Katalog
| İhraççı | Java |
|---|---|
| Yıl | 1811-1815 |
| Tür | Standard circulation coin |
| Değer | 1/2 Stuiver (1⁄60) |
| Para birimi | Rupee (1811-1817) |
| Bileşim | Tin |
| Ağırlık | 0.99 g |
| Çap | |
| Kalınlık | |
| Şekil | Round |
| Teknik | |
| Yönlendirme | |
| Gravürcü(ler) | |
| Dolaşımda olduğu yıl | |
| Referans(lar) |
| Ön yüz açıklaması | The obverse of the coin shows most characters in their respective location, yet the letters are also backwards and mirrored. At the top center, the `B` is reversed. At the left center, the `1/2` fraction is instead mirrored so that it shows `2/1`. The fraction bar between the numbers is missing and the `2` is mirrored. In the center is the iconic bale mark of the VEIC, the heart encompassing the VEIC letters. The heart is crude and leans to the side. Within the heart, the `E` on the left side is mirrored and the bars of the letter are weak. Also within the heart, the `I` on the right side is missing the bottom bar while the top bar is missing the right side of the bar. The left side of the top bar curves down and almost looks like a `9` or a backwards `P`. The bottom heart character, `C`, is missing the serif at the top. At the right center, the `S` is missing the bars at either end and is stretched long and snake-like. The coin is missing the `t.` portion to the right. |
|---|---|
| Ön yüz yazısı | Latin |
| Ön yüz lejandı | B 2 1 V E 9 (P) C S Corrupted and retrograde (mirrored) script of B 1/2 V E I C St. |
| Arka yüz açıklaması | This prominent reverse shows a nicely mirrored crude imitation of an 1813 1/2 Stuiver. The `2` at the bottom is actually a reversed crude Z. |
| Arka yüz yazısı | Latin |
| Arka yüz lejandı | AVAJ 3181 2 Retrograde (mirrored) script of JAVA 1813 Z |
| Kenar | |
| Darphane | |
| Basma adedi |
1811 - - 1812 - - 1813 - - 1814 - - 1815 - - |
| Numisquare Kimliği | 2618584340 |
| Ek bilgiler |
Historical Context: This 1/2 Stuiver tin imitation from Java dates to the tumultuous period of 1811-1815, coinciding with the British interregnum in the Dutch East Indies. Following the French annexation of the Netherlands, Britain seized Dutch colonial possessions to prevent them falling into French hands. Lieutenant-Governor Sir Stamford Raffles administered Java during this era. The official coinage supply from Europe was severely disrupted, leading to a critical shortage of circulating currency. This economic vacuum fostered the proliferation of locally produced, often unofficial or semi-official, base metal imitations like this tin stuiver, reflecting the urgent need for small change amidst political upheaval and a struggling colonial economy. Its existence underscores the pragmatic adaptations made in response to imperial shifts.
Artistry: The artistry of this 1/2 Stuiver tin imitation is inherently constrained by its material and unofficial nature. Lacking a named engraver, the design likely emerged from local workshops attempting to replicate familiar Dutch colonial stuiver motifs. Stylistically, it belongs to a utilitarian colonial tradition, prioritizing legibility over elaborate artistic merit. Designs would typically feature a simplified rendition of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) monogram or a crown, often accompanied by a date. Due to the imitative nature and base metal, details are often crude, simplified, and lack the fine relief and precision of officially minted pieces. The "artistry" here lies in its functional adaptation rather than aesthetic refinement.
Technical/Grading: Struck in tin, this coin presents unique challenges for preservation and grading. Tin is a soft, reactive metal, making these pieces highly susceptible to wear, corrosion, and planchet damage such as pitting or laminations. With a weight of 0.99 grams, it is a lightweight, small denomination. High-points for wear would typically be the central device (e.g., monogram or crown) and the outer rim. Technical strike qualities are often inconsistent; expect weak strikes, especially on the periphery, off-center strikes, and uneven metal flow due to rudimentary production methods. Grading must account for the inherent crudeness and material limitations, focusing on the preservation of primary design elements and the absence of severe environmental damage.