Money and exchange rates in 1632

by
Francis Turner
"There are two fundamental causes of madness amongst students: sexual frustration and
the study of coinage."
Professor Karl Helleiner, quoting what is purportedly an old Austrian proverb
In 1632 Europe was filled with coins of varying values, issued by governments of
varying degrees of trustworthiness. To make it worse each system had different
ratios of the numbers of coins of one denomination that made up the next. About
the only sure thing was that no one used a decimal system. For a modern reader
all this is compounded by the changes in the relative costs of different things.
Together it means that it is very hard to work out how much Grantville things
should be sold for downtime and how much uptimers should expect to pay for
things made by downtimers. This article is an attempt to shine some light on the
issue but I would be the first to admit it does little more than outline the
problem.

National Currencies
Money in the 17th century was primarily based on silver coins with gold used for
larger transactions and smaller coins minted from copper, brass or tin. One of the
reasons why there was considerable inflation in the 16th century was the vast
influx of gold and silver from the Spanish looting of the new world. To add to
this the rough ratio of gold:silver by weight gradually changed. In the medieval
period the ratio was approximately 12:1 (i.e one unit of gold was worth 12 units
of silver) but thanks to the vast discoveries of Latin American silver this ratio
increased so that by the time Sir Isaac Newton was in charge of the Royal Mint in
1717 it was over 15:1. Needless to say this caused significant dislocation as
cunning traders were able to take advantage of the mismatch in pricing but
fortunately for 17th century Europeans the majority of this dislocation had
occurred during the previous century and the ratio of ~15:1 was more or less
fixed. However the disruptions to trade of the 30 years war meant that in
different places the relative abundance of gold and silver as well as copper and
other metals often varied thus altering the price and in some cases the value of
the coins used. There were times when older coins especially were melted down
to retrieve their metal as the metal was more valuable than the face value of the
coin.

To step back a bit: in medieval Europe the standard silver penny was defined as
being 1/240th of a pound of silver (by weight) and the soldus/shilling/sou was
the weight of 12 pennies. This ratio was first applied by Charlemagne and was
common across much of early 2nd millennium Europe. In England the familiar
1:12:240 ratio was made official by Henry II in 1158 who also defined the weight
and purity of the penny and it lasted until 1971. Initially most realms only minted
pennies or very small multiples of a penny (such as the English groat worth 4
pennies) however due to inflation, debasement of the coinage and so on the
pound weight, penny based currencies gradually added additional coins and in
different realms their values changed even though the ratios usually remained
constant. This meant that an Englishman used to Shillings and Pence (20 Shillings
to a pound, 12 pence to a shilling) would find it easy when he traveled to other
places with the same ratios such as France (20 sou to a livre, 12 denier to a sou) or
Italy (1 Lire = 20 Soldi or 240 Denari) but not so easy elsewhere. Although the
pound (livre, lire etc.) and shilling(soldus,sou) were defined and used as a unit of
account, for a long while there were no shilling or pound coins. However this did
not stop kings, princes and other rulers issuing coins with names like "crown" or
"angel", which had a value of some number of pennies or shillings (or their
equivalent) but generally a different number in different places. These coins
added to the confusion since they would be referred to in casual usage ("I lost 3
crowns at cards last night"), but would not be used in bills or accounts which
stuck with three columns: L (pounds/livre/lire), s(shillings,sous,soldi) and
d(pence, denari). Another unit of account which, in medieval times, was rarely if
ever a coin was the mark. Unfortunately despite the general agreement about the
theoretical weight of the penny, the number pennies to a mark varied being 144
in some parts of Germany, 160 in Britain and either 192 or 384 in Scandinavia.

