Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Specializing in Modern Numismatics Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin Auctions300,000 items to help build your collection! Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Thoughts And Questions On Attributing Dates To Undated Medieval Coins

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 5 / Views: 1,593Next Topic  
Pillar of the Community
Learn More...
tdziemia's Avatar
United States
7955 Posts
 Posted 01/26/2020  12:58 pm Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add tdziemia to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
On another thread https://www.coincommunity.com/forum...&FORUM_ID=51 a question came up about attributing a very specific date (day/month/year) to an undated medieval French coin of the early 14th century, and a member provided some helpful links to a website with the origin of this information for French coins.

My knowledge of French numismatics in this era is pretty weak, but looking through that link a little, what I think I found was that these are the dates of royal decrees (ordonnances in French) authorizing the minting of the coins. But not necessarily the only year in which the coin was minted? We might expect that a decree issued in January will result in coins being minted in the same year. But my question (probably to @erafjel) is whether we know if the minting of coins only occurred in that year, or might also have occurred in subsequent years until the end of the reign?

Another place where coinage records were well preserved was the Low Countries. To give an example from Brabant of a 15th century undated coin where a single year can be reasonably attributed, we can look at W.522, a double patard minted in Malines. The decree authorizing this coin is from August 5, 1485, and the production records from December 24, 1485 show some 459,570 coins having been delivered up to that date. There is no mention of this type in any subsequent production report from that mint. So 1485 (rather than a date range) has been attributed (info from A. deWitte, "Histoire Monetaire des Compte de Louvain, Ducs de Brabant, etc.").

I think there are other places where early dates have been attributed to medievals (England if I recall correctly?).

So, like @oriole on the other thread, I am curious about the other ways that have been used to get these attributions, and whether the dates given for the French medievals are meant to signify a specific year, or a "minted on and after" date.
Edited by tdziemia
01/26/2020 1:38 pm
Moderator
Learn More...
Spence's Avatar
United States
34427 Posts
 Posted 01/26/2020  2:11 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Spence to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Yes valid question @tdz, and one that I have struggled with. I'm hoping that a true scholar can straighten us out.

For the question of dating undated French coins, one example for context is a gold Ecu d'or issued by Philip VI. His reign was from AD April 1, 1328 to August 22, 1350. With these Ecus d'or, there were the following emissions:

1st: January 1, 1337 (Duplessy 249)
2nd: April 10, 1343 (Dup 249A)
3rd: January 5, 1348 (Dup 249B)
4th: August 13, 1348 (Dup 249C)
5th: March 11, 1349 (Dup 249D)
6th: May 6, 1349 (Dup 249E)

There are dozens and dozens of other examples in medieval French numismatics where multiple emissions are known with amazingly great accuracy on the timing.

I suppose, these are the questions that would be really nice to have absolute clarity on the start and end dates of the coins themselves:

1. Does the date of the emission coincide with the striking of the coins or just the authorization to mint them? In other words, was the first coin of the 3rd emission struck on the 5th of January 1348 or was it later?
2. Were some emissions continued even after they were obsoleted by new orders?
3. Were all coins for a specific emission struck on that one day? In other words, is the last day that coins of the 4th emission were stuck on the 13th of August 1348, sometime unknown day between then and the 11th of March 1349, or at some unknown even later date?

My personal thinking on this has evolved a bit. At first my interpretation was that the date of the emission was the date of the first striking and coins could conceivably be struck under that emission until a new one was begun. Using the example above, coins of the first emission were struck between AD 1337 and 1343, coins of the second emission between AD 1343 and 1348, and so forth up to coins of the 6th emission being struck, between AD 1349 and 1350 when Philip VI stopped reigning. Using this same example, only two emissions would definitely be struck in one calendar year: the 3rd (AD 1348) and the 5th (AD 1349). More lately, I have had the more rigid interpretation that coins of a specific emission were struck pretty much only on at least very close to that date. Again using the example above, that means that coins of the 1st emission were all struck in AD 1337, coins of the second emission were all struck in AD 1343, etc.

I would welcome more learned thinking on this subject.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb

"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
Pillar of the Community
Learn More...
erafjel's Avatar
Sweden
2124 Posts
 Posted 01/26/2020  2:23 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add erafjel to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
... these are the dates of royal decrees (ordonnances in French) authorizing the minting of the coins. But not necessarily the year in which the coin was minted. We might expect that a decree issued in January will result in coins being minted in the same year. But my question (probably to @erafjel) is whether we know if the minting of coins only occurred in that year, or might also have occurred in subsequent years until the end of the reign?

