Hello JK, As a specialist and author of books on the coinage of the German States, I can understand why you would be confused about the 1851 conversion chart. In the 19th century, the number of coin-issuing states was down to about 30, whereas there were over 300 different entities in the 18th century and several thousand in the centuries prior to 1700. Although they often used the same denominational names in various parts of the Holy Roman Empire, which later became Germany, they struck the coins to different standards, at least, the smaller ones. What you must ask yourself, firstly, is where was the chart published for whose use was it intended? The authors, themselves, may have been confused as to what coins were called in their country of origin. Secondly, merely comparing the names of coins as being the same does not mean that they were worth the same. Rather, the amount of precious metal in the coin, in this case silver, would need to be compared. By the early 19th century, there were only three cities of the original Hanseatic League still able to strike coins - Bremen, Hamburg and Lübeck. The latter city only issued a single coin in the 19th century, a gold ducat of 1801. The other two cities had extensive coinage until they joined the North German Confederation in the 1860s, then the German Empire in 1871. Something to keep in mind is that each of these cities had territory around it - the Hinterland - which was part of their domains. While Bremen had a coinage system of Grote and Talers, Hamburg's own currency was based on the Dreiling, Sechsling, Schilling (= 3 Pfennig, 6 Pfennig, 12 Pfennig), multiples of the Schilling and gold coins. The 36-Grote coin of Bremen was equal to half a Taler and contained .278 oz. of pure silver, alloyed with other metals. By comparison, the U.S. quarter of the same period contained .18 oz. of silver and the half dollar had .3867 oz. of silver. So, based on silver content alone, the 36 Grote should have been worth about 37 U.S. cents. Likewise, the 6 Grote coin of Bremen contained .046 oz. of silver and should have been valued at 6 U.S. cents. I suspect that the maker of the chart was hedging on the values of foreign coins if such a chart was used for calculating the worth of coins brought into the U.S. by immigrants. A currency dealer of the time had to discount foreign coins by a certain percentage because of the cost of putting them through the banking system of the time in exchange for U.S. coins. I'm not sure what you mean by single issue coins because the 6 Grote coin of Bremen was issued in 1840, 1857 and 1861. The 36 Grote was issued in various years from 1840 to 1864. The Bavarian coin was called a Taler, as it was in the other German States. Talers were struck in Bavaria in just about every year of the first half of the 19th century. 2-Taler coins equal to 3 1/2 Gulden were also issued, as well as 1 and 2-Gulden coins. All larger silver and all gold coins were required to adhere to the Monetary Decree of the Empire of 1555, with modifications over the centuries. Therefore a Taler, no matter from which state, would be worth the same in exchange, but all were called Talers. Hope this helps, Doug Nicol Norman D. Nicol, Ph.D. Professional Genealogist/Family Historian Specializing in NE Pennsylvania, England, esp. Cornwall, and Scotland

Thank you for the detail. The chart was American in a travellers guide and put values on a number of different currencies. Wasn't thinking about the actual precious metal content value as a guideline. They do have a double thaler at $1.32 and a double guilder at $0.72 so your example is pretty accurate It doesn't mention a handling charge built in but when they show a chart of English coins, they suggest a handling fee of 9% The Third of a thaler must have been small since its only listed as 20¢ Thanks again Norman D. Nicol wrote: > Hello JK, > > As a specialist and author of books on the coinage of the German States, > I can understand why you would be confused about the 1851 conversion > chart. In the 19th century, the number of coin-issuing states was down > to about 30, whereas there were over 300 different entities in the 18th > century and several thousand in the centuries prior to 1700. Although > they often used the same denominational names in various parts of the > Holy Roman Empire, which later became Germany, they struck the coins to > different standards, at least, the smaller ones. > > What you must ask yourself, firstly, is where was the chart published > for whose use was it intended? The authors, themselves, may have been > confused as to what coins were called in their country of origin. > > Secondly, merely comparing the names of coins as being the same does not > mean that they were worth the same. Rather, the amount of