Strike date or issue date?

[<k>]

In January 2013, Fiji and Zambia both issued a new series of circulation coins. To my surprise, photos of these coin sets showed all the individual coins with a date of 2012. This suggested to me that there had been some delay in the issue of these sets: surely if you were issuing a new coin series in the New Year, you would want to use the new date? However, it occurs to me that the answer is: not necessarily.

It is obvious that the mint sets dated 2013, which collectors have been busily buying since December 2012, were all minted in 2012. That much is clear. Here, though, I am interested only in coins issued directly for circulation, which is why I have placed this topic in the Numismatics board and not in the Coin Collecting board. Is is standard policy all over the world for non-collector coins to be struck with the current year, whilst those intended for collectors only are struck with a bespoke year? Or do some mints prefer to strike non-collector coins with the year of intended issue?

I've just been reading about those Spanish coins that used two dates: the year they were struck and the year of authorisation. That is a different matter again, of course, and I understand that that practice is now defunct.

See the topic: Modern Spanish Coins and their Dates

[chrisild]

Don't think there is a "global" pattern here. In Germany for example the circulation coins usually show the year when the producing mint got the order from the federal government. So some coins dated 2011 may well have been minted in 2012. The most extreme example we have for that is the 15-year "gap" for most denominations between 1950 and 1966. Another interesting case was the euro introduction; several mints started the production in the summer of 1998 but picked either 1999 or 2002 as the first year to appear on the coins.

As for commems, well, usually you want the year that appears on the coin to correspond to the occasion, typically an anniversary. So if a coin is issued in late 2012 but "celebrates" something that is in early 2013, it will be dated 2013 ...

And those Spanish dates, well, that practice has been defunct for more than 30 years.

Christian

[<k>]

In Germany for example the circulation coins usually show the year when the producing mint got the order from the federal government. So some coins dated 2011 may well have been minted in 2012.

So backdating as well as postdating is possible. Never knew that. Though there is the practice of frozen dates (the same date being used in successive years), when governments apparently want to disguise the quantities minted over a particular period.

[andyg]

Recently we had circulation Olympic 50p 2011 out in December 2010... and circulation 2010/11 £1 coins (Cities) out in 2012....

[Figleaf]

Frozen dates are also used when the real date is inconvenient. Queen Wilhelmina abdicated unexpectedly in 1948, but new dies were not ready until 1950, so in 1949 (and a few months of 1950), coins were struck with old dies. Since the date could not be 1949, they were dated 1948 as well. Another example is several new South American states, that struck coins with the portrait, title and arms of the Spanish king after independence, until the Republican designs were ready.

Peter

[paisepagal]

There are numerous examples in recent Indian coinage. The kuka movement coin is especially unique. The coin was planned in 2007 but for some reason was never issued until 2012. What's more, everyone was speculating whether the coin was minted 5 yrs ago in ferritic stainless steel. However the coin has only been minted in the last few months in nickel brass and carries the rupee symbol although it is dated 1857-2007.

The Bhagat Singh coin (dated 2007) was issued in 2008-09 in special proof or unc sets but not released for circulation. But suddenly in early 2012, due to some political pressure, these coins were issued in FSS although Rs5 coins were being minted in Nibs by now. So I suppose one could speculate that these coins were minted long ago but never got released.

The Tagore coin takes it the other way around.... Although dated 2011, the coin was available much before then and indeed most people got their proof and unc sets well before then. That would have been a first !

[dheer]

In India, the commemorative [circulation or for collection] are struck depending on the capacity of the mint and other issues related to the coin design / etc ... so its typically struck after the year has gone by ... and there are cases where they are struck before as well ...

On the definitives, there is a marked difference between when the coins were struck and when the coins were put into circulation ... the most recent example being Definitives with the theme "Unity In Diversity" popularly called Cross coins ...

Further Indian mints follow the financial year that begins from 1 April of current year to 31 March of next year ... so technically all definitives struck from Calander Year 1 jan to 31 March have a date of previous year

[FosseWay]

As Christian alluded to wrt the euro coins in 1999-2002, some countries have strict rules about how coins should be dated. Any official French coin struck by the French mint I believe has to carry the date it was struck (and the relevant privy marks for that date), hence you get 1999-dated euro coins because that's when they started striking them.

Other countries are happy to forward-date coins that they know are not going to be used yet -- all the original eurozone members whose coins begin in 2002 come into this category, as do the UK bronze coins dated 1971.