Money of Account
Because of the gradual debasement and change of the actual coins used for every
day transactions accounting was frequently done using some nominal coin.
These nominal coins typically had known properties (e.g. 240x1.555g of sterling
silver (92.5% pure) or 3.55g of 24 carat gold). As and when a ruler kindly debased
his coinage by 20% merchants simply ignored the change in their internal
accounts and just required 20% more from those paying in the new coin (and to
other merchants at least they would also pay out 20% more). Most money of
account was based on a silver measure - in French influenced Europe typically
the livre de gros tournois: 970.56 grams of pure silver or 1012.76g of 23/24 pure
silver - though some used a gold measure such as the Venetian ducat or the 1337

French cu la chaise. In some cases (e.g. the Venetian Ducat) the reference coin
remained current as well, in other cases (such as the gros tournois) it didn't.
Money of Account was most often used in places where currency was frequently
debased and/or where it changed radically as one ruler conquered another, more
stable countries such as England typically did not use it. England and English
merchants generally used the accounting measure we use today based on the
actual coin (pound, dollar, penny) although during the wars of the roses and the
early Tudor period this was not the case. In much of Germany the unit of account
was based on either the gold Rhenish florin or the silver Reichsthaler which was
generally considered to be worth 1.5 Rhenish florins.

International Currencies
In addition to the mish mash of national currencies, there were two international
currencies, a gold one and a silver one with a fairly well defined rate of exchange
between them. These were struck to a generally consistent weight by numerous
states and coins from different states were thus generally interchangeable. The
gold coin was the Venetian ducat, introduced in 1284, contained just over 3.5
grams of gold and was the first international coin. It was so successful that it was
minted under different names by many European nations. In northern Europe it
was called the Guilder or Gulden and it had a variety of other names such as the
Florentine or Rhenish Florin, the Forint (Hungary) or the Scudo (Milan). The
silver one was the Thaler (tallero, dollar, daler etc.) which was (supposed to be) a
fixed weight of silver and was the equivalent in value to two of the golden
ducats. The name thaler (from thal, "valley") originally came from the coins
minted from the silver from a rich mine at Joachimsthal (St. Joachim's Valley,
Czech: Jchymov) in Bohemia, then part of the Habsburg Empire. It was also the
equivalent of the Spanish peso ("heavy"), also known as the piece of eight
because it was worth 8 reales, which was a silver coin minted by Spain since 1497.
The 2 gulden to a thaler rule was usually correct but both the gulden and the
thaler of the time suffered from clipping and debasement so actual physical coins
had to be weighed and ones with an unusual design would need to be assayed to
check for lack of debasement. The amount of pure silver in a thaler was
approximately an ounce (28 grams) but varied between 25 and 30 grams. For
example the Swedish Riksdaler was 25.5 grams, whereas pesos nominally
contained 27 grams. If it were that simple we could relax, but to make things
worse countries also introduced thaler-like coins (some of which were called an
something thaler) of varying weights. For example the Dutch had various
daalders including the Rijksdaalder (Rix dollar) and the Leeuwendaalder (Lion

dollar). The Lion dollar had 27.7g of silver was the equivalent of 40 stuiver/2
guilders, whereas the Rix dollar was 25% bigger (50 stuiver or 2.5 guilders).
However since the lion dollar was the equivalent of the peso etc etc it was thus
was more popular than the rix dollar or the other ones.

A Country by Country Survey

One of the more complicated tasks is to convert from one currency to another.
Apart from England and France most places preferred to work with the
guilder/florin/ducat and the thaler/daalder/dollar and the aforementioned
fixed ratio between the two. Thus anything quoted in reals, pesos, ducats, florins,
guilders or thalers is going to be easy to convert. Unfortunately while the
ducat/thaler rule was good for cross border trade most states also had an
internal currency that they frequently debased against these international
standards. For example although Venice was a model of fiscal probity, a number
of other Italian states were not hence the difference in the value of the Lira as
stated in terms of a Ducat. This survey starts with the simpler countries and then
goes on to the nightmare ones. German coinage of the era is described by one
source as a "bottomless pit", thus, despite Germany being of great interest to the
163x reader or writer, it has been left to the last.
England (also Ireland and Scotland)
Although England did not directly use either guilders or thalers England's
shilling was stable in the 1630s since parliament refused King Charles' efforts to
debase the currency. In 1630 the conversion rate between English Shillings and
Dutch Guilders was 2:1 that is to say one guilder was 2 shillings and hence one
lion dollar was 4 shillings and one rix dollar worth 5 shillings or a crown. This
means that for larger sums an English pound is worth 5 thalers or 10 guilders
which makes for easy conversion. Astoundingly this ratio remained pretty much
constant from the last currency revision of 1601 until the wheels fell off the gold
standard in the twentieth century despite the fact that the thaler (dollar) changed
from being a European reference currency to the currency of the United States of
America. Irish coins were worth about 75% of their English equivalent (i.e. 1 Irish
shilling was worth an English 9d). Scotland, despite the modern reputation of its
inhabitants as canny businesspeople, had a severely debased currency which got
worse and worse over time. The first indigenous currency in Scotland was the
silver penny, coined by David I. In theory each pound weight of silver yielded
240 pennies (that is, 1 pound equaled 20 shillings, and 1 shilling equaled 12
pennies). However, the crown coined 252 pennies to the pound to make a profit.
From the fourteenth century until the end of the sixteenth century debasement of

