Probably something meaningless

[Md. Shariful Islam]

I think I am doing something meaningless . But here I give my observation.

Islam

[Figleaf]

Maybe not. Maybe it's me, but the top of the crown looks different too. What are date and mint of the two coins? The reason I am asking for the dates/mints is that there are die differences usually described by the bottom panel of the dress.

Peter

[andyg]

The writing looks closer to the rim on the coin on the right too.

[Afrasi]

The right picture seems to show a fake.

[Md. Shariful Islam]

Maybe not. Maybe it's me, but the top of the crown looks different too. What are date and mint of the two coins? The reason I am asking for the dates/mints is that there are die differences usually described by the bottom panel of the dress.

Peter

This is my frustration sir... You are great... I said what I do believe.
Both of the coins are 1887 Rupees. The left hand side is Calcutta and right hand side is Bombay. Victoria coins are differentiated into types by panels. But in this case I observe the lenght difference. I have around another 14 mature bust rupees of different time of both mints. In all those cases the length and shape is similar to the right hand one. The length has been different as in the coin at the left the back at the bottom has been curved back while the area is straight in other cases.

Islam

[Md. Shariful Islam]

The writing looks closer to the rim on the coin on the right too.

Thanks. I missed that.

Islam

[repindia]

To me these look like the obverse "Type A" on the left and the other obverse "Type C" and so the difference.

[Md. Shariful Islam]

To me these look like the obverse "Type A" on the left and the other obverse "Type C" and so the difference.

Thanks. I appreciate your comment as I see that the left one is 'Type A' as it has 3.75 pannel in the front dress while the right hand is 'Type C' as it has 3.33 pannel in the front dress.

But the bottom of the back has been curved back (rounded) in the left coin while the area is pretty straight in even 'Type A and C'. Compare the picture here (http://britishcoins.indian-coins.com/swish_anim/1_rs_obv_a.html). This feature creates the difference in length. I am greedy to call it a new variant.

But probably its not. The shape which I am indicating is available in Type B. But Type B has different design in the dress. The picture of Type B is here (http://britishcoins.indian-coins.com/swish_anim/1_rs_obv_b.html).

I see the coin has a mix of shape of bust of Type B and the design of the dress of Type A.

Islam

Islam

[repindia]

I did look at some of my examples of type A and they look to be like the one which you illustrated -- along with the rounded back.

I am not a big fan of minor varieties anyway and believe these are mostly promoted by dealers as a sales promotion tool. I collect it as a different type only if it is noticeable with a naked eye. There would have been many different dies for this obverse in almost a quarter century of minting and there are bound to be varieties.

[Md. Shariful Islam]

I did look at some of my examples of type A and they look to be like the one which you illustrated -- along with the rounded back.

I am not a big fan of minor varieties anyway and believe these are mostly promoted by dealers as a sales promotion tool. I collect it as a different type only if it is noticeable with a naked eye. There would have been many different dies for this obverse in almost a quarter century of minting and there are bound to be varieties.

I agree with you. This is a minor variation. Not that much significant... so meaningless.

Islam

[malj1]

Victoria's back hair is very different too, the 'bun'.

[Md. Shariful Islam]

Victoria's back hair is very different too, the 'bun'.

I'm afraid, I cannot locate the difference. Would you please elaborate the difference that u notice. Thanks.

Islam

[malj1]

A zoomed-in image shows the tighter bun in the second coin