Just got this, because I didn't have any Venetian coins and I could afford it. There are other examples of this coin around, so I don't think it's a fantasy piece (and it's hardly fancy enough for a fantasy coin). Seller wrote "decree of 1691". But the Standard Catalog ( at least my 4th Edition for the 17th century) doesn't show anything less than a ducato, which makes me think it is hugely incomplete. Presumably this is some kind of colonial money for Dalmatian (today Croatia) and Albanian Venetian colonies. Anybody can tell me why this should not be in the standard catalog? 5.9 g copper, 28 mm. Obverse SAN MARC VEN, reverse DALMA ET ALBAN
The Krause editing fails strike again. I guess it's just missing from your edition. My 1701-1800 4th edition is missing nearly all of China
Might be missing, might be listed incorrectly (I don't have access to my catalog to look it up): https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide...-soldi-km-9-1691-1709-cuid-208825-duid-444188 https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces19340.html
Well for what it's worth that coin is not listed in the Krause 3rd edition either. The 3rd edition does however list various coins from the soldo (12 denari) to 30 soldi, and it even lists 1 example of a Bezzo (6 denari). That said, the deficiencies and inaccuracies of the Krause catalogs are well known. What is not so well known are the deficiencies and inaccuracies of many other books. For the most part, if it is found written in a coin book it is most often taken as gospel. There are many books out there that have long been thought of as "the bible" on a given subject. But sadly this is not always the case. Yeah, parts of these books will be accurate and complete, other parts no so much. So how does this happen ? It's pretty simple really - it is due to secondary and tertiary research, and very little if any, primary research done by the authors. In other words, a lot of the time and maybe even most of the time, the content of a book is determined by the information that the author was able to find in other books and or articles that were written prior to the writing of his own book. And there's always a list of these books and articles, it's known as the bibliography. I'm sure most of you are familiar with this, but may not have ever paid much attention to it. But what happens is bad information is passed from one to the next and repeated time after time. Within the next couple of months there's going to be an article on this subject published in the numismatic press. It is my hope that it will prove to be not only informative but even beneficial to those who read it.
