alexbq2 Posted June 16, 2010 Report Share Posted June 16, 2010 Nicholas the 1st may not have been a very popular ruler among his contemporaries, but I believe him to be extremely popular among the coin collectors. In his 30 years of rule just the copper coin standard changed 4 times! Very popular masonic eagle appeared on gold coins during the reign of his far more popular brother, but stuck around under Nicholas, and even made a brief appearance on copper coins! Also the popular Russo-Polish series appeared under the unkind eye of the emperor Nicholas. I understand he really did not like his Polish subjects, they did not like him either. Perhaps this is the reason why the polish zloty coins retained the portrait of Alexander 1st almost ten years into the rule of Nicholas I? Either Nicholas did not want to appear in Poland under any circumstances – even as a coin, or the Poles would not accept him in their pockets! On top of that, I just (yes it took me awhile) noticed that on the Reverse of these coins his name is spelled Mikolay not Nikolay as I would expect. I suspect that Mikolay is the Polish version of the name Nikolay? Or maybe it was just another “clever” disguise for the Polish coins! You know the portrait of Alexander on the obverse, some obscure tiny reference to some Mikolay king of Poland on the reverse, sort of looks like it has nothing to do with the Russian emperor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobh Posted June 16, 2010 Report Share Posted June 16, 2010 Nicholas the 1st may not have been a very popular ruler among his contemporaries, but I believe him to be extremely popular among the coin collectors. In his 30 years of rule just the copper coin standard changed 4 times! Very popular masonic eagle appeared on gold coins during the reign of his far more popular brother, but stuck around under Nicholas, and even made a brief appearance on copper coins! Also the popular Russo-Polish series appeared under the unkind eye of the emperor Nicholas. I understand he really did not like his Polish subjects, they did not like him either. Perhaps this is the reason why the polish zloty coins retained the portrait of Alexander 1st almost ten years into the rule of Nicholas I? Either Nicholas did not want to appear in Poland under any circumstances – even as a coin, or the Poles would not accept him in their pockets! On top of that, I just (yes it took me awhile) noticed that on the Reverse of these coins his name is spelled Mikolay not Nikolay as I would expect. I suspect that Mikolay is the Polish version of the name Nikolay? Or maybe it was just another “clever” disguise for the Polish coins! You know the portrait of Alexander on the obverse, some obscure tiny reference to some Mikolay king of Poland on the reverse, sort of looks like it has nothing to do with the Russian emperor. I believe that Nikolai is also spelled with an "M" in Czech (Czech is closer to Polish than either language is to Russian). And "Miklós" is the Hungarian version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nordic gold Posted June 16, 2010 Report Share Posted June 16, 2010 Does anyone know why the eagle type 1826-1831 is called masonic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted June 16, 2010 Report Share Posted June 16, 2010 in my opinion, russian nikolay is ukrainian mikolay and polish mikolay anf few more slavic languages have similar spelling, so in case with polish misspelling there was nothing wrong but polish language used Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted June 16, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2010 Ahh! But why was Nicolay, or Mikolay, hiding behind Alexander’s bust on the obverse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexbq2 Posted June 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Does anyone know why the eagle type 1826-1831 is called masonic? Not sure, I think it may be something the collectors made up. The eagle came about on gold coinage in 1817. Masonry was popular in Russia at that time, but Nicholas, as far as I know did not care for it (especially after the December 1825 troubles). Secret societies were being abolished, so I doubt that he would have kept the masonic symbol on coins. But that’s just my opinion. I kind of think that this eagle is warlike and triumphant. Perhaps the design was inspired by the defeat of Napoleon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one-kuna Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Ahh! But why was Nicolay, or Mikolay, hiding behind Alexander’s bust on the obverse? as i understood correctly uzdenikov's view on this, the coins were struk with Alexander I bust (king of poland) to save the coining process and mandatory was to place a name of existing emperor of Nicolas I on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Does anyone know why the eagle type 1826-1831 is called masonic? It is a secret. Dont you read Dan Brown novels? here is a good article on the masonic bird... http://www.masonicdictionary.com/doubleeagle.html The eagle with wings down started during Alex I's time. Alex I was most likely a Freemason. Nicholas may have been unaware or indifferent