent gap in engraving quality between FosseWay's coin and CGB's coin. Looking at the other specimen Guillaume found, that gap is more due to lighting and wear than to reality

He has identified the horseshoe as the mark of engraver Pierre Augier (1577-1588). He presumes that the Ö is a variant of the O between four dots of director of the Bourges mint Alexandre Bedeau (1579-1581). I would suggest that it actually is an O between four dots, but one pair of dots is off-flan.

I think this solidly identifies the coin as an undated product of the Bourges mint. My remaining question is why Duplessy thinks it is Poitiers.

Peter

[FosseWay]

Merci, Guillaume

Good to have a definitive attribution.

I wonder whether Duplessy's reference to Poitiers is for the specific coin illustrated in the catalogue, i.e. with the crown or flame. He may even possibly be implying that coins with the Paris mintmark (A, as illustrated) in combination with the crescent/horseshoe are minted not at Paris but at Poitiers, which otherwise should be G. Duplessy is in other words not suggesting that all coins with the crescent are minted at Poitiers; instead he implies through silence that the crescent can be found alongside other mints' letters.

But that interpretation may be entirely wrong - I agree that it's very unclear, at best.

[Guillaume Hermann]

De rien ;-) I am happy if I can help.
With all the respect due to Duplessy, his book is neither the most recent, neither the most specialized in doubles tournois. Looking into the CGKL would perhaps be interesting, but I do not have it https://www.cgb.fr/les-doubles-et-deniers-tournois-en-cuivre-royaux-et-feodaux-1577-1684-cgkl-crepin-gerard,ld022,a.html

[Figleaf]

Another posthumous one from the catholic league, Paris mint. As noted by Duplessy with a crown between TOURNOIS and the + sign, replacing the date.

If you are interested in this period, try finding a copy of Conspiracy by S. J. Parris, ISBN 978 0 00 748124 8. It's fiction but well researched. Her written portraits of Henri III, De Guise and Catherine de Medici and life in Paris in the aftermath of the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre are fascinating.

Peter