Talk:Maria Theresa thaler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Numismatics (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Saltire[edit]

Saltire--I'm not sure it refers to a saltire at all because most sources in know say that the X indicates that X (ten) are a fine mark of silver--German courant coins indicated their weight in relation to the mark. Can you cite a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.112.167 (talk) 01:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know anything about it, but here is a reference. It doesn't look like a ten to me, rather it looks like a pair of budding branches. Rwflammang (talk) 13:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

The first Thalers minted with Maria Theresa\s Bust were struck in 1741 under what is often called the Reichthaler standard (9 Thalers to the Wiener Mark). In 1750 the thaler was debased to 10 to the Wiener mark. In the document authorising this new standard Maria Theresa directs the cross should be added to indicate the new standard and refers to it as "a St Andrews Cross or Burgundian Cross" Both devices are heraldic accordingly Saltire is the appropriate term for the device. In 1751 the Bavarian monetary convention adopted the Austrian standard so from the date on all Austrian Habsburg thalers were known as conventions thalers.

It's a raguly saltire, that is, a cross of Burgundy.

Note there is some discussion between coin collectors regarding the Reichsthaler standard with some non Austrian collectors claiming the pre 1750 thalers of the Habsburgs were not true reichsthalers. However given that it was a Austrian Habsburg Holy Roman Emperor set the standard against the Wiener( Vienna ) mark it seems reasonable to argue the pre 1750 thalers were Reichsthalers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austrokiwi (talkcontribs) 16:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

dating[edit]

"Since 1780, the coin has always been dated 1780"-why? Wouldn't that make it hard to determine the collectability of one? Chris 06:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

These coins were issued by the authority of the Empress in official acts dated on the coins. After she died, they were still issued under her authority, as authorised in 1780. A saltire following the 1780 indicates, I believe, that she was dead when the coin was issued. Rwflammang 13:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Is there any way that the specific year of post-1780 MTTs can be determined? 75.76.213.106 (talk) 22:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

The Maria theresa thalers had become important in Levatine trade well before Maria theresas death. the demands of the customers were such that it was found the coins design could not be changed. Soon after her death orders for more of her Thalers were received at the Guenzburg mint. A request was made to the Emperor Joseph II and on the 9th December 1780 he directed that the coin could continue to be produced but only in the form set prior to his mothers death. The date on the coin was required to be that of 1780.

The saltire is an indicator of the conventions standard (10 Thaler to the Vienna Mark), and can be seen also on her husband's and son's coins prior to her death.

It is a myth that the coins have been produced in exactly the same form since 1780 (any experienced coin collector will know the changes in technology and mints makes it impossible for the coin to be exactly reproduced each time new dies are cut). As with Morgan dollars, small variations can change the value of a coin substantively.

The coins are highly collectable. There are 7 minting periods: 1:1741-1750 ( Reichsthaler) 2:1750- Oct 1780 ( original conventions thaler) 3: November 1780 - 1805 4: 1812.15/17-1853(aprox) 5:1853-July1935 6:august 1935 - February 1962. 7: 1962 to current time. Each period has distinctive markers making it easy to identify the coins. An original Prague mint coin dated 1780 has a market value in excess of €27,000 (only two known). An original 1780 Vienna mint coin is worth around €1500. The pre-1853 coins are easier to identify as they were struck by Screw press from hand engraved dies and so there are clear differences between coins. Pre-1805 coins are typically (not 100%) identified by: Obverse: Plain brooch( ie: no pearls surrounding it) reverse: (Guenzburg mint coins only) AUST DUX instead of the modern AVST DUX. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austrokiwi (talkcontribs) 17:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Masculine Titles[edit]

Quoth the article in a reference:

The Empress used the Latin masculine forms for her archducal, ducal, and comital titles.

The Latin words archidux, dux, and comes are third declension nouns of common gender; i.e., they can be either masculine or feminine, depending on context. It seems to me that in this context they are clearly feminine. Is there some reason for thinking otherwise? Rwflammang 13:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

In post-classical Latin they had the feminine forms ducissa and comitissa, regularly used as equivalents for "duchess" and "countess", respectively, while dux and comes became exclusively masculine. But the comment is an unnecessary complication, so I'll remove it.RandomCritic 10:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

MTT?[edit]

What kind of thaler is this one?

Av. Between a Palmen and branches of laurel, which are together bound down with a mesh, is the chest picture of the empress facing right. Transcription from downside M. THERESIA. D: G.R. - IMP. HU. BO. REG.
Rev. Between branches of palm there is a rounded box containing "20", and over it the double eagle with head under a crown, on the chest of the eagle the bohemian coat of arms sign. Transcription from downside ARCHID. AUST. DUX. - BURG. SI. M. MO. 1778 x

I`ve searched to whole net, and I couldn`t find such a thaler. Both the year and the legends are unique. For example, on no other MTT does the legend from the rev. appears. Also, there were no MTTs made in 1778 (from what I know). Could this be a fake? Dry dust 13:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

It's no thaler, but a 20 kreuzer piece. All coins depicting Maria Theresia were not thalers.

Meniliks attempt at a alternative to the MTT[edit]

As noted in the entry it is generally regarded that Menelik failed in his attempt to introduce the Birr as a replacement for the MTT in Ethiopia. However was he really serious in the first place? The reason I pose this question is Menelik did not demonetise the MTT and effectively condoned its continued use by allowing taxes' to be collected in MTTS, salt as well as the new Birr. The MTT was an important trading currency at the time and enabled transactions across a wide area ( Sudan, Yemen, Saudi, Palestine, Oman, Bahrain, Basra and across the Indian Ocean to as far as Indonesia. Menilik would have been well aware that demonetising the MTT would have severely damaged Ethiopia's trading relationships. For the reason is it not more reasonable to assume Menelik produced the Birr not to replace the MTT but to cement his position as Emperor in the eyes of European Nations ( especially in view of Italy's failed colonial desires for Ethiopia)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austrokiwi (talkcontribs) 09:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Draped Bust dollar[edit]

Draped Bust dollar obverse is so similar to that of the MTT that I once mistook a Chinese replica of the DBD for a MTT knockoff. Considering the original date of the DBD, maybe it is. --Pawyilee (talk) 10:59, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

PS My mistaking a DBD (presumably made in China, as that's where the missionary said he got it) for a MTT, I happened to be next door to a library at the time, so tried to look up MTT on line. The Warner Robins, Georgia library's "Net Nanny" blocked my search. I pulled a book off the shelf that explained why: MT's partially exposed bosom has been considered pornographic by a great many cultures, including by whoever programmed the library's Net Nanny. Note that the MTT was in world-wide use when the DBD was designed. If you compare the obverse of the one with the other, you'll see the exposure is the same. Though the library book only related world-wide prudish reaction to the MTT, which enhanced rather than stopped its production – especially in Turkey, if I remember correctly – it is not inconceivable that prudery tarnished the DBD and did it in, though it remained popular with collectors throughout the 19th century – and again in the 21st, though I doubt current interest is in the bosom. --Pawyilee (talk) 05:10, 26 May 2012 (UTC)