A very valid question indeed, @tdziemia. I have in fact done some research about this as far as it concerns French coinage, trying to understand the path from royal decision to make a new coin to it actually being made. I'm happy you opened this thread, giving me an excellent opportunity to shine share my knowledge .

Let me begin by giving the conclusion: No, you cannot, in general, deduce that a coin has been minted only during year Y just because the royal decree is dated year Y. It may have been minted several times afterwards (sometimes with small differences that can make it possible to differentiate between emissions, but often not - especially since we talk about hammered coins, where there can be substantial variation in appearance within a single emission).

The steps in introducing a new coin type are like described below for most of the French royal period, beginning sometimes in the 13th century and lasting until the revolution (in fact, the same overall steps continued also after the revolution, but with the king replaced by the government). It seems this procedure was not always followed to the letter, steps could be skipped or merged as far as I understand, but in general this is how it was done:

1. The first step is that the king issues a decree (French ordonnance) about the new coin type(s), describing what they should look like, their weight, fineness, and value. (The decree I gave a link to in the other thread is actually incomplete in this respect, it only states how the new coins should be valued. There is probably another decree - not available online - that states weight and fineness.) This is just a specification, not an order to start manufacturing.

2. The second step is for the office in charge of the royal mintage to issue orders (arrêts) to the mints (of which there were several spread across the country) to manufacture coins according to the decree. These orders would also specify how much silver and/or gold that should be used, that is, effectively how many coins should be minted. The office at the time of Philip IV (whom we discussed in the other thread) was the Generaux-Maîtres des Monnoyes ("General Masters of Moneys"), a group of royal office holders. It was replaced in 1358 by Chambre des Monnoyes ("Chamber of Moneys") which in 1552 changed into Cour des Monnaies ("Court of Moneys").

3. A final step (not always performed) was to issue an announcement (lettre patente) to the public about what the coins looked like and what their value was (remember that French coins generally did not have a value stated on them; the value was assigned by the Crown and could change from time to time, also for already emitted coins - very practical for the king, a bit annoying for the public).

The 2nd step could be repeated a number of times, over the course of several years if no new coin types appeared. Coins were made in batches, each batch requiring a new order/arrêt. There could be years between batches, and since all batches were made to the same specification - the original decree - there is in general no way to tell them apart.

This said, for many coins there is still a good chance that the year of the decree is the only year of mintage. The coin production was very batch-oriented and in many cases the intention was to provide enough coins for a reasonably long period of time with the first batch. Not until there was a shortage of coins was a new batch ordered (this one can sometimes see already in the decrees, where the king motivates the issue of new coins with "the great need and lack of coins in our kingdom").
Pillar of the Community
Learn More...
tdziemia's Avatar
United States
7955 Posts
 Posted 04/16/2020  1:35 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add tdziemia to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Sorry to have let this lay dormant for so long.

That was a very helpful response for French coinage.

So now I will come back with another question on a different part of Europe: Florence.

I have been looking at some 15th and early 16th century coins of Florence, and see that there, too, we find undated coins which can be attributed to specific years or even more narrowly, apparently according to the mintmaster's insignia, rather that documentary evidence from ordinances (for instance, MIR59/36, Biaggi 793, dated to 2d semester 1424, Giovanni di Mico Capponi mintmaster).

I see these attributed with MIR numbers, and was wondering if that reference has a list of mintmasters and dates?


Edited by tdziemia
04/16/2020 1:36 pm
Moderator
Learn More...
Spence's Avatar
United States
34427 Posts
 Posted 04/16/2020  1:47 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Spence to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
@tdz, in my Biaggi, there are a about a dozen pages detailing this work. Just as you describe there are hundreds of mintmaster marks that seem to have lasted for a half-year pretty much non-stop between 1300 and 1505 AD.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb

"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
Pillar of the Community
Learn More...
tdziemia's Avatar
United States
7955 Posts
 Posted 04/16/2020  8:38 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add tdziemia to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks for the quick response.

I know that the holy grail for the OFEY gang is DATED coins, but it struck me that maybe some of the really tough dates could be found here as undated, but attributed.

It also struck me that the mintmasters were changing really often, and that this must have been intentional?

I've not found a 1460 which is a tough OFEY date that we've discussed on that thread (looks like it would be a MIR 61 or 62 if it exists).

I probably have just enough Italian coins that I should be keeping an eye out for a copy of Biaggi (though some comments you've made have tended to scare me off)
Edited by tdziemia
04/16/2020 8:45 pm
  Previous TopicReplies: 5 / Views: 1,593Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.27 seconds to rattle this change. Forums