I think it's unusual for coins to be found in circulation with dates in the future (as happened with some of the UK Olympic 50 pences) but AFAIK not a breach of the rules, at least not as far as the UK is concerned. AIUI the official announcement in the London Gazette of a new coin will determine the design (including the date if it's a commemorative) and authorise the issue, but the actual emission of coins will be down to the Royal Mint, who if they want for marketing or other reasons to issue them at the tail end of the year before the date on the coins, are entirely free to do so.

[Bimat]

Austrian mint usually issues one collector coin (silver/copper €5) dated X+1 in the year X, at the time of Christmas...

Aditya

[chrisild]

As Christian alluded to wrt the euro coins in 1999-2002, some countries have strict rules about how coins should be dated. Any official French coin struck by the French mint I believe has to carry the date it was struck (and the relevant privy marks for that date), hence you get 1999-dated euro coins because that's when they started striking them.

With the "pre-euro" euro coins it was a little different - Pessac, FR started minting them in May 1998 while Munich, DE for example began in August 1998. However, no French or German euro coin is dated 1998 - the original 11 countries just picked 1999 (when the euro started to exist) or 2002 (when the euro cash became legal tender) as the first dates.

But maybe it would have been relatively easy for the Monnaie de Paris to melt down the pieces made between May and Dec '98 in some bad/worst case. For similar reasons, the monarchies in the euro area (e.g. Belgium started minting euro circulation pieces in September 1998) would not have picked 2002 as the earliest date, but chose 1999.

Well, those "complicated" years are over. But of course it is quite common, for "scheduled introductions" of new currencies, to make the coins in year "N-1" but date them "N". In the UK the Royal Mint will issue the coin sets of year "N" in late N-1. That does (as far as I know) not affect the regular circulation pieces. Also note what Aditya mentioned regarding Austria - but since those are not circulation coins, we can more or less safely ignore them for the purpose of this topic.

Christian

[Bimat]

In case of Irish Euro coins, coins dated X are often issued in X+1 or even in X+2 (year)...

Aditya

[translateltd]

Then there are the 1971-dated UK decimal bronzes, which made their appearance in 1968.  I assume that was an instance of a "projected frozen date", and that minting continued through to 1971, though I haven't checked any references to confirm.  Had the Queen met with any disaster in the intervening years it could have caused some confusion for future generations of new numismatists.

The current practice in NZ is to order about three years' worth of a given denomination at a time and then stockpile them to be released when needed.  That way we have only one or two denominations produced showing any given year, in some vague sort of rotation.

The extreme was in 1990 when we introduced a circulating $1 coin showing a kiwi.  Because the 20c already showed a kiwi, the design of that denomination was changed that year and a few "new" examples were issued.  However, there were more than plenty 1967-89 "kiwi" 20c in circulation, and political issues involving the "Maori" design of the new coin meant that it was somewhat controversial (though we weren't told this at the time) and no more were struck for circulation until 2002.  Very few of the stockpiled 1990 coins were issued until much later, though I can't remember exactly when (late 90s/early 2000s?).

Likewise, though no design change was involved this time, we had no new 50c coins from 1989 to 2000 inclusive, other than in collector sets, and stockpiled examples were drawn on to serve needs for the duration.  Not quite sure if this fits the category or if it's a third variation on the theme.

[Chinasmith]

There are many examples of coins being made years, even decades, after their stated date. In 19th and 20th century Spain, one date was adopted for each coin, that date was used year after year. The actual year of minting was hidden inside tiny stars on the coin. In a number of Muslim countries, the year in which a ruler came to the throne was used on coins year after year. The actual year the coin was made was indicated by another number placed somewhere on the coin. The Ottoman sultan Abdul Hamid II came to the throne in 1293 AH (1876) and ruled till 1909 (1327 AH). In Egypt, his coins all carry the date 1293, with an additional number (1 through 33) indicating the actual year of his reign in which the coin was made.

In 1949 all three U.S. mints struck dollar coins under contract with China. The coins were not US dollars (not being made at that time), but Chinese dollars dated 1934 and Mexican dollars dated 1898. Mexico also struck 1898 dated pesos that year for China. Some Chinese silver coins dated 1909-1911 were actually struck or restruck for circulation in later years, into the 1920's. Some undated Chinese dragon dollars, which were originally made during 1890-1911, were restruck for circulation in 1949. All of the Szechuan 5 Cash coins dated 1912 were actually made in 1918 and 1919.

During the Southern Sung Dynasty in China (1100's -1200's) coins were dated with the year of the emperor's reign -- 1, 2, 3, etc. One emperor died in his 6th year and a new emperor took the throne (that year being year 1 of the new emperor). However some mints which were far away on the other side of the country, didn't receive the news in time, and actually made and circulated coins dated 7th year ---  a year which did not exist!