News:

Sign up for the monthly zoom events by sending a PM with your email address to Hitesh

Main Menu

UK 1 1/2 pence 1843/34

Started by Thulium, November 12, 2016, 02:25:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Thulium

A new overdate find on a tiny silver coin from Great Britain for use in their colonies. The coin is just 12mm in diameter and 0,70gr.  :o
Consequently, both the primary digits and the underlying date are rather crude. But, I think the overlay helps predict the prior date position.



9 years is quite a stretch for an overdate--unless this is simply a blundered die, ie somebody transposed the last two digits.
However, there are two different dies for this overdate, which suggests to me more an intentional re-dating of a prior die.

Here is a higher grade example of what I believe is the same die:


And here is the other 43/34 position (more common), where the 3/4 is more sharply defined, the 4/3 a bit less:



Overall, a nice coin with few issues:

THCoins

Nice find ! And just as nice an explanation and presentation of the supporting evidence. I am convinced !

Anthony

Figleaf

These coins were struck in the era of steam presses. I can well imagine that the mint had prepare several dies in advance, rather than one mother die and one working die for the reverse.

The 1834 coins should show William IV, not Victoria. This means that there are two possibilities: the digits were transposed in 1843 or the 1834 reverse dies were legitimate, but - because of over-estimation of demand - little used if at all, in stock and discovered again in 1843. I think both scenarios are likely.

Peter
An unidentified coin is a piece of metal. An identified coin is a piece of history.

Thulium

#3
Quote from: Figleaf on November 12, 2016, 02:44:58 PM
The 1834 coins should show William IV, not Victoria. This means that there are two possibilities: the digits were transposed in 1843 or the 1834 reverse dies were legitimate, but - because of over-estimation of demand - little used if at all, in stock and discovered again in 1843. I think both scenarios are likely.
Peter

Yes, thanks for pointing that out--I wondered if the 1834 reverse dies had any telltale design difference, but I have not found one so far. It might be apparent above--the 3-digit used in 1834 looks different than those used for the 1843 date. But--not enough of the prior date is visible to make that determination.  I do consider both scenarios possible; I merely lean more towards the overdate explanation. Thanks for all the comments, and for moving this post to the proper place. :)