1603 Teutonic Order taler - question for forum

worldcoinguy · January 1, 2009 1:28PM

I was wondering if I could solicit some opinions and expertise.

I shared my opinion on a recent taler that was offered in ebay auction 220335683216, and now I am not sure I was in the right. I advised the seller that I felt it was fake due to significant die differences from a PCGS certified example I have, as well as the extremely neat obv/rev fields. To his credit, the seller cancelled the auction and was quite courteous in his responses. After re-weighing it, he believes that it is exactly on target for the issue (28.6g). Unfortunately I cant get a weight due to the slab. He has also examined it under magnification and does not see any telltale signs of casting. He also stated that he cannot find any differences between it and one in a Zurich auction catalog that he uses for reference. Was my instinct wrong, or am I perhaps putting too much on the fact that my example is in a PCGS holder? Should I just mind my own business?

Auction OBV (seller's pictures):

My OBV:

Auction REV (seller's pictures)::

My REV:

Slab image:

spoon · January 1, 2009 1:54PM

I don't know the series well enough to render any definitive judgment, but CoinArchives has quite a few examples in their records matching the seller's coin. LINK

The odd thing is, I don't see any with the characteristics found on your example! The lion is the standout thing, but there are several other markers that I don't see in the Archive's pics, like the decoration atop the shield between 6 and 0.

Interesting!

edit: refined the linked search

worldcoinguy · January 1, 2009 2:04PM

Thanks spoon. The number of varieties found within the coinarchives link is quite interesting. On my example, I seem to have a distinct lion (obv left of Maximilian), and the plumes on the helmut differ in relation to the legend on all those examples. I wonder if my example is the one that should be questioned.

1jester · January 2, 2009 12:38AM

WCG, maybe your example is a contemporary counterfeit? I can't say for certain, since I don't know the series at all. However, in general I would say that there were many different dies in use, so just because one doesn't match up to most known examples isn't a reason in itself to be worried. But getting back to your coin, I am troubled by the lettering and how it doesn't look "full" or deeply engraved; it doesn't seem to have as 3D a look as the auction example. That tells me it might not have been engraved by someone with experience, which is nearly always the case with contemporary counterfeits. Let us know what you find out in your research!

worldcoinguy · January 3, 2009 2:23PM

Thanks 1jester. You thoughts on the engraving really have me thinking. I tried to reimage it to get some different perspectives, but the new images do not give me much new to offer over and above the original pictures. If it is a contemporary counterfeit, then they did one hell of a job giving it a feeling of originality. I guess this mystery will remain exactly that - a mystery.

1603 Teutonic Order taler - question for forum

Comments