Some Interesting Counterstamped Mtt Thalers

The title of your post and the first part of the body of your post are very easily misread as you put it. Hence the strength of my posts.
Words like "interesting" are not applied to Chinese fakes why are you applying them to Middle Eastern Fakes.





In particular the following statement of yours is particularly concerning.....In it you declare they are fantasy pieces Youur claim that they should have happened is in light of how the MTT was actually traded is farcical. Any one familiar with how the MTT was traded would know that counter-marking the coins would actually decrease their value in the regions where the Counter-marks were supposed to have been used. Accordingly countermarking of MTTs in the East African and Middle Eastern region was very unlikely. You said( I would remind you:

Austrowiki, the "should have happened" is something I picked up from a source while researching the counterstamps. And there is nothing wrong about the word interesting, for these are certainly interesting pieces in many ways, not just the controversy behind them. You are just splitting hairs and you being mad about these pieces is pointless. They are restrike host coins with fantasy or modern counterstamps and everyone that collects them knows this. There is no fire here for you to put out.

Colniajohn - the coins are correct silver purity, have been tested via multiple methods. These are known types as described in the Hafner catalog, they are not Chinese counterfeits. I have never seen a high quality Chinese counterfeit of these anyway, does not make sense to make them unless they are faking earlier and valuable types. The host coins here without the counterstamps would just be worth melt value anyway.

colonialjohn - yea I get that. I initially presented them as legitimate collectible pieces, which I strongly believe they are, but I can see why that would cause some controversy. The thing here is that people spends thousands on these pieces even knowing full well they are mid century fantasy pieces. Every auction record I could find for them noted that they are spurious issues. The "Unusual World Coins" Krause publication has tons of fantasy pieces, and you don't see people creating controversy over these, not sure why the ones I posted would be any different. I guess it's just a matter of one person having an opinion they feel very strongly about, but the market seems to disagree with.

Actually if you look at the way these fakes are advertised...the words dealers use are euphamisms such as "Spurious", "doubtful" etc. What they don't use is the word fake......as the moment they do their sales will drop. This one person is doing a Mini Seminar at the ANA's Summer seminar.....on exercise will involve going through an auction catalog of counter-marked MTTs identifying the base coins from the auctioneers pictures. The aim is to sure the participants understand how to identify the coins and also warn them about the fake counter-marks that are out there. The fact is there are a huge number of dealers and collectors who rely on the fact that many customers and fellow dealer have no idea of how to identify MTT. so they use euphemistic terms to sell these fakes, this protects them from complaint and liability. I believe this is a passing phase. The market for counter-marked MTTs is such that more and more counter-marks are being produced and overloading the market... so for now the market may be good for such fakes but there is a huge Risk that the market will collapse( and I assure you that as I continue to do presentations and publish articles I am doing my best to ensure that it does).

For any one looking to buy such items are you really prepared to take a loss?

In a private communication Numismat has informed me that these counter-marked coins are in Krause's Unusual world coins catalog. I had never ever thought Krause would list such items, so I checked my old copy and they are there. According to Numismat the current valuations are somewhere around US$1000.00 for some types. As I noted Earlier the counter-marks by Mel Wacks and the Missouri Numismatic society are more important numismatic and are rarer. Those two real counter-marks should be setting the market levels not the "fantasy/fake issues. Whats even worse is that Krause doesn't even warn readers that these Countermarks are regarded as Fakes and that as a general rule they are found on mid 20th century base coins. Today I will be drafting a letter to Krause asking them:

• why they are listing these coins?


• Why they haven't added a comment that they are generally regarded as Spurious( euphemism for Fake)


• Why they haven't listed the MIssouri and Wel wacks examples

The situation is very much like one you might see in the art world.



The reality with these counter-marked MTT.

• There are a significant number of dealers, publishers like Krause, and collectors who have an interest in these spurious countermarks being worth a lot.


• There are very few dealers and collectors who have developed an Eye for identifying MTT to mint and date of striking with the result;


• IN the current coin market it is unlikely that buyers who rely on dealers knowledge will challenge the authenticity of the counter-mark and the dealers expertise. SO;


• Dealers rely on the perceived doubt on these issues but they use the word "spurious" rather than fake. "Spurious" sells "fake" doesn't

If you look at the same counter-marks on non MTT base coins there is a significant price difference( often around half the value of the MTT version). IMHO the reason for the price differential is the inability of people to identify the MTTs minting date...in this case doubt = money.


