Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Specializing in Modern Numismatics Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin Auctions300,000 items to help build your collection! Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Vancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer








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!

An Early Maria Theresa Thaler Restrike - H35

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 10 / Views: 2,755Next Topic  
Pillar of the Community
wonghinghi's Avatar
Hong Kong
1270 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  01:23 am Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add wonghinghi to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
Hello members,

This is my latest acquired MTT restrike. Just to post and share with anyone who are interested in this special historical coin.

The coin is identified as H35, was minted at Milan in 1790-1802. The coin is 27.88 grams and 40.0-40.1 mm (different from Hafner's Lexicon which shows 41.5 mm in diameter).

One question to the coin: what is the letters "ST" above the mint officers' signature stand for?

An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
An-Early-Maria-Theresa-Thaler-Restrike---H35
Pillar of the Community
Medieval's Avatar
3772 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  01:36 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Medieval to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
There is a pdf which might shed some light on it: http://www.numismatik-cafe.at/downl....php?id=7722
Interesting information on your type in there.
Pillar of the Community
wonghinghi's Avatar
Hong Kong
1270 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  01:52 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add wonghinghi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Oh so fast to receive your reply, Medieval. Thank you and Merry Christmas. This is austrokiwi's paper, also thank you very much. Henry
Pillar of the Community
austrokiwi's Avatar
2087 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  02:34 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add austrokiwi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
JUst for every one else's benefit: Hafner says the coin is MIlan based on the 1976 work of Dr Franz Leypold. Hafner published in 1984. In 1986/7 (I am going from memory) Dr Leypold published an article updating his research. In that update he acknowledges the work of MR Broome and accepts that H35 is from Florence. If we were to be strict we wouldn't describe H35 as a restrike but instead describe it as a counterfeit. Florence is the most likely mint, as such the coin would have been struck without Austrian Habsburg approval. It is therefore a Napoleonic state counterfeit( of correct weight and silver content) As for the "ST". NO one knows what it stands for. I have to get to Florence to check but in other literature quoting the Florentine mint records there is an interesting fragment Which says the Coin has the initials "S.F." standing for Series Fecit. ( translates as Series made this coin/engraving). Series is the probable engraver. I am pretty sure the authors citing that fragment weren't familiar with the MTT. MY speculation is they confused the ST with the proper Mint Signature SF and read an "F" in the records where they should had read "T" ( its an easy mistake with old hand written documents). So my speculation is the engraver to ensure the Austrian habsburgs wouldn't have a legal standing added ST ( for Series Fecit) to clearly identify the coin from Austrian made examples. He would have used the last letter of Fecit to ensure it wasn't SF/SF which would have been confusing. I repeat this is pure speculation but it is the only possibility that fits the currently known facts. This variety was first struck in 1814 and its very existence challenges Hafners date attribution of the other so called Italian mint MTT). The coin was produced before Venice and Milan started production of the type. The current Numismatist has an article outlining the other evidence that Hafners attributions are incorrect.

Henry its a very nice example I have 11 or so and only two are close to the condition of yours. Hafner talks about only two varieties . MY 11 examples show there are probably five varieties made from 3 die sets.
Edited by austrokiwi
12/20/2014 02:35 am
Pillar of the Community
wonghinghi's Avatar
Hong Kong
1270 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  08:04 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add wonghinghi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Thank you so much about the story behind this coin, though you said it's your speculation. I am very satisfied to have this important MTT collection, no matter it is a "counterfeit" or not.It is great to hear that this is a Napoleon-related example. The coin bears an additional bonus to me as I love to collect coins at this era. Henry

Pillar of the Community
swamperbob's Avatar
United States
5362 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  1:51 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add swamperbob to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Nice coin Henry - great that it is a counterfeit.
Pillar of the Community
wonghinghi's Avatar
Hong Kong
1270 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  8:12 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add wonghinghi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks!
Pillar of the Community
Medieval's Avatar
3772 Posts
 Posted 12/20/2014  10:01 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Medieval to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Wouldn't really call it a counterfeit but rather imitation coinage (the ST letters make it different from the original if not sanctioned).
Pillar of the Community
swamperbob's Avatar
United States
5362 Posts
 Posted 12/21/2014  12:47 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add swamperbob to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
An unauthorized coin made in a location other than a mint legally authorized to do so is by definition a counterfeit. Adding two letters will identify it to those who know what the letters mean, but since the fact was so well hidden that the meaning was only recently discovered proves it certainly was not common knowledge.

