Unknown medieval silver

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Roerbakmix, Jul 17, 2019.

  1. Roerbakmix

    Roerbakmix Well-Known Member

    I have the possibility to buy this coin. Diameter and weight unknown; pictures are blurry as well. Despite several hours of searching, I can't identify it. Any help is appreciated.

    Obv: a figure what seems to be a rather silly looking lion. Text partly illegible: "DOIN . . . N . SVNTERSE.L .."
    Rev: shield. Text partly illegible: "GVN..HRN.G......GA."

    According to the seller, the coin was found in the Netherlands
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2019
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    This should get you close ;)
    It'll at least help you with the text around the coin.
    That being said, I'd avoid this seller. Photos are intentionally blurry, which is a bad sign. Also, the coin is heavily damaged. If you're not getting it at a significant discount, I'd walk away.
    Stevearino likes this.
  4. Roerbakmix

    Roerbakmix Well-Known Member

    Seattlite86 likes this.
  5. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

  6. Roerbakmix

    Roerbakmix Well-Known Member

    On my PC, the link leads to this coin:
    Schwarzburg, gemeinschaftlich. Günther XLI. der Streitbare, allein 1569-1583. Groschen o.J. -Arnstadt-. Fischer 139 var., Bethe 404.
    selten, minimal gewellt, sehr schön

    Which I believe is the coin in question.
    Bing likes this.
  7. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Still convinced it's the same coin?
  8. dougsmit

    dougsmit Member Supporter

    Humor me: Explain for us all how you tell "intentionally blurry" from plain old garden variety bad photography. I can deal with people incompetent far better than I tolerate intentional deception. I have no personal interest in this coin (too new for me) but the question of deceit by photography is universal.
    Seattlite86 likes this.
  9. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Fair question, and I hope I can do it justice. I obviously cannot say with 100% certainty that this case was done intentionally, but there are certain indicators that I always look for:

    The photo on the left is much clearer than the photo on the right. It's not easy to see based on so little background, but even the background on the left shows more detail. If both photos had looked like the left one, I'd assume poor photography skills. All the person taking the photo had to do from the first photo was flip the coin over and push the button again. Why would the second photo be this blurry?

    Then there's the fact that the coin is damaged and bent, with the bent upwards side showing in the right photo. By taking a blurry photo, it minimizes the look of the damage and makes the coin look passable.

    With the increasing capacity of our phones to photograph, we often don't even have to focus the cameras ourselves. Any standard point and shoot phone can take much higher resolution photos than what is being shown here. Also, just about every photo capturing device out there lets you review the shot you took immediately after taking it. That means that someone had the chance to look at this and go "yes, that's what I want".

    Also, the photos are combined. That implies the seller has some sort of software and capacity to edit photos. Again, why would someone who knows how to edit and combine photos have such a poor photo?

    I'd also be tempted to see where it's being sold, what the price is, and how many other coins were photographed by the same seller. I sometimes find poor pictures of details coins sold by the same seller who is capable of taking decent shots.

    One thing I do with every coin I look at online is download it to my phone and allow my phone to auto correct the photo. Many "glamour shots" I see (especially of gold coins) are overly bright and the color is changed. My phone is smarter than I am and will make adjustments to make the coin look like it did when the photo was taken. Once this is done, many hidden details come to light. I definitely recommend this trick.
  10. Orielensis

    Orielensis Well-Known Member

    Chiming in a bit late – sorry!

    It's almost the same coin as the one suggested above: a slightly earlier groschen from Schwarzburg with the same design but a different legend. Here is a better preserved example (picture found here):

    County of Schwarzburg,
    under Günther XLI. zu Arnstadt and Johann Günther zu Sondershausen, 1552-1569.
    Groschen (not dated), Arnstadt mint. Bethe 319 ff; Fischer 107 ff.
    Seattlite86 likes this.
  11. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Nailed it, thank you!
    Orielensis likes this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page