the coinage resulted in the further divergence of the Scottish and English
currencies. In the reign of James III (1460-1488) the pound sterling was worth 4
pounds Scots. In 1560, 5 pounds Scots equaled 1 pound sterling. From the time
James VI of Scotland assumed the English throne until 1707 the exchange rate
between the Scottish and English pound was fixed at 12:1, that is to say
1(English)=12(Scots) or 1 Scottish shilling was equal to one English penny.
The English used the term mark to refer to two thirds of a pound (i.e. 160d or 13s
4d). There was no mark coin but some things were priced in marks, just as today
some things are still priced in guineas. Common coins were the angel (10s) the
crown (5s) in gold; the half crown (2s 6d), the shilling, the groat (4d) and the
penny in silver; and the copper farthing (1/4d). There was also the golden unite
(20s) and the silver sixpence, threepence, the ha'penny and half-groat or
tuppence.
The Low Countries
The low countries suffered from being effectively split between the Spanish
controlled part and the independant part however both used the same currency
elements and because both were important trading powers they did not usually
debase their currency, although some Dutch provinces did produce some very
odd low-weight daalders. The currency was based on the guilder (i.e. ducat) with
20 stuivers to a guilder and 16 pennings to a stuiver. As mentioned above there
were two important daalders - the Rijksdaalder (Rix dollar) worth 50 stuiver or
2.5 guilders and the Leeuwendaalder (Lion dollar) worth 40 stuiver or 2 guilders.
Other coins included the groot (1/2 stuiver) duit (1/8 stuiver), the dubbeltje (2
stuiver), the kwartje (5 stuivers) schelling (6 stuivers), the 3-guilder coin and the
monster Gouden dukaat worth 15 guilders.
Spain
Spain had a completely different currency system; consisting of maravedis, reals
and pesos. There were 34 maravedis to a real and 8 reals to a peso. Fortunately
the peso was equivalent to the thaler and thus it was easy to convert other values.
A real was worth 6 English pence or 5 Dutch stuivers. Spain had suffered
sufficient inflation that previously valuable coins such as the maravedi or the
blanca were now essentially worthless. The real was divided into quarters (a coin
called a quartillo) and the smallest coin was 2 maravedi (a 17th of a real). Other
coins included escudos (=2 peso) and dubloons(=16 peso).
Italy

The Italian states had the standard Ducat (Venice) or Florin (Florence) as well as a
system similar to the English and French one of 1 Lire = 20 Soldi, 60 Quattrini or
240 Denari. The problem was relating the Lira to the Ducat as a Lira was
frequently debased (and hence so were soldi and denari) and thus a rather
indeterminate thing. Typically in the 1630s there were about 6-7 lire to a Ducat or
Florin. In Venice there was a fixed exchange of 6L 4s to a ducat but this only
applied to Venetian lire.
Sweden
Sweden had the solid riksdaler as well as marks, re, rtugar and penningar,
with 1 mark = 8 re = 24 rtugar = 192 penningar (usually). Although the
Riksdaler remained constant (at 2 guilders or 1 peso) it was only used for
external trade and the conversion between it and the more normal copper marks
and re used for internal trade varied after 1620. In 1604 a riksdaler was 4 marks
(4 mark = 32 re), but it steadily increased in value afer 1620. In 1632 I estimate
that a riksdaler was worth about 2 copper dalar (i.e. 8 marks or 64 re). To add to
the confusion in the past in different parts of Sweden the ratio between marks
and penningar varied: in Gtaland a mark was worth 384 penningar, double the
usual 192. This was supposed to be outdated but there is some evidence that the
384 ratio was still used by some people.
Poland
Polish controlled areas, that is to say Poland, Lithuania and parts of Prussia, used
the zloty as follows: 1 zloty = 30 grosz = 90 Szelags = 540 Denars. Nominally the
grosz was the same as the Bohemian groschen (24 to a thaler) and thus a Zloty
should be the equivalent of the Dutch Rix Dollar. I do not believe it really was the
same in the 1630s as Poland was as busy as its neighbours in debasing its
currency, in fact there is evidence that there were 3 zloty to a thaler in the 1630s.
It is unclear whether this thaler was the standard 2 guilder one, the 2 guilder
one or the german Reichstaler which was worth 1 guilders.
France
The French currency was both impure being generally made of "billon", an alloy
of copper and silver, and highly inflationary. France had Livres, Sous and
(theoretically) Deniers although the smallest coin was the copper gros (4 denier)
and also had the Ecu worth 3 livres. A French livre was worth approximately the
same as a guilder in the early 1630s but the actual amount decreased steadily
over time. English sources report that in 1625 a quarter cu (3/4 livre) was worth
1s 7d implying that 1 livre was 2 Shillings and 2 Pence but in 1645 1 Livre

