| Author |
 Replies: 3,662 / Views: 260,131 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2637 Posts |
Undated. Since it could have been minted in 1490 I posted it here, but I was not intending (or pretending) to move the ball down the field.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
34430 Posts |
Ah ok no prob--thanks for the clarification and glad you posted it. We will get a legit 1490 sooner than it took for our 1491 AD post I hope.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5177 Posts |
There's a bit of a cloud over the would-be 1491 coin, though - starting with the fact that the Jaunpur Sultanate didn't exist any more by 1491... More details at the underbidder's thread, with a comment by drnsreedhar: http://goccf.com/t/288311Enough late dates are apparently attested for this type (the Zeno database has examples dated 899, 904, 910 and 911 AH, among others) that I'd personally take the 896 at face value. I'm hardly the expert, however. (For the record, no, as far as I know, I don't currently have any 15th century dated coins. In fact, last time I checked, the next dated coin in my collection that I knew the date of was from 627 AD. I'd love to get some 15th century Muslim coins, however - they aren't that rare, really, just hard to identify.) |
|
Moderator
 United States
189673 Posts |
Quote:
Undated. Since it could have been minted in 1490 I posted it here, but I was not intending (or pretending) to move the ball down the field. Fair enough. It is better than my typical and boring bumps.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
Quote:More details at the underbidder's thread, with a comment by drnsreedhar: http://goccf.com/t/288311 I must have missed that thread, but that coin is from the same auction. So, I have finished reading that thread, and interpreting the date as being 869 is interesting, but I cannot see how that is possible. When I was searching for more information about the coin, Zeno was one of my resources, and I remember there being a lot of 899-dated coins. One of the clearly dated ones can be found here. With the date of 899, no matter in which order the digits are rearranged, the date would be something after Hussain Shah's reign has ended. And if an 899 exists, an 896 surely would as well. |
|
Moderator
United States
34430 Posts |
At the risk of jumping the gun, I'm going to post a coin from 1490 AD. It was previously posted here: http://goccf.com/t/269713&whichpage=2#2283828Here is a Koertling from the German City of Goettingen. It is a little smaller, coming in at 1.2 g and 21 mm. The attribution is Levinson I-250a and the date is 1490 AD. The obv contains the inscription MONE NOVA GOTTING around an octofoil with the letter G in the middle. The rev has the same letter G (this time on a cross) plus the inscription ANNO DNI M CCCC XC.   "If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Moderator
United States
189673 Posts |
Wow! We just moved up two years that fast?  It is a new day, so the title will change.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1186 Posts |
Undated 1489 Hungarian Denar under Matthias Corvinus with a K-P radial rosette mint mark. Huszar 722,Unger 567c,Pohl 223-2,Rethy II232.   |
|
Moderator
United States
189673 Posts |
Three in less than a week?  Very nice!  Looks like I can change the date again tomorrow.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5177 Posts |
According to the recent Levinson thread, if I didn't miss anything, we have 1489-8, 1485-1, 1479-4, 1472-68, 1466-5, 1459-8, 1449, 1447, 1444, 1438-7, 1420-19, and 1411 (plus a few more dates in the 1490s).
In other words, we're missing 1487, 1486, 1480, 1473, 1467, and after 1464 we're missing more than we have (as should be expected).
1487 and 1486 might require Muslim dates (892 and 891 AH respectively). 1480, 1473 and 1467 would be tricky.
Of course by 1464 we're up in the territory where Muslim dates make sense again; good luck with the 1450s and 1440s though!
EDIT: just found a post where EddieDiz gives his own list of single-year type Hungarian denars; the dates are 1489, 1470-68, 1465, 1463-2, 1446, 1444-0, 1438-6, 1434-3, and a few in the 14th century.
This means that in total we have 1489-8, 1485-1, 1479-4, 1472-68, 1466-5, 1463-2, 1459-8, 1449, 1447-6, 1444-0, 1438-6, 1434-3, and a few scattered 1421 and older. (I misremembered the 1467, which I mentioned in a previous version of this post; it was actually 1465.)
In other words, we're still missing 1487-6, 1480, 1473, 1467, 1464, 1461-0, 1457-0, 1448, 1445, 1439, 1435, and a lot of dates before 1432 (by which point we might as well switch entirely to AH dates).
The 1457-0 range will be somewhat tricky (but perhaps doable with Muslim dates, where it corresponds to 863-56 AH). No comment on the rest, sorry.
Edited by january1may
06/26/2017 6:32 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
189673 Posts |
We are ready for the 1488 then.  |
|
Moderator
United States
34430 Posts |
Good summary@j1m.
And @eddiediz, I'm glad that we are getting the band back together again. Hopefully, we get pepactonius' help too!
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1186 Posts |
Actually,I can add 1439 to that list because I got one recently making it 1444-1436.
|
|
Moderator
United States
189673 Posts |
Quote:
Actually,I can add 1439 to that list because I got one recently making it 1444-1436. Excellent! |
|
Moderator
United States
34430 Posts |
From the Levinson thread, here is my contribution for 1488 AD. Quote:
Continuing to show some Northern Netherlands dated coins, here is a pretty rare Half Stuiver from the City of Nijmegen dated 1488. On the obv, it shows a lion to the left holding the shield of Nijmegen surrounded by the legend MONETA NOVA NOVIMAGEN. The rev shows a floriated cross with imperial orb at the top and the inscription ANNO DNI M CCCC LXXXVIII. In my example, the centers are quite weak, but the inscriptions are largely legible. It is 22 mm in diameter and has a mass of 1.6 g. It is attributed as Levinson III-199.
I'm pretty sure that this is the rarest early dated coin that I own, with only an estimated 7-10 examples available for collectors (i.e. excluding those locked up in museum collections). The vast majority--perhaps 85%--of the several roughly 1,100 coins listed in Levinson's book include photographs or at least line drawings. As if to reinforce its rarity, this little guy is one of the few that just has the description. If there is ever a second edition of Levinson, maybe my coin will be chosen as an exemplar, despite the weak centers...   "If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
| |
Replies: 3,662 / Views: 260,131 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 06/24/2017 5:04 pm
