Półtorak / 3 Polker - Zygmunt III Waza

[cam]

Hey,

Please, correct me if I am wrong. I think that it is Półtorak / 3 Polker of Zygmunt III Waza, 1614-1627. Could you please help with a particular year and mint?

Weight: 1,2 g
Diameter: 19,5 mm

Thanks a lot in advance!

[FosseWay]

1622?

I think I see 2 2 either side of the orb.

[cam]

1622?

I think I see 2 2 either side of the orb.

Then it could be this coin: Pó?torak / 3 Polker - Zygmunt III Waza (Bydgoszcz mint) - Polish?Lithuanian

[Figleaf]

Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, KM41, 3 polker/poltorak (16)22, Krakow/Cracow mint. Date as indicated by FosseWay. The mintmark is on the side with the orb at 6 o'clock. Mint master in 1622 would have been Nikolaus Danillowicz, who did not use a mint master mark. However, if I have overlooked a W, TKA or TA mark on the coin, the name of the mint master changes.

Peter

[cam]

Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth, KM41, 3 polker/poltorak (16)22, Krakow/Cracow mint. Date as indicated by FosseWay. The mintmark is on the side with the orb at 6 o'clock. Mint master in 1622 would have been Nikolaus Danillowicz, who did not use a mint master mark. However, if I have overlooked a W, TKA or TA mark on the coin, the name of the mint master changes.

Are you sure about Krakow mint? They used to have an eagle. The coat of arms could be the Bydgoszcz mint.

[Figleaf]

Yes, I am sure. See attachments.

Peter

[cam]

Yes, I am sure. See attachments.

Thanks a lot for your investigation!

But Pó?torak / 3 Polker - Zygmunt III Waza (Kraków mint) - Polish?Lithuanian does not have any digitals over the orb (reverse).

This coin (Pó?torak / 3 Polker - Zygmunt III Waza (Bydgoszcz mint) - Polish?Lithuanian) has 4 on the right. So it could be either 14 or 24. It cannot be 14 since only Krakow mints suits but it had an eagle not a coat of arms.

BTW, where do you see mintmarks and what does it mean "Date as indicated by FosseWay"?

[Figleaf]

1622?

I think I see 2 2 either side of the orb.

This means the date is necessarily (16)22. The mintmark is on the side with the orb at 6 o'clock. Have you perhaps mixed up this coin with the other 3 polker you posted?

Peter

[cam]

This means the date is necessarily (16)22. The mintmark is on the side with the orb at 6 o'clock. Have you perhaps mixed up this coin with the other 3 polker you posted?

Sorry, not 4 but 2.

The date is for sure (16)22. In this case, mint could be only Bydgoszcz  (Pó?torak / 3 Polker - Zygmunt III Waza (Bydgoszcz mint) - Polish?Lithuanian). I see the mintmark of Krakow on coins, but if you'll check them on Numista, they all are from Bydgoszcz mint. Krakow is only until 1618 year or without the date.

BTW, I've 3 coins: 1622 (this coin), 1624 (http://www.worldofcoins.eu/forum/index.php/topic,45802.msg287064.html) and 1626. All of them are Bydgoszcz. Would it be correct to think, that it is basically different years of the same coin? I'll keep one of them and swap all the rest.

[Figleaf]

OK, you have me confused. Why is a coin with the Krakow mint mark not from Krakow?

Peter

[cam]

> OK, you have me confused. Why is a coin with the Krakow mint mark not from Krakow?

Good question. Maybe mintmark is wrong, maybe Numista is worong. Please, have a look at Numista. If Półtorak 1622 has a date on the reverse, it is Bydgoszcz mint regardless of the mintmark.

[Figleaf]

I think the mintmark decides where the coin is minted, until otherwise proven. I have no evidence to present outside of what I gave you above, noting that Krakow has mint officials at least until the end of the century. I know nothing about the evidence numista has.

Peter

[cam]

I think the mintmark decides where the coin is minted, until otherwise proven. I have no evidence to present outside of what I gave you above, noting that Krakow has mint officials at least until the end of the century. I know nothing about the evidence numista has.

Thanks! I'll try to investigate this issue deeper.

[cam]

I think the mintmark decides where the coin is minted, until otherwise proven. I have no evidence to present outside of what I gave you above, noting that Krakow has mint officials at least until the end of the century. I know nothing about the evidence numista has.

I think you are right about Krakow mint. Numista is rather messy with these coins. Krause is not very descriptive either but mintmark is a mintmark.

[cam]

I think the mintmark decides where the coin is minted, until otherwise proven. I have no evidence to present outside of what I gave you above, noting that Krakow has mint officials at least until the end of the century. I know nothing about the evidence numista has.

Well, I've got some new info.

1. Półtoraks were minted in Kraków only until 1619.

2. Sign that Krause marked as a privy mark was the Sas coat of arms of Daniłowicz family. Daniłowicz, in his turn, was a Podskarbi koronny. The treasury was managed by Podskarbi of the King, called Podskarbi koronny (Treasurer of the Crown). Since both mints Krakow and Bydgoszcz were royal mints, they both had Podskarbi koronny's coat of arms.

Sas coat of arms - Wikipedia
Podskarbi - Wikipedia