| Author |
Replies: 26 / Views: 10,729 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
New Member
 Greece
9 Posts |
Dear friend no S.C. Under the bust
|
|
New Member
 Greece
9 Posts |
I have found these informations.Its a Austria States Maria Theresa Silver Thaler KM#15 , Dav.#1147 Gunzburg mint Burgau Obverse : Armored Bust of Maria Theresa Reverse : G below eagle in cartouche
|
|
New Member
 Greece
9 Posts |
*** Edited by Staff - Please Review the rules that you agreed to when you registered. ***
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
Btw the 1765 Guenzburg MTT is quite common. It shouldn't be described as rare. Ok checked my references 1765 was a transition year. THE SC signature was introduced during 1765 so you find MTT with and without the SC mint signature
Edited by austrokiwi 04/25/2014 07:49 am
|
|
New Member
 Greece
9 Posts |
As I can see on Krause Publications its not common thats why if you r looking in all over Internet its not easy to see thaler like this one.Most of you can see its with the Initials SC. Thanks any way for your Help austrokiwi I will need more help with some more pieces I got.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
Thank you I really needed to pin down when some of the mintmark/mint signature changes occurred so you helped me....isn't that whats great about Forums like this?
|
|
New Member
 Greece
9 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
An update I was looking at a better reference and I obtained a much clearer understanding. The mint signature's were officially put into place on the 16th June 1766. So why's it on a 1765 thaler? Because the 1765 thaler was restruck in 1766. Maria theresa's husband died in 1765. In 1766 another form of the MTT was produced(the Burgau conventions thaler)Banks and traders wanted the standard MTT so the 1765 was restruck but following the rules; with the mint signature SC added. So the no "SC" 1765 MTT are original strikes and the ones with SC are restrikes produced in 1766. IN 1767 a new widows bust was produced.
Edited by austrokiwi 05/09/2014 04:33 am
|
|
New Member
Indonesia
2 Posts |
I've got these coin, looks like the same 1765 MTT coin but there are slightly different things  
Edited by DonButars 09/03/2014 1:43 pm
|
|
Valued Member
South Africa
453 Posts |
|
|
New Member
Indonesia
2 Posts |
Is it a fake or genuine one?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
Can you provide a better lit picture of the reverse. For now it looks genuine (probably Vienna mint). It appears to have been holed and plugged. Something to note. From the Austrian Habsburgs perspective the Vienna mint was the main mint and Guenzburg. burgau as Krause insists on calling it( LIke calling the denver mint "Colorado". Was a minor provincial mint. These days every one seems to assume the Guenzburg mint is the Main type of MTT.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
Quote: 1765 was restruck but following the rules; with the mint signature SC added. So the no "SC" 1765 MTT are original strikes and the ones with SC are restrikes produced in 1766. Can't be sure you are right or wrong, austrokiwi. What do "S.C." stand for? More likely be the mint master's initial. Acccording to Davenport, #1148 Gunsburg convention talers have both with S.C. and w/o S.C. varieties. This means the presence or absence of S.C. is not a must. Why didn't all the 1766 convention talers have S.C. mark on them (if this was a rule)? Henry
|
|
Pillar of the Community
2087 Posts |
I feel like I am repeating my self here. On Austrian Habsburg thalers form the mid 18th century you find MInt marks and mint signatures. MInt signatures were only introduced in 1766 As I stated earlier Quote: The mint signature's were officially put into place on the 16th June 1766 The S is Tobias Schoebl the C is the mint Warden Josef Hubert von Clotz Basically it is impossible for Habsburg Thalers to bear mint signature prior to june 1766.... So any 1765 dated MTT( known to be restruck) bearing a mint signature of S C were restruck after the 16th June 1766. As this is from the state archives and is published in a number of different places I can not see how you can think I am wrong on this point The convention thalers were a coin of the realm. Issued for use in Swabia. Apparently they weren't what the banks were looking for for sale to the Levant hence the restriking of the 1765 MTT. Obviously the 1766 Conventions thalers that don't have the mint signature SC were struck before the 16 June 1766
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
Quote: Obviously the 1766 Conventions thalers that don't have the mint signature SC were struck before the 16 June 1766
This is the point what I need and now I understand fully. Thank you austrokiwi. Henry
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 26 / Views: 10,729 |
Page 2 of 2
|