Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 37400, member: 112&quot;]Ian - </p><p><br /></p><p>I am quite enjoying this - rather think you are too&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; So let&#039;s narrow things down a bit shall we ?</p><p><br /></p><p>Now then, NOS says he has measured the coin at 22mm. I think it reasonable that the orignal measurement of the coin could have been 23mm, but due to wear 22 can be accepted. Can we agree that the measurement limits the possibilities as to what the coin may or may not be - yes ? </p><p><br /></p><p>Assuming that - we must then limit what the coin may or may not be by the design found on the obverse &amp; reverse - yes ? </p><p><br /></p><p>And then we have to limit the possibilities by the date found on the coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>First the size - the 1/8th ecu ( 10 sols ) issued in 1704 was 23mm so that works. However - the design is wrong as this coin is known as the 10 sols aux 4 couronnes. So that one&#039;s out.</p><p><br /></p><p>The 1/16th ecu ( 5 sols ) which I have pictured was 20mm. Too small and the wrong design - again out.</p><p><br /></p><p>The 20th ecu was always way to small, and the 1/10th was not issued until 1709 - both out. </p><p><br /></p><p>So the only thing left that fits for a coin issued in 1704 is the 1/12 ecu, which varied in size depending on design and was issued in 22 and&nbsp; 23mm. </p><p><br /></p><p>Do we agree so far ?[/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