| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 4,067 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
701 Posts |
I think I have got the identification right on this coin, Just looking for some confirmation. Hafner 49A2, Tail feathers 1-3-1 Dot to left of X/cross Middle feather longer 2 dots between ET & Clementia Pearls match both sides Weight 28.03g Diameter - 40mm Not magnetic.     Should I have any concerns with it or is it ok ? TIA |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
Looks OK... But hard to identify the variety. Have a look in the heart shield on the reverse. The centre band should have two small dots in it. Also is the edge clearly impressed with finely formed letters and devices? if yes to both its probably H49 (Value is bullion value)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United Kingdom
701 Posts |
Hi Austrokiwi, Yes to both dots and a well done edge inscription/detail. The dots in the band would have gone unnoticed without you mentioning it, thanks. I only paid a very small premium above spot so the money side isn't important, I do feel a lot more confident about the next time I find one though. Hopefully a rarer variety next time  Thanks again |
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
Hunting MTT is like coin roll searching;95% of the coins you see are not important....but the 5% makes it worthwhile( and very addictive)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
To me, this is a very modern strike. It is probably a a H60 or H61a, the minting period is 1960s to 1980s. The saltire of H49 is not like that. I have never seen an UNC grade H49 specimen, its minting period is 1890-1900. More information: https://goccf.com/t/139072&SearchTe...eresa,thaler |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
701 Posts |
Hi Wonghinghi,
I would rather let Austrokiwi respond to your point because I simply don't know.
Are there any other pics you would like me to take ?
Looking at your link provided are there any specific details that may help ?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
Second coin in Page 4 and first coin of Page 12 is your coin type. A very common MTT restrike.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
701 Posts |
Hi again, I have taken a couple of pics of the cross for you and also tried to get pics of the edge detail/lettering. I did struggle to photo the edge detail so will try again later. As you can see the lettering is clear and easily legible with no " squashing " or blurring.      |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1666 Posts |
Looks like Hafner 62 to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
The edge is a good indicator. This coin has a clean well defined edge. That places it as being struck before 1960. The Arabesque is typical of pre 1930 but it is not typical of H49. Most likely it is H54 dating from 1890-1930. Value is the same as H49. One would really have to examine the coin in hand to confirm the variety. Like H49 H54 is a catch all variety......It covers a wide range of variants from the date range indicated. Dating MTT is very difficult if you check this months issue of the numismatist you will see an example of the dating problems. the article covers two Varieties and any one familiar with MTT attributions will realise the two file discoveries blow a huge hole in Hafners currently accepted catalog. Unfortunately the discoveries prove the attributions currently accepted for Milan and Venice are wrong ( except for H41 which should now be recognised as Venice 1817-circa 1860). ( I'm the author).
Edit: One further check you can do. With a tape measure measure the length of IUSTITIA on the edge. If its 14mm you have a rare find...if its longer its back to H54
Edited by austrokiwi
12/02/2014 1:19 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
IMO, a modern MTT restrike from 1960s onwards would always has the curved nail on the eagle's claw (as shown in the circle). H54 has not this feature. A H60 will also has an improved edge minting. I would say it is a H60.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
701 Posts |
Hi AustroKiwi & Wonghinghi
The length of " iusticia " is longer than 14mm.
At this point I am leaning towards Wonghinghi's choice based on all the suggestions and evidence.
Please understand that I am not trying to cause an argument between you two, but I do think I have an answer now though.
1 other thing about the coin, I decided to test and check it again a little more diligently with my big magnet, it does not stick to the coin or pick it up but it is giving a strange " pull " feel when held closely above the coin.
When I moved the magnet over the coin within a couple of mm's of the surface area I managed to make the coin " move "
Now I am thinking I have picked up a modern forgery, a pretty good one at that if that's the case.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
Quote:
When I moved the magnet over the coin within a couple of mm's of the surface area I managed to make the coin " move " Hello Tenbobbit, this is a physical effect of diamagnetism caused by Ag inside the coin as your coin contains 83% Ag. You pick up a modern MTT restrike rather than modern forgery. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
701 Posts |
Phew, thought I had a total duffer for a minute.
I purchased it for the purpose of learning something new and I can safely say that it has been an eye opener.
I will definitely dedicate a bit of my spare time to learning more about them after this.
Many thanks to AustroKiwi & Wonghinghi for your combined efforts, greatly appreciated.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
H 60 will have a diameter greater than 40mm and often a blurred/unclean edge . Henry not sure where you get the idea H60 has a clean well defined edge. H60 is another very annoying catch all variety and Hafner notes there are many sub-varieties. Its really hard to put an attribution to these modern varieties. I have gone back to the one confirmed 1962/3 strike I have. The Missouri NUmismatic societies countermarked MTT ( an undervalued numismatic item). the edge on that coin is not clean and not as well defined as the edge pictures shown in this thread. The Missouri countermarked coin is dated 1963 and the coins were purchased brand new from the Vienna mint. My example doesn't have the two dots in the centre band of the heart shield! the other 1960s strike is H55; An error coin( Hafner first labelled it as 1920s but the MIssouri countermarked coins confirm by edge comparison that its a 1960s striking date and Hafner now states it is 1960s) It has the two dots in the heart shield it has the same edge as the Missouri countermarked MTT ( perfect match) and claw is broken unlike the one circled by Henry. The huge problem is no one has a clear break down of all the varieties in this time frame( excluding the non Austrian mint coins). I would still put a bet, based on the edge, that the coin is earlier than 1960. The reason being that once Austria regained the sole Right to MTT production( 1961/2) they started striking the coin in a collar. That causes blurring to the edge back in the 1960s the edge was still readable but, using Hafners words, unclean. By 2000 they couldn't care less about the edge and it is almost always extremely blurred. The coin is in phenomenal condition for a pre 1960s strike so that might indicate a later date but the edge Arabesques are absolutely typical of H54. For me that tips the balance.
Edited by austrokiwi
12/03/2014 10:52 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1666 Posts |
Ian, how come you say that after 2000 they left the edge blurry? I have seen pieces that were advertised as "fresh off the press" a.k.a. very recent, sometimes even proof-like in appearance. They had very clean edges. I'm pretty sure the coin posted here is very modern, as in within the past 25 years.
|
| |
Replies: 23 / Views: 4,067 |
Posted 11/29/2014 3:44 pm