If you classify these as genuine varieties because they contain the correct amount of silver then the 1896 micro-O Morgan dollar needs to be restored to its former VAM status. It was made as a circulating counterfeit when the coin contained only 35-50 cents worth of silver metal. There are other silver and gold counterfeits as well.

In my book, I was faced with the same problem of what to call a class of full weight silver imitation 8 reales that was made for trade purposes. They were made with no authority to do so in the UK, US and other countries decades after the originals ceased to be made.

I introduced a brand new classification for such coins. I called them Class 2 Contemporary Circulating Silver Counterfeits.
Pillar of the Community
austrokiwi's Avatar
2087 Posts
 Posted 12/21/2014  01:25 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add austrokiwi to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Its not a good idea to get tied up in knots over the term counterfeit. My comment came from considerable research and a need to accurately understand the different varieties.

I think class 2 counterfeit is the best way to describe it. Don't worry about the word counterfeit to many people think counterfeit= worthless. class 2 counterfeit dutch lion thalers produced in Italian mints are phenomenally rare and fetch prices in the range of US$1000 - US$20,000.

I do have to admit with the MTT it is very confusing. I regard the coin posted in this thread as a counterfeit because the florence mint had no legal standing to produce the coin( under contemporary international law. But the MTT produced by London, Paris, Belgium, Calcutta and bombay I would regard as genuine. the reason being is due to a legal mistake by the Austrians. After the 1st world war the austrians forgot to include the MTT in their monetary legislation. They then handed the minting rights over to the italians effectively, under international legal principles(no applicable international law at that time) surrendering the right to the MTT. There was a Private Swiss striking in 1937 but I would regard that as a class II counterfeit because it was deemed illegal ( which it was) and the Swiss government seized the dies( they hadn't authorised it). From a collecting point of view this seems complicated and confusing...but in understanding the story of the MTT such definitions enhance the coins' story. The ST/SF variant is rare ( R5 on the 1-7 scale) and understanding that it was made without Austrian Habsburg authority just makes the coin more desirable. The coin Henry posted has a value in the range US$500 -US$1000.
Edited by austrokiwi
12/21/2014 01:44 am
Pillar of the Community
swamperbob's Avatar
United States
5362 Posts
 Posted 12/21/2014  12:46 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add swamperbob to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
I agree that it is best to not get hung up over technicalities. The concept must remain clear to be of value. Class 2 is absolutely not always a condemnation as worthless by any means. Until actual rarity is determined by testing of large numbers of coins the value of Class 2 coins of any type is uncertain. As you indicate many types of clearly Class 2 coins are as rare as many of the Class 1 debased counterfeits. Rarity does not change because of a technical legal status.

I agree you are technically correct when you say:


Quote:
But the MTT produced by London, Paris, Belgium, Calcutta and bombay I would regard as genuine. the reason being is due to a legal mistake by the Austrians.


While technically correct this way of classifying some MTTs as "genuine" because of a mistake made by the Country that actually controlled the legitimacy of the coins - does not change the way the people authorizing the coins would have viewed it. England thought they had a legitimate right to coin counterfeit Spanish and Spanish-American 8 reales. The US altered existing laws to make it "legal" to coin Mexican 8 reales. Even though the Austrians ultimately lost in court on a legal technicality - the MTTs mentioned fall much better into Class 2 than they do as "genuine" with a qualifier. In China today - their laws allow for the legal production of replicas of the coins of all other countries. These do not become "genuine" by a manipulation of law.

The examples you cite might always need a qualifier even under Class 2 but that is where I would place them for simplicity.
  Previous TopicReplies: 10 / Views: 2,755Next 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 0.29 seconds to rattle this change. Forums