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!

60 Pfennig Kurzenmoor

Issuer Gemeinde Kurzenmoor
Year
Type Log in to see details
Value Log in to see details
Currency Mark (1914-1924)
Composition Log in to see details
Size Log in to see details
Shape Log in to see details
Printer Log in to see details
Designer(s) 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 Log in to see details
Obverse lettering 6105 Notgeld der Gemeinde Kurzenmoor AMTSBEZ. KURZENMOOR 60 PFENNIG 60 PFENNIG AMTSVORSTEHER: DER FINANZAUSSCHUSS: DIESER SCHEIN VERLIERT SEINE GÜLTIGKEIT AM 31. DEZEMBER 1921
Reverse description Multicolour letterpress design in orange, ochre, and black, centred on a vignette of two wrestlers grappling within a circular ring, observed by a standing figure to the right, rendered in a bold folk-art idiom against a dark background framed by sweeping curved panels. Circular denomination cartouches in red and black at left and right each read '60 Pfg.' in Fraktur script. The issuer's name appears in Gothic lettering along the lower margin, with 'Notgeld der Gemeinde' arching across the top.
Reverse lettering Log in to see details
Signature(s) Log in to see details
Protection type Log in to see details
Protection description Log in to see details
Variants Log in to see details
Comments

Kurzenmoor is a small settlement in Schleswig-Holstein, and its Gemeinde issued Notgeld like hundreds of other German parishes during the 1920–1921 paper money crisis, when small-denomination coins had effectively vanished from everyday commerce. Konrad Hanf in Hamburg was a regional printer who handled a number of these municipal emergency issues, working quickly and cheaply to meet demand.

At 60 Pfennig, an odd denomination — not 50, not 75 — suggesting the issuing authority was trying to match a specific local pricing need rather than following convention.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE