Modern Proof Maria Theresa Thaler?

wonghinghi- sorry to inquire, but have you been able to come up with any new ideas about the second coin that I posted above on 11/15/2013? I'm just curious since I'm still rather stuck.

wonghinghi- Thanks for the help! That's actually what I suspected.

However, it is rather frustrating that there is not a description or even an image of H54 on the go-to site for MTTs.
http://www.theresia.name/cgi-bin/Token.cgi?Page=12

How does one defined an H54?

wonghinghi- Great! Thanks!

So does that mean that strikes made later than 1900-30 (H54) actually have oval as opposed to circular beads in the diadem? If so, that could actually clarify 20th century classifications quite a bit.

wonghinghi- hmmm, this is quite puzzling. So does Hafner make any distinction between H54 & 57? I know that you said that they were quite difficult to tell apart.

Like hafner 49 Hafner 57 is a catch all catalog reference. Simple put no one has the time or inclination to do the tedious study of identifying all the variants involved. One extra bit of info the diameter of h57 is less than 40mm...it was the coin that led to the Johnson and Matthey type(H58)

with MTTs
rule one: never ignore an example until you've checked it.
Rule two don't trust auctioneers descriptions:


Have a look at this auction listing( I won it @ €180 + BP)

http://www.sixbid.com/browse.html?a...&lot=1008801

the auctioneer described it as Hafner 37b a coin of moderate rarity. Indeed it looks exactly like Hafner 37b except you need to look at the spelling of AVST DUX on the reverse. Hafner 37b will have the spelling eactly as I have already written. This lot had "AVST DVX" ie: its actually an unkown variant of H42. In 1984 the H42 was known of but its existence was doubted. Since then not more than two were known to exist. This listing was of a third and different example ( 6 pearls in the diadem instead of seven). So I managed to pick up a major rarity for peanuts!! given how little I paid for it no one else noticed the miss-attribution.

Henry and any others with Hafners book.....have a look at the picture of the reverse of H42...... the photograph looks to have been doctored to show the second "V".

Its not a major concern to me...Hafner was obviously trying to illustrate the expected type.

Cheers Henry I was just checking that others were seeing what I was. To explain further:I have become very aware that once something has been published it becomes "fact" and is very rarely questioned. In the case of Hafner 42 too many relying on the book will assume that is exactly the way the coin should look not realizing that the photo has been "constructed" I suspect that some of the pictures in Hafner are repeated for different varieties. you actually have to look at the type coding to get a proper description of the coin.