Austria County of Tyrol 6 Kreuzer 1400s [επιλυμένο]

The tag for this coin attributes it to Sigismund 1439-96, but the attribution has been marked out and edited to Maximilian [1496-1519]. The tag attributes it to Saurma 345.

The coin is silver 24mm, and weighs 2.9 grams. (The coin rotation is neither medal nor coin. The cross at the top of the obverse aligns with the end of the cross between I and R of TIROLIS.)

The legends of Saurma 345 match the coin. For the 6 kreuzer (or Sechser) of Maximilian in Saurma, the reverse legend begins "GROS COMITATIS" instead of "AC COMITATIS".

Saurma 345 is listed as 24mm; the Maximilian sechser is listed as 22mm.

Is this Sigismund or Maximilian? Is Saurma correct, or has newer information revised it?

http://www.elfreeman2.com/t18/5i17o.jpg

http://www.elfreeman2.com/t18/5i17r.jpg

You have my permission to use these photos for the Numista catalog. Please attribute them to elfreeman (my eBay username).

Hello,
It is the Maximilian coin.
Here in our catalogue: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces134918.html
I have just checked on my copy of Saurma and the 435 starts with AC COMITATIS. No doubt.
Same on Schulten who gives both illustrations of coin with gothic and coin with roman lettereing. And again confirmed by Moser Tursky.
Coins by Sigismund start wit SIGISMUNDUS.

Are you selling it ?

Regards,
André

I do not understand. Saurma 437, the Maximilian coin, reverse legend starts GROS COMITAS and is 22mm.

Saurma 435, the Sigismund coin, starts AC COMITATVS and is 24mm.

If Saurma is correct, you have the wrong photo in the Numista catalog for Maximilian.

Yes, I would consider selling it, once the attribution and value are determined.

The original tag is from Civitas in Middleton, Wisconsin, and gives the references of "Moeser/Dworschak 44 var. (reverse); Saurma 818/345".

The attribution to Maximilian has no reference, but changes the marked value from $50 (by Ben, at Civitas), to "$100+".

Civitas graded it "Good Fine Cleaned Ex-jewelry, mount removed"

Hello,
Your Saurma refs seem wrong.
I have 345 for Maximilian, as stated by Civitas' tag (818/345), 818 is the number of the coin, 345 the illustration in Saurma. And it is AC ... and 347 is for Sigismund.
Confirmed by both Schulten as #4435 and Moser Tursky#74 and 75.
regards,
andre

Let's try again. The Civitas tag (before the edit) says Saurma 345 is Sigismund.

Saurma (which is online at http://saurma.info/g/gi.htm ) clearly indicates that the sechser coin that says SIGISMVND is the Maximilian coin, and it is the smaller one:

Sigismund 1439-96

343. goldgulden (22 mm), no date
standing ruler / floral cross, 4 arms
SIGISM ARCHIDVX AVSTRIE
MONETA AVREA COMITIS TIROL

344. pfundner (27 mm), no date
crowned bust / arms on eagle
SIGISMVNDVS ARCHIDVX AVSTRIE
GROSSVS COMITIS TIROLIS

345. sechser (24 mm), no date
bust to waist / long cross, 4 arms
MONETA ARCHIDVCIS AVSTRIE
AC COMITATVS TIROL

346. kreuzer (18 mm), no date
eagle / double cross
COMES TIROL / SIGISMVNDVS



Maximilian 1496-1519

347. sechser (22 mm), no date
bust to waist, sceptre / long cross, 4 arms
SIGISMVND ARCHIDVX AVSTRIE
GROS COMITIS TIROL


All entries in Saurma have two numbers: the second number is a type number (with an asterik by the line number if a photograph is in the catalog); the first number is the line number for each date/variety of that type.

345 and 347 are undated, and list only one variety for each. The line numbers are 818 and 820, respectively.

I have been working from the online Saurma; I have now gone to my reprint of Saurma. The 347 photo definitely has the legends quoted above.

Right. I was too quick.
Saurma inverted the numbers then. Or the pics.
Or ??
I send you tomorrow scans of the other 2 books and you decide

It does seem odd that 345 is the only Sigismund coin in Saurma without his name on it; and 347 is the only coin of Max that has a name on it--and it is Sigismund!

Do you have the "Moeser/Dworschak 44 var. (reverse)" reference Civitas noted?

The only other thing going logically contrary to a simple switch in Saurma, is the fact that 347 is smaller than 345. Usually, the diameter gets smaller, not larger. Too bad we do not have weights for both issues.

Catalogue copies:


Plus other examples here https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=sale&sid=2468&cid=66480 where you have the weight.

And I don't have the additional reference you mention.
Maybe something that leads to a confusion is that gold coins with title of Sigismund were minted after his death under Maximilian I. But I think only gold.

Thank you for your help with this. Looks like Saurma has it wrong.