Silver riders (ducatons)

Started by thelawnet, November 21, 2010, 05:26:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

thelawnet

These were minted/prepared in Holland, West Friesland, Zeeland in 1726. However they were not approved by the States-General and were all melted down.

The original coins read 'LUCTOR ET EMERGO' (I strive and rise) and 'MON NOV ORD ZEL IN USUM SOCIET INDIA ORIENTA' (in full - Moneta nova ordinum zelandiae in usum societatis indiae orientalis - New money of the order of Zeeland for use of the East India Company')

Approval was acquired subsequently in 1728.

Types:

Holland:

Obverse inscription reads MON: FOED: BELG: PRO: HOLL: IN USUM SOCIET: IND: ORIENT in other words Moneta foederatarum belgii provinciarum hollandiae in usum societatis indiae orientalis- Coin of the province of Holland in the United Netherlands for use of the East India Company
Reverse inscription reads: CONCORDIA. RES. PERVAE. CRESCUNT. (DATE). (From Sallust, Roman historian - In harmony small things grow)

Obverse design: 'Rider', shield of the province below
Reverse design: Arms of the United Netherlands, below the VOC monogram in a scroll.

Edge: plain

Weight: 32.779 grams, .941 silver
Holland:
KM71: 1728, 1729 (rare), 1730/1729, 1730, 1731 (rare), 1732, 1733, 1738, 1739, 1740, 1741 (rare)
KM71a Proofs in gold: 1728 (40.20 and 37.80 grams), 1732 (34.80g - 3 exist), 1733 (41.30g - unique)

Mintages given in Scholten: 1728-30 604,420; 1730-31 260,175; 1731-33 162,500; 1733-34 28,385; 1738: 19,190 1738-40: 384,930
Scholten lists 1733 as plain or milled edge.
Scholten and Bucknill list 1739 plain-edged 43mm diamater (or obliquely milled edge, finer workmanship, 44mm diameter.
Scholten lists two variants of the 1739 plain-edged coin - either the usual obverse inscription orientation such that IN U appears below the shield, or a rotated version such that L: IN is below the shield), ditto for the 1740 coin

Here is the 1728 gold proof, sold May 29, 2008 for $126,500 (inclusive of premium) in an NGC Proof-63 slab, against a $30-35,000 estimate. Bucknill notes that at least two examples exist having sold in Amsterdam in 1905 and 1922 respectively.




1739:


Sold June 4 2002 in UNC, estimate was $1500+

1739 milled type:


Sold June 4 2002 in XF, weak strike, estimate was $1250+

1739 29.6 grams (significantly underweight!), VF. Presumably fake?
 20 October 2010, Stacks, $425



The 1739 is known for forgeries, not just of the Holland ducaton but other companies too.

The normal Holland ducaton (1734-1756 type), for comparison



Fake (30.5g, too thick, copper):



Fake (weight varies, 28-30.5g)


thelawnet

#1
Zeeland, KM151
Obverse inscription reads MON. FOED. BELG. PRO. ZEEL. IN. USUM. SOCIET. IND. ORIENT.* (Scholten claims five-pointed star on 1728 and 1737, subsequently six-pointed, Bucknill implies the 1728 and 1737 had no star at all)
Reverse inscription reads: CONCORDIA. RES. PERVAE. CRESCUNT. (DATE).

Plain edge.

1728, 101,520
1737
1738 and 1738/7
1739 Bucknill notes that 1739 is of finer workmanship than 1728, 1737 (He does not list 1738)
Scholten lists two variants for the 1739, with variation in spacing of the inscriptions

1740  Some have milled edge. CRESCUNT or CRSUNT
1741 three text variants - uniform spacing, CON CORDIA CRESC UNT, or CRESCU NT, plus milled variant
Bucknill notes straight and curved sword variants

1739 Selling December 2010 in London, aVF est. £180-220. Sold December 2009 same auctioneers for £450



1741: Listed as type two, i.e. CON CORDIA CRESC UNT in recent auctions


Sold $2700 'Millennia Collection' graded NGC AU-55. Previously sold in 2002.

This is the 'straight sword' type.

The desgination as Scholten 39b CON CORDIA CRESC UNT seems dubious - compare with:



plate from Bucknill, the CRESC UNT in the example above is in fact CRESCUNT

andyg

Quote from: thelawnet on November 21, 2010, 06:00:34 PM

1739 Selling December 2010 in London, aVF est. £180-220



That one looks very much like the date has been 'restored' :-X
always willing to trade modern UK coins for modern coins from elsewhere....

thelawnet

Here is the 1728 Holland ducaton on a piece of Chinese porcelain.
From the Victoria and Albert museum

This tea set was probably made to celebrate the minting of the coin, or to commemorate the opening of a direct trade from the Netherlands to
Canton, and not via Batavia, in 1728-29. The first ship to sail direct to Canton in 1728 had on board large quantities of silver coins, possibly the
newly minted ones. The ship left Canton in 1730 with a cargo of tea and porcelain, probably including the tea services decorated with the
ducatoon design. The five months between sailings would have given enough time to the enamellers at Canton to copy the design from the
coins on undecorated pieces from Jingdezhen.