bought just 1 Shilling and 6 Pence and in 1653 1 Livre was equal to 1 Shilling
and 3 Pence.
Denmark
Traditionally Denmark had marks, skillings and penninge with 16 skillings to a
mark and 12 penninge to a skilling. This made the mark the same as the Svealand
swedish mark (192 penningar = 1 mark). Danish coins were notorious for their
lack of silver, and steadily decreased in value compared to their German
neighbours during the 16th century. Given that the German coins were also
getting worse this was quite a feat. However a decree of May 4, 1625 brought to
an end an unsettled period in Danish monetary history and fixed the ratio of the
rigsdaler to the mark and skilling: 1 rigsdalar was to equal 6 marks or 96
skillings. A Rigsdaler was the same as a Dutch lion dollar, that is to say 2
guilders.
Danish coins included the Rigsdaler or 6 mark coin, the crown (4 marks), the
mark coin and coins for 1,2,4 and 8 skillings
The Ottoman Empire
The Ottoman empire also used the Ducat for trade as well as local coins called
the Akche, the Para and the Kurush. One Kurush or Piastre was the equivalent of
40 Para or 120 Akche but as with many other currencies value of these to a fixed
currency such as the Ducat varied. There ware 200 Akche to a Ducat in 1584 (a
few years earlier there had been 60) and it is not clear whether this had changed
by 1630.
Germany and Bohemia
As noted above, German currency has been described as a bottomless pit by one
of my sources. In Germany and nearby countries there were multiple currencies
such as 60 kreuzer to the Gulden, 4 denar(pfennig/penny) to a Kreuzer 12 to a
Groschen and 16 to a Batzen or 1 Gulden = 4 Mark = 24 Albus = 48 Schilling =
288 Heller depending on where you were. Not only were there a large number of
coins the reformation wars had encouraged every mint to debase its currency
thus coins were of widely varying quality. Because there were so many currencies
that there is no hope of giving a conversion to any native unit of currency (Albus,
Batzen, Mark, Groschen...) in most cases. In Bohemia the Thaler was the
equivalent of 24 groschen and each groschen was (theoretically) 12 pfennigs
however the 30 years war severely impacted the relationships since some coins
were copper and others silver and silver became rather scarce. The Bohemian

(Prague) groschen however generally seem to have been reliable since the rulers
of Bohemia had access to the Joachim valley and thus the same silver mine that
gave its name to the thaler. From the 1620s Ferdinand II issued the ducat, thaler,
half, quarter, groschen (3 kreuzer), kreuzer, half kreuzer, and quarter kreuzers.
Much of Germany used the Reichsthaler as a nominal unit of account to deal
with the variations in coinage. A German Reichsthaler was 1 guilders or threequarters of a peso. Many German mints also produced "Reichsthalers" but the
thalers produced frequently varied in weight and hence value.

