Fosdinovo. Luigino. Trade imitation?

[Figleaf]

Summing it up so far: not an official coin of Fosdinovo, but inspired by it. Legends suggest that the "target audience" had difficulty reading Latin characters and was Asian. Possibly used as small change in the Levant (MT thalers and Lion dollars don't make small change.) The rest is a question of weight and fineness, that make the difference between an imitation (for lack of the real thing) and a forgery (to deceive).

Peter

[ZYV]

As for me, if my coin is imitation - it is imitation of this coin.

[Figleaf]

This coin is 13.55 grams, 21 mm. Yours is 1.96 g., 20.25 mm. If that weight is correct, yours is so vastly underweight and thin no one would have accepted it for the real thing. I am surprised Fosdinovo could carry the arms of a Bourbon crown prince...

Peter

[ZYV]

1/12 ecu (with diameter 21 mm) can't have weight 13.55 g.
It is one of many examples of mistakes in this "Standard" catalog.

[andyg]

There are several similar luidgini coins to this one listed under Italian States - but I can't find one in which the legends match.  Help !

Legends read : DEUS MEUS ET OMNIA - 1666
and MEGIS VIRTVIIS IMAGO

[Figleaf]

Ascribed to Fosdinovo. One variant of a series of coins with an unclear but probably not kosher purpose. Neat double strike or overstrike.

Peter

[translateltd]

Obv legend isn't quite transcribed correctly: should be HIC (or perhaps HAEC, contracted to HEC) EST VIRTVTIS IMAGO (behold the image of virtue).

[FosseWay]

Agree with HEC, to match IMAGO (feminine).

[andyg]

thanks all.

I remember that thread Peter pointed to now

[Levantiner]

Last year I discovered the story of the 1/12 Ecu ( also known as Luigino or Timmin (various spellings))

A 17th century writer, Rycaut, referring to his observations in 1669 wrote the following:
Towards the end of last year, and at the beginning of this the Turks began to open their eyes, and find themselves defrauded with the grossest cheat that was ever imposed on a people that had either reason or humanity."

He was referring to the Luigino. As I understand the story:  French traders like everyone else had been using Dutch Lion Thalers for trade with the Levant  However the French entered into aconflict with the Dutch and their access to Lion Thalers was cut off.   Around approximately the same time either a French Sailor or trader used some 1/12 Ecu pieces in Smyrna in 1656, these coins impressed the locals, some suggest because they were one of the first milled coins seen in the Levant,  and they were valued at 8 to the ECU ( some say this was the reason for the name  Timmin; being Ottoman/Arabic for 8 ).   Obviously there was profit to be made and soon these coins were being exported in great numbers to the Levant.  Soon after a number of European powers particularly the English complained to the Ottomans about the incorrect tariff  and the Ottomans set the official exchange rate to 12 to the ECU.    French and possibly Dutch traders  responded by finding small European principalities who would produce debased versions of the coin.  Now as can be seen from the quote above the European view was that this was a fraud. However I found a modern Turkish economic Historian who gives another side of the story.   The Ottomans in the time leading up to the introduction of the Luigino had so debased the akçe  that by the 1640s it had disappeared from circulation. This saw the removal of an important small change denomination, the Luigino was the coin that ended up filling the gap.   

I had never heard this story before and found it quite fascinating: I added some examples to my collection. Interestingly it was the Dombes version  that became the model for nearly all the Luigino produced for Levantine trade:  Heres my one Dombes variety:

Opps I just saw my post answers someone else's post, perhaps a kind moderator could move this post to that thread:   
http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,16489.15.html

[Figleaf]

Your information adds important detail. For instance, it explains why the Bourbon arms were used: since the fraudulent coins were imitating official French coins, the arms were important. They would improve acceptance. The story also explains the funny legends. By using a nonsense legend, the fraudsters would have a defence against forgery. No one (who could read latin characters) would take this for an official coin.

