Hello The English sometimes got the best of the Dutch as well. In the end, it was the French who really destroyed the Dutch golden age. Then there was Munster.. Amanda
[h=2]Decline[/h] Long-term rivalry between the two main factions in Dutch society, the Staatsgezinden (Republicans) and the Prinsgezinden (Royalists orOrangists), sapped the strength and unity of the country. Johan de Witt and the Republicans did reign supreme for a time at the middle of the 17th century (the First Stadtholderless Period) until his overthrow and murder in 1672. Subsequently, William III of Orange became stadtholder. After a stadtholderless era of 22 years and the Orangists regained power, his first problem was to survive the Franco-Dutch War (which was related to the Third Anglo-Dutch war), when France, England, Münster and Cologne united against his country. Wars to contain the expansionist policies of France in various coalitions after the Glorious Revolution, mostly including England, burdened the republic with huge debts, although little of the fighting after 1673 took place on its own territory. The necessity to maintain a vast army against France meant that less money could be spent on the navy, weakening the Republic's power against England. After William III's death in 1702 the Second Stadtholderless Period was inaugurated. The end of the War of Spanish Succession in 1713 marked the end of the republic as a major military power.
No, Münster. 1648. This one, and the Peace of Osnabrück, ended the Thirty Years War. In German we usually use the term Westfälischer Friede as a collective term which covers them both. Oh well, the Peace of Münster seems to be the one event in European history that is more important, relevant, etc. than anything else, and without it, Europe would be like the Middle East today according to some Coin Talk members (Check the "ducats" topic out ...) Then again, judging the relevance of a historic event largely depends on where one is. Christian
Hello It is overstating the influence that the peace of Munster was the single event that prevented Europe from being fragmentary and violent like the middle East today. Actually, one can argue that Europe at that period was very much like the Middle East at that time. for example, you had the iconoclast violence in 1570. And it would further stretch that view of reality when one remembers that just a few decades later the Dutch republic was swept away by the Napoleonic wars and French domination. However, I think that one can argue that the Dutch experiment in tolerance and secularization of the public sphere largely showed the blueprint for the future, and its philosophies and arts transforms Europe and North America, even if it took another bloody century or more to sort it all out. Amanda
Should be handling them with cotton gloves and i would air-tite it asap unless you want some nice milk spot appearing a year or two down the road.
I believe it is 33 mm coin so you can probably use 38 mm direct fit airtite holder for this (it is move around little bit since it 5mm larger than coin). You can also use Air Tite with foam (I class 33mm). You can find them in ebay or online (JpCoins, Pinnacle, Vernon all sellers' i have bought from) http://www.air-tites.com/Air-Tite_Ring_Type_Coin_Holders_1.htm http://www.air-tites.com/Air-Tite_Direct_Fit_Coin_Holders.htm
I don't understand. If the case is too large then it won't be air tite, and you certainly do not want the coin to slide around. Ruben
As long as the seal is Air Tite it is fine. For my world silver coins i generally throw most of them into 40 mm Air tites (this is one that fits for American eagles and you can get them bulk for cheap) since i just can't afford to spend to buy specific sized AirTite for each & every coin. I store it in a album, so once it goes there it should not moving around and possibly damaging any of the sides (which is unlikely but still) . http://www.air-tites.com/air-tite_coin_albums.htm