Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Shop for APMEX Bullion on eBay!Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. 300,000 items to help build your collection! Specializing in Modern Numismatics








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

Re-Strike: Knowing The Definition.

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 7 / Views: 3,555Next Topic  
Pillar of the Community
austrokiwi's Avatar
2087 Posts
 Posted 01/04/2014  02:44 am Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add austrokiwi to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
this may seem overly "freudian fixated" but I am seeing often considerable confusion over the term re-strike. In fact when I look at my own collecting focus on Maria Theresa thalers I actually find the 1780 MAria Theresa thaler does not actually fit the definition of a re-strike.

So first the generally accepted definition of a restrike:

"Re-strike: A later impression from an original die"

Sourse: Dictionary of Numismatic Names by Albert R. Frey


There are a number of restrikes such as 1925 Sovereign. the 1765 Guenzburg Maria Theresa thaler( the 1766 & 1767 striking were made with the 1765 dated dies). However the definition is not strictly applied. the New Zealand Waitangi crown was struck( and dated) in 1935, but it was necessary to strike more in 1936 but every Watangi crown is regarded as original.


With the 1780 dated maria Theresa Thaler every one , my self included, regards it is a re-strike. But the so called re-strikes were never produced using the original dies and it is very easy to sort original from re-strike when you know how.

Now Frey defines another type of coin:

"Posthumous Coins are such as were struck after the death of the individual whose name they bear"


The MTT actually matches better the definition of a Posthumous strike....and when one looks at the orders directing the production of the MTT after Maria Theresa's death...posthumous is the term that fits most.


Back to restrike: a restrike is not:

  • A fake

  • A counterfeit

  • Illegal



However collectors don't like restrikes as they muddy the waters and as in the case of the 1925 sovereign increase the mintage numbers destroying the collector value of the coin

Edited by austrokiwi
01/04/2014 02:51 am
Pillar of the Community
philadelphian's Avatar
United States
3253 Posts
 Posted 01/04/2014  09:08 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add philadelphian to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Is novodel the term you're looking for?
Pillar of the Community
wonghinghi's Avatar
Hong Kong
1270 Posts
 Posted 01/04/2014  09:26 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add wonghinghi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Austrokiwi, I think you should add one more condition for restrike and posthumous coins, that is, they should be ordered from an official source. 19th Century Latin American Portrait 8R are neither restrike or posthumous as they were lacking an official licence to strike the coins. They are then known as Class 2 Contemporary circulating counterfeit.
Pillar of the Community
Australia
852 Posts
 Posted 01/19/2014  06:37 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add nealeffendi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
wongthingi, you have 2 distinctly different definitions of what is needed for a coin to be a restrike.
-ordered from an official source.
-official licence to strike the coins,
Problem is there are restrikes that meet only one of those 2 definitions,
For example the Australian government contracted the Indians to strike Australian pennies in 1942-43. But in about 1965 the Indians pulled some old dies out, polished them up and struck proof coins for collectors. So the restrike proofs came from an official source but the Australian Government did not give the Indian mints licence to strike the proofs. Australia demanded the mintage stop and the dies returned. Those restrike proofs are worth about $30,000 each now.
Pillar of the Community
austrokiwi's Avatar
2087 Posts
 Posted 01/19/2014  12:21 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add austrokiwi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Is novodel the term you're looking for?



Interesting idea I have been thinking about it for some time.. I assume this link provides an accurate description of Novodel:

http://vintages-antiques-collectibl...ssian-coins/

By my reading Novodel refers specifically to a type of Russian coin....and with the MTT it doesn't fit too well. Tkae the ubiquitous modern restrike. Only a non collector would say it is the same as the origional 1780 strikes. I actual fact the modern restrike MTT(post 1853) is a hybrid coin. Guenzburg like obverse and reverse combined with a Vienna mint edge. I had a discussion about it with another collector who suggest a better label for the MTT would be "frozen date coin"
Pillar of the Community
nalaberong's Avatar
Canada
2805 Posts
 Posted 01/19/2014  2:39 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add nalaberong to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Is it true that all original 1780 strikes read "ARCHID.AUST.DUX" while all restrikes read "ARCHID.AVST.DUX", or is there some overlap?
Pillar of the Community
austrokiwi's Avatar
2087 Posts
 Posted 01/19/2014  6:24 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add austrokiwi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Is it true that all original 1780 strikes read "ARCHID.AUST.DUX" while all restrikes read "ARCHID.AVST.DUX", or is there some overlap


It depends on which mint you are talking about.

For Vienna mint:
Original 1780 MTT have AUST DUX( current known population is around 20 coins). Restrikes from 1781 on have AVST DUX. Vienna mint had to recut dies (including much of the tooling) for the restrikes.. and that mint adopted Maria Theresa's son's revised spelling "AVST DUX" immediately.

For Guenzburg (incorrectly,IMHO, labelled by Krause as Burgau) mint:

AUST DUX continued to be used until 1797 then AVST DUX was adopted. Actually I suspect that, as around 1802, Vienna actually struck Guenzburg mint MTT for Guenzburg that all true Guenzburg restrikes bear AUST DUX.

Prague mint: Origional 1780 strike has AUST DUX with the mint signature(on the reverse) of EVs-IK. restrikes from Prague(1812-1820) have AVST DUX and reverse mint signature of PS-IK

Kremnitz Mint: Origional 1780 strike was a Madonna thaler that did not include AUST DUX in any spelling. Restrike( only produced in 1784) had AUST DUX.

Karlsburg mint( Sometimes referred to as Siebenburgen)

No original strike in 1780. all restrikes have AVST DUX

All other mints producing re-strikes used the spelling AVST DUX except for a very few very rare varieties with AVST DVX

has that helped or is it even more confusing?

Valued Member
Germany
194 Posts
 Posted 01/20/2014  11:27 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add dosmundos to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I think that the main discussion is about the legality of the use of original dies at a later stage

- the case of India striking Australian coins with original dies at a later date without authorization
- the many cases of mint officials striking coins with original dies at later dates to fulfill collectors' wish lists
- the use of official dies at a later stage by private enterprises who managed to get a hold of them somehow
- the Russian novodels (where different metals were used in some, but not all, instances)
- the famous 1804 dollar (where "re"strike is the wrong term since there had not been an original strike, however, the people producing the restrike did not know that)

Can such unofficial/moonlighted/doubtful issues be called "restrikes"? More importantly, if not, what are they? Counterfeits would definitely be a misleading expression
  Previous TopicReplies: 7 / Views: 3,555Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.26 seconds to rattle this change. Forums