Catalog
See full images - free registration
Continue with Google - no registration!
or register with email
Why register? Just to keep bots out of our catalog. Your email stays private - we will never share it or send you anything uninvited. We guarantee you that!
16 Gute Groschen
| Issuer | Goslar, City of |
|---|---|
| Year | 1674-1675 |
| Type | Standard circulation coin |
| Value | Log in to see details |
| Currency | Log in to see details |
| Composition | Log in to see details |
| Weight | Log in to see details |
| Diameter | Log in to see details |
| Thickness | Log in to see details |
| Shape | Log in to see details |
| Technique | Log in to see details |
| Orientation | Log in to see details |
| Engraver(s) | Log in to see details |
| In circulation to | Log in to see details |
| Reference(s) | Log in to see details |
| Obverse description | Imperial eagle displayed with wings spread, head turned to the left, rendered in bold relief against an unadorned field. The eagle's plumage is elaborately detailed with feathered wings outstretched in heraldic fashion. Below the eagle, a small oval cartouche bears the fractional denomination '2/3', indicating two-thirds of a Thaler. The circular legend reads MONETA CIVITATIS, identifying this as the coinage of the city of Goslar. The coin's milled border frames the design with a fine toothed edge. |
|---|---|
| Obverse script | Log in to see details |
| Obverse lettering | MONETA CIVITATIS |
| Reverse description | Log in to see details |
| Reverse script | Log in to see details |
| Reverse lettering | Log in to see details |
| Edge | Log in to see details |
| Mint | Log in to see details |
| Mintage | Log in to see details |
| Additional information |
Goslar's mining economy was already in steep decline by the 1670s, the Rammelsberg silver deposits that had funded imperial ambitions for centuries increasingly exhausted. This issue almost certainly reflects a last effort to assert municipal coining rights at a moment when the city's fiscal independence was under sustained pressure from Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel.
The two-year span of 1674–1675 suggests limited production, likely tied to a single contract with a local wardein rather than sustained mint operation.