Summary table
Country
Guilders
Holland

Venice
Guilder

Currency

Value in

1 Guilder = 20 Stuiver = 320 Penning

1 Leeuwendaalder = 2 Guilder
1 Rijksdaalder = 2.5 Guilder
1 Ducat = 6L4s

N/A

1 Lire = 20 Soldi, 60 Quattrini or 240 Denari

As with Venice but the Lire/Ducat rate varied

Italy
Guilder
Spain
34 Maravedi = 1 Real, 8 Real = 1 Peso
Guilders
France
1/3rd Ecu = 1 Livre = 20 sous = 240 Denier
Livre ~= 1 Guilder
England
1 pound = 20 Shillings = 240 pence
Shillings = 1 Guilder
Scotland
As England
Shillings = 1 Guilder
Denmark
1 rigsdalar = 6 marks = 96 skillings
Rigsdaler = 2 Guilders
Sweden
1 mark = 8 re = 24 rtugar = 192 penningar
2 Guilders
1 riksdaler =~8 marks (variable)
Poland
1 zloty = 30 grosz = 90 Szelags = 540 Denars
Guilder (?)
Turkey
One Kurush/Piastre = 40 Para = 120 Akche
1 Guilder (in 1584)
Bohemia
1 thaler = 24 groschen = 72 kreuzer = 288 pfennig
Thaler = 2 Guilders

1 Ducat = 1

1 Ducat = 1
1 Peso = 2
1
2
24 Scots
1
1 Riksdaler =

1 Zloty = 2/3
200 Akche =
1

Germany
1 gulden = 4 mark = 24 albus = 48 schilling = 288 heller
Gulden = 1 Guilder
Also 1 groschen = 3 kreuzer = 24 pfennig = 48 heller
many other coins. Unit of account the Reichsthaler
1
Reichsthaler = 1 Guilders

The cost of living

Now that we know what a thalar or a ducat is worth in terms of other currencies
how much did people need to live on? And how does it compare to prices today?
A general guide is that in the early 17th century 1 English pence was roughly the
equivalent of one English pound 400 years later. This means that 1 guilder is
worth about 24 or US$36. This is only approximate and it is important to note
that in the 17th century manufactured goods were much more expensive in
relative terms than they are today. Due to the lack of mechanization clothing was
expensive because it was such a labour intensive task. On the other hand taxation
was more on imports, exports and farm production (tithes) than on general
income. A lot of people could escape taxation altogether which means that their
wages go further than you might expect.
Given the complexity of German currencies I am unsure how to relate such
wages as I have found but it seems unlikely that they would differ too much from
the clearly documented English wages of the period. A good English daily wage
was 1s/day, assuming 50 weeks at 6 days a week that works out at 300s or
15/year. An unskilled labourer could expect less (perhaps 8d/day) and of
course a highly skilled craftsman could expect more. However it is also worth
noting that many wages for craftsmen were actually based on production (i.e.
piecework) so the more you produced the more you got. One other point to note
is that in many cases labourers were paid in kind, agreements to provide 1 suit of
clothes/year or to supply food and lodging were by no means uncommon. The
important thing to remember is that very few people had significant disposable
income. For non-farmers purchasing food (and fuel both to cook and to keep
warm) could easily be 4d a day or sometimes more. If you compare this with the
wage rate this means that a 17th century worker could spend between a quarter
and half of his daily wage on food. Adding in requirements to buy clothing and
to pay rent and the amount left over for discretionary spending be it a friendly
drink at the inn, to gamble with or to save up to buy a book, was under 10% of
his wage.
Trade and debts between neighbours were quite often settled by barter, this

included rents which could be a proportion of the harvest crop. This was a
holdover of the feudal tithing regime but it was used because, despite the influx
of South American silver, coins were still comparatively rare. Agricultural rents,
when they were paid in coin to an absentee landlord, were of the order of a
guilder/acre/year, less for pasture and more for arable land and often much
more for prime meadows or orchards.

Sources
Google was invaluable during the cration of this document. However I found a
lot of mutually incompatible documents so google on its own will lead to
problems. The following seem to be correct and were mined for most of the
above:
http://www.economics.utoronto.ca/munro5/MONEYLEC.htm
http://www.algonet.se/~hogman/slmynt_eng.htm
http://www.portsdown.demon.co.uk/coin.htm and
http://www.portsdown.demon.co.uk/mark.htm
http://www.helmer-c.dk/Econhist/dk-money.htm
http://home.golden.net/~medals/staremoneta.html
http://www.anythinganywhere.com/info/a2z.htm and especially
http://www.anythinganywhere.com/info/a2z/azgermany.htm
http://users.crocker.com/~jcamp/coins.html