Peter

[Levantiner]

I understand that some luigino  bore Arabic as well as Latin script ( although I have never seen one). Apparently such coins one could often find that the Arabic script indicated the coin had a higher value than the Latin script more accurately indicated ( seems that to prevent problems in mainland Europe with the debased coins some producers indicated the proper value on the coins).    Although the European view point was that the whole affair was a cheat, the Ottoman view point it looks slightly different. First there was the lack of small change  then there was a clear customer preference for the coin ( it is highly likely Ottoman bankers and money changers were well aware of the real value of the debased coins).   Interestingly the Dombes type was preferred because of the female head on the obverse. It was not men who drove this preference but women.   Women in the lower socioeconomic strata wanted the small coins so as to decorate their head-dresses( in imitation of the aristocrats who most often used ducats and their equivalent for the same purpose).   The coat of arms on the reverse was also regarded as a good luck charm. The coin became so popular that Ottoman troops insisted on being paid with it.   This apparently was one of the reasons that it took over ten years for the Ottoman officials to actually jump on the problem. While they were involved in Armed conflict the Ottomans used the Luigini to pay their troops.  Once the campaign(s) ended ( around 1667) then the govt turned its attention to the monetary situation.    The English in particular had been suffering " at the hands" of this little coin ( the English Levant company banned its traders from using the Luigino) and had pushed  hard to have it properly controlled. Around 1666-1667 ( dates approximate)  other European powers started complaining, particularly as the  debased coins started to return to Europe in large numbers.

Earlier in this thread some noted that the weight of the coin pictured  at the start was too light.   The debasement started in the late 1650s and continued to get worse every year. By the late 1660s some Luiguini were silver washed copper.  Krause obviously has just listed the proper/official weight for the coin I don't know of any one who has actually done a proper survey of the weights for this unique series of coins.

For any one interested the main source for the information I have paraphrased rather inadequately is :

"The Levantine Coinage"  by F. W. Hasluck  in  Numismatic Chronicle, fifth series 1 ( 1921)  pages 39 - 99.   

Once I knew it existed, it took me a long time to find an actual copy of that article. It is a very interesting read. If any one wants a copy it is easiest to obtain it through SUBITO   it cost me about €8.00 for photocopying and postage.

BTW I haven't checked. but I might have posted the wrong photo ie: may not be Dombes

[Figleaf]

BTW I haven't checked. but I might have posted the wrong photo ie: may not be Dombes

The difference between the reverses of the royal coins and the Dombes coins is the small heraldic device between the two upper flour-de-lis. On the coin you posted, that area is worn (coincidence? Maybe not.)

The English complaints are fun. The Luiginis started out, as you wrote, as economic warfare against the position of the Dutch Leeuwendaalder in the Levant. By 1672, France and Britain were allies in a war against the Republic. This war was religion-based: the republic was protestant, France, Bavaria and Cologne were all catholic. Britain had a catholic king, but its merchants were at best high church. That puts the English merchants' complaints in perspective, doesn't it?

The war of 1672 set the scene for the glorious revolution: it put William III in a ruling position and gave him enough credit to finance a fleet, it undermined the position of James II and it took a big bite out of the financial position of Louis XIV. Wonderful to find out how these little coins played their own modest role in these great events.

Peter

[Levantiner]

Today I just received a catalog for the Luigino:  "Corpus Luiginorum"   by Maurice Cammarano, Bibliotheque de France Paris 1998:  From  the index the following mints are associated with the coin :   

Arquata, Avignon, Campi, Dombes Fosdinovo Genes, Incertains, Livourno, Loana, Lucca. Malta, Mantova, Massa, Messerano, Modena, MOnaco, Neuchatel, Orange, Ponzanello Ronco, Seborga, Tassarolo, Torriglia, Vergagni Zwolle.   


For the first coin in this thread the known weight range is 1.88-2.23 grams and it is listed as common. The second coin which had the questions about it is listed as a rare sub-variety but should be dated 1666.

[Figleaf]

I would be very interested to know how to recognise those made in Zwolle and Orange...

Peter