# Objections from collectors, in this case, coin collectors.....



## ViniB (Jan 16, 2022)

Often we encounter objections to alt history topics and foruns by the collector community, especially coin collectors. One example, pertaining Brazil is the earliest coins allegedly made here in the mid to late 1600s. The narrative goes like this: 
Besieged in Pernambuco by the Portuguese, the Dutch issued in 1645 and 1646, to pay their soldiers, the first coin inscribed “BRASIL”. Named _obsidional_, it is said to have been fabricated by melting either African gold or gold tableware. It is only in 1694 that the Brazilian itinerant mint was created in Bahia, and successively closed and transferred to Rio de Janeiro in 1698, to Pernambuco in 1700, and back to Rio de Janeiro in 1702. This itinerary is related to the exhaustion of the local metal supplies, until the discovery of gold in Brazil in the late 1600s. SR-XRF analyses of a small set of coins issued by the Dutch West Indies Company and the first Rio de Janeiro mint show the use of different gold alloys and the ratios of trace elements allow advancing several assumptions on the provenance of the gold.
So we have a really questionable narrative about the origins of Brazil first Gold coins. Appart from said dutch coins, there's not a lot of proof that they were in fact here, only scarce & circunstancial evidence. I can say to a collector hey, we really don't know if the dutch were here and ge goes like Wtf man?? We have coins made by the dutch, what are you talking about?? 
This is only one local narrative example, but there's plenty more here to look at, so the question would be how do we conter arguments like these?? Honestly i don't really see anything like it here or other groups and foruns. Many thanks to everyone who can provide insights on the matter.
Below is an example of said coins


----------

