| Author |
 Replies: 7,432 / Views: 398,950 |
|
|
|
Moderator
  United States
190060 Posts |
Quote:
Moving along again, my coin for 1389 is a Timurid AR "miri" or dirham, minted in the name of the the Chaghatai Khan Mahmud, a nominal (but powerless) overlord of Tamerland and Tamerlane himself. Apparently a nice example of a coin of one of the cruelest and infamous rulers of all times! Outstanding!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2569 Posts |
I am looking forward to seeing @tdziemia's 1388 contribution, and then finally seeing @j1m's 1387!  Failing the appearance of JohnConduitt, I have an 'iron in the fire' for 1386, (fingers crossed in an upcoming auction, some 9 days from now). Should that eventuate, perhaps we could get out early invitations to EddieDiz and Collects82? After that, I have a 1381 and 1380 As much as everyone is hanging out for the 7th edition to catch the 6th, I personally would like to wring out the very last drop from our current collections and acquisitions before that happens. It will be a while before we get back to this point again, and as we have seen in the early years, some posters are not reachable, so it may not be possible to venture this far again. Onwards!  The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
Edited by ttkoo
05/21/2024 10:10 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Quote:
I am looking forward to seeing @tdziemia's 1388 contribution, and then finally seeing @j1m's 1387!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2569 Posts |
The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Someone needs to drop a hint somewhere. I have an idea...  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5180 Posts |
Quote:
As much as everyone is hanging out for the 7th edition to catch the 6th, I personally would like to wring out the very last drop from our current collections and acquisitions before that happens. It will be a while before we get back to this point again, and as we have seen in the early years, some posters are not reachable, so it may not be possible to venture this far again. Possibly relevant correction/clarification: when the 7th edition catches up to the 6th, it will be the 7th edition that would then progress further through the (1380s and) 1370s and 1360s (and so on), so technically we would still have a continuous(ish) chain, just in the 7th edition rather than the 6th (while the 8th edition would start from 2024 and go back from there). I do want to see how far we can take this in those last few weeks, though! (And by the time the 8th edition gets to the 15th century I expect there'd be a lot more Islamic dates showing up.) |
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
I agree, J1M.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2569 Posts |
@j1m
Yes, of course, I take your point. I was a little unclear on how it all works. Thank you.
The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Do not fear, you will be a pro by the time the Eighth starts up!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
7968 Posts |
This undated 2 mite coin of the County of Flanders struck in the name of Philip "le Hardi" is claimed as (1388) by the seller, Heritage Auctions Europe, which is usually pretty solid on attributions of Low Countries coins. The old, classic reference on Flanders, de Pas, is not clear that this was a single year emission, but maybe there is some more recent scholarship on this (or maybe my French was not good enough ... the section in de Pas on this ruler is very confusing) :  I think my next dates are 1384 and 1382. Edited by tdziemia
05/23/2024 7:47 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2569 Posts |
Quote:
This undated 2 mite coin of the County of Flanders struck in the name of Philip "le Hardi" is claimed as (1388) by the seller, It's a lovely coin @tdziemia. Amazing history from the 14th century. I am looking at possibly acquiring a Belgium mite of Philip the Bold which the seller cites as 1386, referencing de Pas Supp. 8, 2 and Vanhoudt G2626. Not having either of these reference works I don't know how much faith to give to this date. Still it is a very nice coin, graded ZFr and would be a nice addition to my meagre collection from Flanders. I have a bid resting on another 1386 coin due for auction in 7 days, and should that not be realised and the mite be still available, it could possibly be coming down under. The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
Quote:
This undated 2 mite coin of the County of Flanders struck in the name of Philip "le Hardi" is claimed as (1388) by the seller... Outstanding and thank you for posting! Quote:
The old, classic reference on Flanders, de Pas, is not clear that this was a single year emission, but maybe there is some more recent scholarship on this (or maybe my French was not good enough ... the section in de Pas on this ruler is very confusing) Most certainly above my pay grade. I will leave it to the group whether or not we can regress to 1387CE/AH/89. |
|
Moderator
United States
190060 Posts |
If we can regress to 1387CE/AH789, do not wait on me to change the title! Three-day weekend in the US, not sure what I will be doing yet. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2569 Posts |
I wouldn't be able to qualify @tdziemia's 1388 2 mite, way out of my zone at this stage. I wonder if Heritage Auctions could be approached, seeking verification of the date? I'm trying to get an AH 790, but the affordable ones are not on the shelf, and the purchase of the unaffordable ones would bring about world conflict far sooner than the troubles in Europe at the moment, according to the Domestic Goddess.  The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
Edited by ttkoo
05/27/2024 04:15 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5180 Posts |
I tried to look up the 1388 double mite but couldn't find anything definite in either direction. There seem to be enough auctions (including, yes, Heritage, as well as Veilinghuis Eeckhout, in a catalog that also includes an extensive discussion of the mint ordnances relating to the dating of a gold coin from 1387 on the previous page) dating it to 1388 for that to be plausible, but I can't figure out where the dating comes from!
The dates for the ordnances, as far as I can tell, do not immediately allow for a single-year emission in 1388; the ordnances covering 1388 were apparently issued (years converted) on 1387-04-03, 1388-10-01, and 1389-12-20.
The mint records are apparently more granular, though (they're said to be missing for 1386/87, but that year would have ended just a few days after the April 1387 ordnance and they probably didn't start minting that quickly), and it's plausible that the issue for the 1387 ordnance did not start until well into 1388; there are said to be similar examples in other years (in particular, the December 1389 ordnance supposedly did not result in any minting until late 1390?), but I couldn't find any evidence one way or another for this specific case.
(There was apparently a lot of tinkering with the coinage, including double mites, in the 1380s - in particular, the specifications of the double mite were apparently changed six times between 1384 and 1390, with two changes in 1386 alone.)
Numista seems to attribute the type to 1384-1404, which AFAICT is just Philip's entire reign? That seems a little too long, especially given the aforementioned tinkering with the specifications.
Is the coin attributed to a specific mint?
|
| |
Replies: 7,432 / Views: 398,950 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/21/2024 10:04 pm