I used to want to own some of these coins... I actually have one Mozambique "PM" example. The Base coin is holed and was struck in Florence between 1814-1828/35. More than likely it is one of the true counter-marked coins. However no one ( because of the "fakes") will ever be able to say it is genuine so destroying the coins numismatic value and likely its monetary value.

I believe in time the value of these fakes will drop substantively. It doesn't actually take long to learn how to identify MTT to period and place of striking. I assure you when you do have the relevant experience and knowledge when you see one of these fakes it just looks incredibly wrong. I mean wrong in the manner of seeing a 2010 quarter being sold as a 1920s coin.

I would say this to Numismat and other who have these fakes. Make sure you establish the provenance of the coin before you buy it. If the fake is one of the coins sold in the Hans Schulman auctions of 1956 and 69, or was part of the Hal Wallis Collection sold by Paul Bosco in 1997 then relax a little. I agree those coins do have a fantasy value and will likely retain their value. If you can't trace it back to those auctions then its quite possible you have a new version( produced in the last 10 years. The fact is those counter-marks are being reproduced today( I believe Spain is one location where it is happening) counterfeiters will get greedy and more of these travesties will come onto the market and will ultimately destroy the market.


Edit: There is one other point I really should make clear. NUmismat quoted the views of other when he said these fakes were issues that should have occured. I have traced that view( could go back even earlier) to Paul Bosco in his 97 catalog of Hal Walls collection of trade coins. Paul Bosco writes
"It is possible that someone attempted to fill a gap in the numismatic record by making coins that the countries involved should have made"

Given the knowledge and zeitgeist at that time( 1997) thats not an unreasonble statement. However the knowledge and zeitgeist was wrong. The MAria Theresa thaler should never be understood as coin of a particular country. It was an international coin, that flowed through porous borders like water through a sieve. The coin flowed through an extensive trading net work. It was continually on the move. when Muscat traders valued the coin more highly than their colleagues in Zanzibar Arabic sailors would buy the coin in Zanzibar and sell in Muscat. The form of the coin was well known. There were clear trading customs involving bartering techniques, particular one was expected to examine the coins being traded and it would be expected that you would reject some( to not do so would be impolite or reflect badly on your reputation as a trader). These customs were applied in all the regions that Arabic trading routes extended to.. covering Egypt, Sudan, Timbuktu,Northern Nigeria, Ethiopia,and the states bordering the red sea and Persian Gulf. As well as the whole East coast of Africa, across to Ceylon and even Indonesia. So when MTT were traded the coins were examined and coins that did not "meet the grade" were rejected or if it was a Schroff ( currency/ bullion trader) would have been accepted at a significant discount in value. Accordingly Counter-marked coins would have been devalued considerably, and it is the predominant reason for the very short period of counter-marking in Mozambique. Yes it could have been used to limit export of the coins....but any Ruler preventing the flow of MTTs in such a manner would have found they had shot themselves in the foot financially! So when you understand the market for the MTT, counter-marking seems ridiculous. In Indonesia the MTT reached an End station in the trade route..it was often melted down so counter-marking there was less problematic

Numismat and others just to reinforce how ridiculous these Counter marks look. In the course of writing to Krause I reviewed my copy of Unusual world coins( 5th Edition) I found these coins listed(It is particularly bizarre when Krause dates the Hejaz countermarks to 1916-1924):



Hejaz X 11 through to X18:
X11 is on a base coin produced after 1935( London Mint) X13 is on a Rome mint coin produced after 1935 and given the typical die crack closer to 1938. X 15 is also on a Rome mint base coin (post 1935). Only X 14 has any thing like true face validity in this case the base coin is a Venice mint strike of the 1840s.

Nejd X14.2 through X20 X 14.2 is on a post 1960s Base coin it actually looks like it is a 1980s strike.


Pemba X-17 through X-18 X 18 is described incorrectly Guenzburg ( not Gunzburg in German the "U" has an umlaut so to pronounce the name correctly in English it is best to add the letter "e") . Guenzburg never produced that form of the MTT. From the photo all I can say it is a modern re-strike ( post 1853)

The face book group "Monedas Españolas: Reproducciones y Falsificaciones (Fake Spanish Coins)" Has copies of that book in their files section. Problem with that book is it mixes genuine with fake.