to the similarity of the wings down eagle with the masonic eagle. and some more outtakes from the google web, (uncredited, unchecked, and used w/out permission): "On Catherine's death in 1796 the situation for Freemasonry changed. Paul I not only abolished all prison sentences imposed on Freemasons (in including Novikov) but rewarded, protected and even consulted them on State affairs although Freemasonry remained officially prohibited. In 1797 an edict had been passed forbidding secret meetings and, although Freemasonry was not specifically mentioned, Paul elicited a promise from all Worshipful Masters not to open any lodges. It has been suggested that this may have been due to certain rivalries between Masonic Templar degrees and the Maltese Knights. Paul declared himself Grand Master of the Knights of Malta on 16 December 1798. (See Speth AQC VIII, p.232). Novikov returned to Moscow, but his publishing days were over. He died on 31 July, 1818, aged 74. Yet he lived to see some of the Russian Freemasons rise to become outstanding generals against Russia's enemies such as Turks and Napoleon. Men such as Alexander Suvorov and Mikhail Kutuzov and some of the world's greatest authors such as Alexander Pushkin. Alexander I (1777-1825) succeeded Paul after the latter's assassination on 11/12 March 1801. Alexander annulled the decree prohibiting all secret societies and became an initiate of the Craft. Dormant lodges were revived and new ones established. Those members of the Craft still attached to the spirit of mysticism that had permeated Russian Freemasonry under Novikov and Schwartz appear to have been especially active at this time. Christian mysticism was in vogue and imparted a significant influence on fashionable society in St. Petersburg. The Rosicrucians opened a lodge (Neptune) in Moscow in 1803. A new Grand Lodge was formed in 1810. Russian Freemasonry began to move in opposite directions -- a Conservative movement represented by the St. Petersburg and Moscow mystics and a Liberal one following French fashions and ideas (again!). A third "force", the revival of the strictly Christian Swedish Rite, reinforced the autocratic regime with its support of Autocracy and Orthodoxy. Yet, in 1810, the Ministry of Police demanded the leaders of Russian Freemasonry produce their constitutions and rituals. As a result of this investigation, a member of the Lodge United Friends (also General Lieutenant aide-de-camp of the Emperor) was appointed Minister of Police. This was perhaps more subtle than it first appears. If the government wished to investigate Freemasonry, but also respected oaths of secrecy, who better to investigate them than a Minister of Police who was also a Freemason? At the beginning of 1812, a Book of Constitutions had been prepared for the guidance of Freemasons. The thrust of the contents was clearly in patriotic support of the Tsar. Under these rules, none but Christians of Russian nationality were to be admitted to high office in the Craft and at the head was to be a Prefect, not responsible to his brethren, but to the Minister of Police and the Emperor himself. This was, perhaps, in opposition to the Swedish system. The Grand Lodge had now become dominated by the strict autocracy of Alexander and his Police Minister. Following the defeated Napoleonic Armies back through Europe, the army of Tsar Alexander I was exposed even more to European ideas of freedom and reform. In 1814, 571 Russian Freemasons (including 62 Generals and 150 Colonels) met with their French brethren in Paris. On their return, the ground swell against the autocracy continued to consolidate. While the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Forces during the Napoleonic Wars, Prince Michael Kutusov, was a prominent Freemason along with many of the high-ranking officers (all of whom had served their country with distinction), Tsar Alexander became increasingly influenced by Prince Metternich who was convinced the Craft in Russia now harboured highly suspicious members of secret political organisations. Strong political elements had certainly penetrated the lodges. Masonic equality was misunderstood and attracted into the Craft men who were resolved to unite against class privileges and to end the autocracy with emancipation. Telepneff (AQC XXXVIII, p. 36) writes that conclusive proof exists that a dangerous political element had entered Russian Masonry. In August 1815 the Grand Lodge Astrea was formed with a predominant German character and Russian Freemasonry began to loose its national characteristics. Its Statutes and Rituals (in French) occupied 154 pages. Also that year, a Swedish Provincial Grand Lodge was formed in Russia to work the Swedish Rite which regarded the so-called "higher" degrees as the acme and perfection of Masonry (see Batham, p.61). Astrea confined its attention to the three Craft Degrees and left its member lodges free to work whatever additional degrees their members wished. By 1818 there were about 1300 Russian Freemasons of whom about 1000 lived in St. Petersburg and met in twenty Lodges." Russian Freemasonry basically goes downhill from there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.