Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
1 Ducat - Ernest of Bavaria
| Issuer | Glatz |
|---|---|
| Year | 1549-1554 |
| Type | Log in to see details |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | MB#36, Fr#1068 |
| Obverse description | The crowned Bohemian lion rampant to left occupies the central field, rendered in high relief with bold detailing to the mane, claws, and double tail characteristic of the Bohemian heraldic tradition. The figure is enclosed within a beaded inner circle. The surrounding legend, separated from the inner circle by a plain border, records the titles of Ernest of Bavaria in Latin capitals, reading continuously around the coin. The overall die style is consistent with mid-sixteenth-century Central European hammered gold coinage. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Reverse description | Log in to see details |
| Reverse script | Latin |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Glatz — the fortified county wedged between Bohemia and Silesia — passed to the Habsburgs in 1526 but retained its own coinage rights under appointed governors. Ernest of Bavaria held the county as a pledge rather than outright possession, a financial arrangement typical of mid-sixteenth century Habsburg cash-flow management, and his authority to strike gold in his own name derived from that pledgeholder status rather than any territorial sovereignty.
The five-year window of this issue reflects the duration of the pledge term precisely.