precious > metal in the coin, in this case silver, would need to be compared. > > By the early 19th century, there were only three cities of the original > Hanseatic League still able to strike coins - Bremen, Hamburg and > Lübeck. The latter city only issued a single coin in the 19th century, > a gold ducat of 1801. The other two cities had extensive coinage until > they joined the North German Confederation in the 1860s, then the German > Empire in 1871. Something to keep in mind is that each of these cities > had territory around it - the Hinterland - which was part of their > domains. While Bremen had a coinage system of Grote and Talers, > Hamburg's own currency was based on the Dreiling, Sechsling, Schilling > (= 3 Pfennig, 6 Pfennig, 12 Pfennig), multiples of the Schilling and > gold coins. > > The 36-Grote coin of Bremen was equal to half a Taler and contained .278 > oz. of pure silver, alloyed with other metals. By comparison, the U.S. > quarter of the same period contained .18 oz. of silver and the half > dollar had .3867 oz. of silver. So, based on silver content alone, the > 36 Grote should have been worth about 37 U.S. cents. > > Likewise, the 6 Grote coin of Bremen contained .046 oz. of silver and > should have been valued at 6 U.S. cents. I suspect that the maker of > the chart was hedging on the values of foreign coins if such a chart was > used for calculating the worth of coins brought into the U.S. by > immigrants. A currency dealer of the time had to discount foreign coins > by a certain percentage because of the cost of putting them through the > banking system of the time in exchange for U.S. coins. > > I'm not sure what you mean by single issue coins because the 6 Grote > coin of Bremen was issued in 1840, 1857 and 1861. The 36 Grote was > issued in various years from 1840 to 1864. > > The Bavarian coin was called a Taler, as it was in the other German > States. Talers were struck in Bavaria in just about every year of the > first half of the 19th century. 2-Taler coins equal to 3 1/2 Gulden > were also issued, as well as 1 and 2-Gulden coins. > > All larger silver and all gold coins were required to adhere to the > Monetary Decree of the Empire of 1555, with modifications over the > centuries. Therefore a Taler, no matter from which state, would be > worth the same in exchange, but all were called Talers. > > Hope this helps, > > Doug Nicol > > Norman D. Nicol, Ph.D. > Professional Genealogist/Family Historian > Specializing in NE Pennsylvania, England, esp. Cornwall, and Scotland > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Looking for a quick translation Billig für Baargeld I get "Cheap for Ship maintenance man's money" Thanx in advance JK

Cheap if paid in cash. Henry. ----- Original Message ----- From: "JK" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 3:02 PM Subject: Re: [HESSE] Translation Looking for a quick translation Billig für Baargeld I get "Cheap for Ship maintenance man's money" Thanx in advance JK ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Perhaps this will help. I read that as: cheap for cash money However, it should have been written: Bargeld or bares Geld (ready money/cash) Gisela Meckstroth ----- Original Message ----- From: "JK" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 3:02 PM Subject: Re: [HESSE] Translation Looking for a quick translation Billig für Baargeld I get "Cheap for Ship maintenance man's money" Thanx in advance JK ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It all depends on what the researcher is looking for. Are we concerned with proper use of the language or should we be concerned with how the language is used and can we learn anything about the person who used it. Does it tell us anything about the area he is from or his education level. Since this is appearing in a newspaper, it is difficult to say who actually wrote the text. But I should think that if the editor wrote it, he would want to make certain that the message was understand by the readers and that he was using "their language". A saddler who used language normally associated with the highly educated may not get much business. Sometimes it pays to throw in a few errors. Thanks to everyone who contributed JK Gisela E. G. Meckstroth wrote: > Perhaps this will help. > > I read that as: cheap for cash money > > However, it should have been written: Bargeld or bares Geld (ready > money/cash) > > Gisela Meckstroth > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "JK" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 3:02 PM > Subject: Re: [HESSE] Translation > > > Looking for a quick translation > > Billig für Baargeld > > I get "Cheap for Ship maintenance man's money" > > Thanx in advance > > JK > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >