Dear all, my parents live in the Czech Republic, central Europe, near the Austrian border. I do not understand numismatics at all and need the help of experts because my dad found a coin in our backyard while digging. This coin shows most probably Louis the XIV, French king. Date on the coin is 1693. It looks like the coin was re-struck as some of the symbols overlap. I have attached pictures as well so if anyone knows something more particular, please advise. I will be grateful. Kind regards, Olga Dolezalova
It is an Ecu, a large sized crown coin. I have to wonder how that coin made it to the Czech Republic, and when. My imagination runs wild, thinking of French troops trapsing across the Austro-Hungarian Empire on their way or way back from Russia and some soldier losing his prize possession.
Thanks guys for your reply! I wonder also what might have happened those many years ago. I am not aware of Louis XIV passing through Moravia. As you can see there is a hook attached to the coin, someone must have worn it as a pendant. I am just visiting my parents here in the Czech republic and my dad was very excited to give me the coin as a present. My mum however said that she had a very bad feeling when they found the coin, she felt very scared, like someone killed the person carrying the coin and the coin having a very negative story behind it. A little superstitious. Aparently the coin was struck in the city of Pau in Southern France, nearby the Spanish border.
Louis XIV would not have gone through Moravia, but some of Napoleon's troops may have during wars in early 19th century.
Interesting coin, it is known as the Ecu aux palmes de France-Navarre-Bearn. It's not often that you find an overstike like this with even the date of the original coin visible. The original was a 1691 Ecu aux 8 L, can't quite make out the mint mark though. But I suspect it would also have been Pau.
Here is one (1600's Jetton) I have which also shows the 'Fleur De Lis" mark. A rather beautiful aspect of the French coinage of the period, IMHO that is... BTW, Welcome to the forum. Take Care Ben
That is a very interesting coin. It's appears to be a 1690 overstruck by a 1693. :kewl: I have never seen that before and I play in Ebay France all the time. If you can get a mega-quality close-up shot of both sides, so we can see the full details on the understrike, maybe we can figure out what the original coin was (exactly). It was more than likely a 1690 ECU but I won't say that until I can better see what's underneath the more recent strike. Tell dad he done good! :thumb: Ribbit Ps: Welcome to CT! :hail:
Doug, you need to look at the coin again, that is NOT a ONE next to the NINE, it is a ZERO. The original coin had the date on the obverse and the newer strike had the date on the reverse. :kewl: Ribbit
Sorry Toad, you are mistaken. The D G is only found on the obverse. And if you were to examine a 1691 Ecu aux 8 L you would see that all of the underlying details match.
The pics attached is what I believe the original coin was and what you don't see Doug, is the underlying strike is upside-down to the over-strike. The ONE you pointed out is the first ONE (one-thousand) and the NINE is a SIX (six-hundred) and the SIX is a NINE (ninety) and next to the NINE (your 6) is a ZERO you didn't see - 1690. Ribbit Ps: It may be another coin that was overstruck but the date was on the obverse and it was 1690 and the overstrike is upside-down of the original strike (or vise-versa).
The ZERO is next to your SIX, which is an upside-down NINE. Ribbit Ps: Notice how the underlying DG and 1690 date (obverse) corresponds perfectly to the 1690 Aux 8 L Type I posted earlier? Also, the X in REX is where it should be.
Hey Olga, I asked a friend of mine in France what the value of your coin is and he said somewhere in the neighborhood of a grand, but being a jewelry piece might bring it down some. Also, he said that during the reign of Louis XIV, it was a rather common practice to overstrike earlier coinage. Personally, I think it is totally awesome, especially being able to see so much detail of the former coin. :thumb: I just wish we could make out the mint mark on the reverse but maybe with a closer examination, it can be seen. :kewl: Tell your mom what it's worth and maybe she won't be so worried about former spirits. Ribbit Ps: Here are a couple more overstrikes similar to your coin and the first one appears to have been a 1691 Aux L type and it also appears to have more than one overstrike, so I don't have a clue what it was originally. The second coin is harder to make out what was overstruck, but there are faint markings remaining.
Fair enough Toad - I agree about the date. Never thought about turning the coin upside down That said, it is still the same coin I said it was. Now, regarding value, that coin is no where near worth $1000. The date is the most common of the series for that mint and the condition of the coin is far from the best even without considering the jewelry damage. I used to specialize in these coins Toad and bought many of them, some much greater rarity, and even for the rarest in near gem condition never paid more than $1250. This coin is worth at best about $100 - $150.
I am really not concerned about the value of the coin at all even though this is pretty much my inheritance! Our family never had any money and it looks like it will stay that way... I am just really interested in the history especially since living in Australia where history is almost non-existent. Thank you again for your replies. Olga
My friend said they are not "appreciated" and I thought the price he gave was a bit high since I can get ones for around the price you said but I haven't seen one as nice as this one, with so much still visible under the overstrike. I figured because so much was visible, that was why the price was so high but he is French, so maybe he boo-boo'd with the translation? As to getting the date right, I am wrong 9 out of 10 times, so I was due to be right. Now I've got 9 things to be wrong about before I can be right again. :goofer: Ribbit