There are several possible explanations as to why the coin design appears on what is clearly a contemporary piece – or pieces - of Chinese
porcelain. All the known pieces form part of tea services – teacups and saucers, teapots, teapot stand, and plates – and it seems probable that
these tea sets were made to celebrate the minting of the coin, and/or to celebrate another occurrence in 1728-1729, that of the Company
trading direct from the Netherlands to Canton, and not via Batavia. This was to last until 1734. The first ship to sail direct to Canton was the
'Coxhoorn', which set sail on 3 December, 1728, and arrived in Canton on 4th August, 1729 (see C.J.A. Jörg: Interaction in Ceramics,
Oriental Porcelain and Delft Ware, p.86). On board were 3 tons of silver specie (Wood ward op cit p.99). This could well have been the newly
minted ducatoons. The ship left Canton on 7th January, 1730, with a cargo of tea and 137 cases of porcelain (D.F. Lunsingh Scheurleer:
Chinese Export Porcelain, p.61). Again, the porcelain could well have consisted of the tea services decorated with the ducatoon design. The
five months between sailings would have been time enough for the enamellers at Canton to have copied the design from the coins on
undecorated pieces from Jingdezhen, and the fact that all the known pieces are from tea services, sets of which were in great demand in
Europe by this time and the shapes most likely readily available at Canton, increases the likelihood that these pieces were ordered, decorated
and shipped within this short period of time.
In spite of Jörg thesis that wholesale porcelain decorating did not take place in Canton until about 1745-1750 (see: Jörg 1982: pp. 126-128), it
can be argued that under certain circumstances, facilities for decorating porcelain would have been available much earlier than this.
Enamelling on metal was already well established in Cantons, and such a process is not far removed from enamelling on porcelain. Secondly,
as alluded to above, certain commonly available shapes (such as teacups and saucers), would not need special ordering from Jingdezhen.
Thus in all probability, the 'ducatoon' pieces did return on the Coxhoorn's first voyage in 1730. Like the porcelain wares with political and
social decoration, the subject matter would have had only a limited life of topical interest. Speed would have surely been a necessity.

thelawnet

#4
Another example of the plate:

This sold at Sotheby's New York, 2003 for $28,800 inc BP

According to David Howard and John Ayers, China for the West, Vol. I, p. 194, no. 191, who illustrate a plate in this pattern, "this design follows in almost every respect as silver ducatoon of 1728, with the rim of the plate imitating the ribbed milling of the coin."

The full set would have included plates, cups, saucers and teapot.

thelawnet

#5
Utrecht:
Inscriptions as Holland, except TRAI appears in place of HOLL. TRAI short for Traiectum, or Utrecht.
KM 110.1
1738 - mentioned in the Muntboek of Verkade (1848) and subsequently in Dee munten van Nederlandsch Indie of Netscher and van der Chijs. Said in Scholten to be an error.
1739 - unique, owned by Jules Fonrobert of Berlin, sold in 1878
1740 - Plain and obliquely milled (KM110.2) edge variants
Sold September 2008 inc. BP $1100, VF, plain-edged




Also 1740 gold proof, unique (KM110.2a)

Overyssel:
KM 95.1
Mint mark the crane of the mintmaster CH Cramer, located to the left of the knight's arm. Minted in Kampen
Inscriptions as Holland, except TRANSI appears in place of HOLL. TRANSI short for Transisulania, or Overyssel
Total mintage 79,895
1737
1738, plain and obliquely milled (KM 95.2) edge variant

Gelderland:
Mintmark - prancing horse of J. Hensbergen
Obverse inscription reads MON: FOE: BELG: PRO: D: GEL & C Z IN USUM: SOCIET: IND: ORIENT in other words Moneta foederatarum belgii provinciarum ducatus gelriae & comitatus zutphaniae in usum societatis indiae orientalis- i.e. 'Coin of the United Netherlands, province of the Duchy of Gelderland and County of Zutphen, for use of the East India Company'
Total mintage 91,860
KM51
1738 FOE and FOED variants
1739 FOED
1740 FOED and FOE variants; the FOED variant has PARVAE: instead of PARVAE

1739 FAKE:



thelawnet

#6
The last is the West Friesland ducatons:

Inscription as Holland but with 'WESTF' in place of 'HOLL'

Horseman facing left (cf. other provinces):
With mintmark turnip of Knol - Km130.1 (plain edge) and Km130.2 (milled edge)
1728, also unique gold proof (Km130.1a). Two variants with normal and small lettering on reverse.
1737 rare, poorer quality
1738 date without dots before and after; plain and obliquely milled edge variants
1739 plain and milled variants
1740/1739 plain and milled variants
1740 with and without . after 1740
1741 plain and milled (unique?) variants. Square pattern exists
Mintmark cock of Kist:
1741 - rare -

Horseman facing right: KM133
1742
1748 rare
1749 rare
1750 plain and milled variants
1751 rare or unique, CRESCUNT appears as CRESCVNT

Sold 2009 $1840 inc BP, NGC XF-40


Didn't sell April 2010, in an NGC MS63 tombstone:



Two similar 1738, two Schulman auctions 2007, plain edge
ZF, €825++, and aVF €720


1740:
(attached)
VF, sold €700++ Schulman November 2009

Fake 1739:



(description at http://lakdiva.org/coins/ibscc/1978_2_51_1739_voc_rider.html)

Figleaf

Fine research, thelawnet. The piece on the porcelain is highly entertaining. Porcelain was used as ballast for return voyages on VOC ships, so conceivably, the porcelain could have been ordered by some Dutch official a long time before it was made.

VOC silver is hard to collect. Conversion rates were set so that minting copper was profitable for the company, but minting silver was a losing proposition. The company therefore preferred to export existing silver coins, mainly Dutch, Spanish and Spanish colonial, while minting of VOC silver coins was kept to a minimum.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

jc