Check this out

Anyone up for a bidding war on this "Gem"???

http://www.ebay.com/itm/GERMAN-STATES-HILDESHEIM-12-Mariengroschen-1-3-Thaler-1676-KM-236-/321080492166?pt=US_World_Coins&hash=item4ac1e38086

You can start!              

Moved by ZacUK from Numismatic questions to Free discussion

No bids ... fancy that!

I can see this one ending with no bids :D

Quote: lysdexic1Anyone up for a bidding war on this "Gem"???

http://www.ebay.com/itm/GERMAN-STATES-HILDESHEIM-12-Mariengroschen-1-3-Thaler-1676-KM-236-/321080492166?pt=US_World_Coins&hash=item4ac1e38086

You can start!              

I wonder what amused you so?
Without having a coin in hand and seeing the rim it's impossible to be 100% sure, but from what I see, the coin looks normal to me. They were very poorly struck at the time. At first I thought that the field was worked upon, but at closer inspection, I think it was not. Planchet defects and double strike are in favor of coin's authenticity.
Price is also reasonable.
http://www.ngccoin.com/poplookup/WorldCoinPrices.aspx?category=79652&worldcoinid=217843
http://www.mcsearch.info/record.html?id=217055
http://www.mcsearch.info/record.html?id=439396

If there are no bids, it just means that not too many people collect 17th century German lands, and those who do, either have this one or don't have money to spend on it at the moment.  

Ok, maybe I was not understanding this thread very well. But, from the looks of the picture it is made from clay instead of silver as stated in the description. I thought that was the gag...am I wrong?

Yeah it's got a funny look to it Ben, that's what I was thinking, but I don't know much about German states coins except some Hannover issues.

Thanks Andrey for the links. I'd already viewed the first two links prior to posting this.
Agreed with poorly struck and planchet errors for coins of this era.
Make comparisons with the other images at close inspection. Tooling marks are evident. Especially at the bottom of the crest in the shield. Look at the four folds/quads and the "Hula girl".

Overall appearance almost a clay mold likeness. On first clicking on this it screamed wrong.
As you said, without having a coin in hand and seeing the rim it's impossible to be 100% sure. You seem fairly convinced. I'm definitely not.
If I'm wrong... then I stand erected! With my head held high, and with those famous words of Britney. "oops!... I did it again".  

Quote: lysdexic1erected

Are you sure you mean this?  

Quote: manxcat12

Quote: lysdexic1erected

Are you sure you mean this?  

Absolutely! Try not to be hard on me please!

LOL!

Hahahahaha !

Quote: bam777Ok, maybe I was not understanding this thread very well. But, from the looks of the picture it is made from clay instead of silver as stated in the description. I thought that was the gag...am I wrong?

Yes, in my opinion, you are wrong, same as the other merry men of this thread.
The coin is struck, not molded or cast. If it was cast, the letters and small details would not have sharp edges. There would have been bubbles on the surface, and crack in the planchet would not have been possible.  The planchet in the 17th century was often uneven in thickness, that's why some letters (e.g. R in Marien and last 6 in the date) and details of the design are not as high as the others. If the coin was cast, this defect of the minting process of the time would not be in evidence.
The dies are obviously not the same as on the NGC picture, which is not surprising. Dies had much shorter lives than nowadays. An apprentice could cut a die after the master die cut by engraver. You can see that even such detail as stars on both sides of XII in NGC picture were replaced by rosettes on eBay coin. In general the dies of the eBay coin are cruder, probably the apprentice was not good enough yet. This explains the differences in design details.  
I cannot totally exclude a possibility that the surface was tooled in order to bring out the worn details, but I tend to think that it was not done. When somebody wants to make the coin look less worn, the leaves, hair, other small but flat details would have been added a fine line here and there to make them look not so worn. The field would have been also smoother than on this coin. There is no evidence of this.  
Thus my conclusion is that the coin looks authentic; yes, it's crude, as many coins of the time, but not a fake.  

I stand erected. I mean corrected.

My first thought was ghastly fake too but I will defer to Andrey.

It does highlight the perils of coin collecting in the era of massive Chinese counterfeiting. If the real coins from this time period look like fakes to many people, how easy it must be for The Big Tree Happy Coin Factory to crank them out.

Quote: pnightingaleMy first thought was ghastly fake too but I will defer to Andrey.

It does highlight the perils of coin collecting in the era of massive Chinese counterfeiting. If the real coins from this time period look like fakes to many people, how easy it must be for The Big Tree Happy Coin Factory to crank them out.

I also defer to Andrey and respect his superior knowledge in this area. I think we should buy it together and then see who is right!

Thanks for the vote of confidence. It's simply the matter of seeing them more often here in Vienna. I also have quite a few for sale from this period. Here is e.g. my Brunswick-Wolfenbuttel 12 Mariengroschen with very similar "defects", which had some of you temporarily confused.



I am sure that there will be enough opportunities for me to learn from you something with regard to Chinese Imperial cash, early middle ages, some obscure Islamic or ancient coinage, where I have no particular experience.

Thank you Andrey for your detailed explanation and insight on this particular coinage. I'm glad to see that this has sparked some interest about "what is" and "what isn't" and not about who's right and who's wrong although I'd be first to admit it.
I have recently had the opportunity to view some beautiful pre-1900 - 1800 Austrian and German coinage that has given me some inspiration and direction on what type of coins I would like to pursue. This is how I stumbled across this listing.
I've expressed interest in the coin and hopefully the seller can provide some provenance as I've asked him to. I would be interested to purchase it for a couple of reasons.
100% feedback doesn't mean much to me if my eyes and gut are telling me otherwise then I stand by that no matter what. There is the possibility of Glaucoma and gastroenteritis being present so it's certainly better to be safe and than to be sorry. I'm not the sort of person that likes to be "taken for a ride". I could also miss out on a great bargain and be sorry but that'll be my inexperience too.
Luckily for me I'm still standing erected!  
Thanks for your input.

As we agreed, nobody can be 100% sure without having a coin in hand. Even PCGS with dozens of experts doesn't certify coins by photos    Luckily, eBay provides buyers with a few days to inspect the item received under good magnification and return it if the coin is not authentic. I don't think that this would be necessary in this case, but it's always good to know that the option is available.