Register to attend our live meetings.
Started by gpimper, November 17, 2020, 07:25:06 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: gpimper on November 18, 2020, 11:41:08 PMThat 1825 is nice. If I were to pick it up at a glance I would think Roman.
Quote from: Prosit on November 18, 2020, 11:16:58 PMWant to add just a couple images1825Dale
Quote from: brandm24 on November 19, 2020, 09:47:35 PMThese older ones, Victoria and earlier, are my favorites, Dale. Thanks for posting yours.Bruce
Quote from: gpimper on November 20, 2020, 10:16:13 PMAfter seeing Dale's beautiful '57 I'm a little embarrassed even posting this one :-) 1862 Victoria Half Penny. Coin has seen better days.
Quote from: FosseWay on November 18, 2020, 03:43:57 PMIf you look closely at the obverses, you'll see that 1949 is in fact different from 1938/40 (those two are the same as each other). On the coins up to and including 1948, the obverse inscription ends ... IND IMP, short for Indiae Imperator, or Emperor of India. In 1949 this was removed and F D expanded to FIDEI DEF (Fidei Defensor, or Defender of the Faith).The reason is of course that the British monarch ceased to be emperor of India when India and Pakistan became independent.But this raises a question that I've never seen a decent answer to. India and Pakistan gained their independence on 15 August 1947, yet the change on UK coinage only took effect in 1949. For all UK coins dated 1948, the king was claiming a title he was no longer entitled to. Some of the Dominions that also used IND IMP or an English equivalent did indeed change the legend in 1948 - South Africa, for example. Why the delay in the UK? Head in the sand ostrich behaviour? If we say it on the coins it must be true? An error? Laziness at the Mint?