Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Ian, post: 37341, member: 283&quot;]Sorry that i&#039;ve come into this so late in the day, but i&#039;ve been away from home this week and time is tight for me just now.</p><p><br /></p><p>The coin as originally posted is a dead ringer for a Seizieme ecu (1/16th) as outlined in Ciani page 426&nbsp; (Ciani #1928).</p><p><br /></p><p>There were three series of the Ecu aux huit L released. The first during 1690-1693. The second and third series were released in 1704. </p><p><br /></p><p>The main things that differentiate the series is a) the style of bust and B) the legends on the first series differ from that of the second and third.</p><p><br /></p><p>a) The first series had a draped bust. The second had a cuirassed bust, the third had a draped bust with minor differences to the first. It is not uncommon to find the second / third overstruck on earlier coins and also mixed die matches.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>b) The first series also shows the privy marks on the reverse.</p><p><br /></p><p>On the image presented by the original poster the fleur de lis are actually the right way up in relation to the position of the date on the coin. </p><p><br /></p><p>I cannot explain the `star&#039; as a privy mark excepting that it might not be a privy mark at all. It may be that it is just the general depiction of the `sun king&#039; as appears on many of the obverse dies in that approximate location on his silver coinage. As you know, the French were not only excellent recyclers of coins but they didn&#039;t exactly record every aspect of their minting practices either. I suspect that the coin in question could easily be the result of the use of re-worked dies or perhaps it might even have had the reverse re-struck using the 1704 reverse die. I can&#039;t tell for sure one way or the other. </p><p><br /></p><p>It doesn&#039;t look to me to be a counterfeit although it is very difficult indeed to make calls on&nbsp; such a small coin from such a poor scan. Personally I wouldn&#039;t like to say one way or the other without seeing it a lot closer up and with higher definition. </p><p><br /></p><p>On the image you present Doug (from Gadoury) the fleur de Lis are actually upside down in relation to the one in Ciani. How very odd!</p><p><br /></p><p>According to my `bible&#039;, Ciani&#039;s `Les Monnaies Royales Francaises de Huges Capet a Louis XVI&#039; (Paris 1926) the Ecu aux huit L series of 1704 were only produced in the following denominations&nbsp; :</p><p><br /></p><p>1&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; (Ecu)</p><p>1/2&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; (Demi Ecu)</p><p>1/4&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; (Quart D&#039;Ecu)</p><p>1/8&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; (Huitieme D&#039;Ecu)</p><p>1/16th (Seizieme D&#039;Ecu). This one is entirely in keeping with the cent&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; size comparison as presented.</p><p><br /></p><p>Interestingly the 1690-93 denom&#039;s for the lowest two were 1/12th and 1/24th as opposed to 1/8th and 1/16th. There is no doubt in my mind though that the coin in question is supposed to be a 1/16th ecu.</p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t have the Gadoury book, so I can&#039;t comment on it&#039;s contents.</p><p><br /></p><p>Ian</p><p><br /></p><p>(I edited this post concerning privy marks on first series being on reverse only)[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in