|
|
This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.
Welcome Guest! Register Now! It's free!Registering will remove the anchor ads and vignette (between pages) ads.
MaximillianMike's Last 20 Posts
| Attribution Assistance 1723 Woods Hibernia Farthing
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
 Posted 09/22/2024 11:22 am
|
| I am positive on it being a farthing. It is 21mm and 68.2 grains. I looked at the number of strings in the harp with a digital microscope to confirm there are 12 strings since the wear is greater on the reverse. That alone leaves only two die possibilities for the series as Bd.1 or Bd.2 It diagnostically aligns to Bd.1 in nearly all variables listed in the book that are still discernable on the coin. The die rust in the right field is also unique to Bd.1. I didn't see any mention of distance from denticles is that in the book, could you let me know where that comes from? In any case thanks for the reply and please don't mistake my reply as argumentative but rather explaining how I came to the decisions I made. Thanks again. |
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| Attribution Assistance 1723 Woods Hibernia Farthing
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 09/21/2024 8:21 pm
|
Hello everyone, I am stumped on this farthing. I have Sydney Martin's attribution guide for Woods Hibernia Coinage and have been pouring through it but havent concluded a pairing.
I am confident in the reverse attribution of this farthing as Bd.1. It has a 12 string harp, the location of the frond is correct, the die rust mark to the right of head is present, and other diagnostics as noted in the reference are observed. The center though is weakly struck or worn so some diagnostics are lost.
I cannot match it to an obverse that is listed. The closest obverse die is 2-1 based on the lower leaf being well right of DEI but other diagnostic cues aren't exacting. The T in gratia is also missing the top cross-bar.
The farthing is 21mm and 68.2 grains with coin alignment.
Woud anyone have an idea that is willing to assist? I appreciate it.
|
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| 1731 5 Kopeks (Contemporary Counterfeit?)
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 07/03/2024 10:52 am
|
| Nytik, thanks for the reply. The pictures are what I had at the time. I have the coin in hand now and the patina doesn't appear to be artificial to me. I also haven't removed modern counterfeit as an option yet but that is mainly because I just don't know enough to make a determination. The more obvious signs of modern counterfeits I am used to seeing are largely absent from this one. |
| | Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives |
|
| 1731 5 Kopeks (Contemporary Counterfeit?)
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 06/27/2024 8:30 pm
|
This 1731 5 Kopeks is 30mm and 17.7g which would be within tolerance of a genuine example. The issue is that there were no 1731 5 kopeks struck that year only denga's and palushkas. My hunch is that this is a contemporary counterfeit and I know that contemporaey counterfeits were struck in Sweden and occasionally turn up, all considered rare. I am not sure if this is one of those but I wanted to share it here for other opinions on it. Thanks!
 |
| | Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives |
| |
| 1695 France Louis Xiv Quinzain Mintmark Mystery
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 04/04/2024 9:22 pm
|
Pertinax,
It is defenitly a hard thing to determine the pattern of striking this coin took. I am inclined to believe its overstruck on an old billon coin and then countermarked. Reformed pieces were sometimes nearly devoid of its former self before being restruck and others not so much. Of note reforme issue means it was overstruck on an older coin. What I see on the obverse rim at about 4 or 5 the letters EX for what I would assume is REX and that can be found on Louis XIII examples. I do have the Gaudry reference that supports my theory here. The publication is in French so I have to use Google translate as I cannot read it very well. It states as seen below that reformes and old billon coins of previous King's were used. I personally think given all the circumstances it's a reforme issue that was first overstruck and then countermarked. Louis XIII examples also have a different obverse and reverse design so it would support that at least the middle of this coin could have been filed down to strike the new pattern but the legends not so much. In any case it's a mystery and I bought it as a study piece and it is living up to that expectation.
Dearborn, it's challenging some times to read these and other reforme issues but I have been fortunate to have alot of practice.
Picture from Monaisse Royales Francaises (Gaudry) below.
 |
| | Forum: World Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| 1695 France Louis Xiv Quinzain Mintmark Mystery
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 04/03/2024 11:19 pm
|
That is true of Louis XIII, here is the reference that discusses the overstrike. With that being said it could be an overstrike of a previous Louis XIV. The numista link below references Louis XIII but it is for that specific example. The IIII you see is where it supposed to be. I don't see enough details to say conclusively what its struck over. (I mispoke out of lack of understanding) I am still learning about this type. In Gaudry's reference it does state these were overstruck on pieces from previous King's in a manner that implies that that is in addition to overstrikes from Louis XIV. I don't think it's double struck as there's clearly an undertype most notable by the N at around 11 on the reverse. Thanks for your assistance, it is appreciated.
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces37829.html
|
| | Forum: World Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| 1695 France Louis Xiv Quinzain Mintmark Mystery
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 04/03/2024 4:09 pm
|
Pertinax, My understanding is that this specific quinzain is overstruck on a 15 deniers of Louis XIII and redenominated as a Louis XIV quinzain which is 15 deniers. I thought L possibly too but it would be off center and most examples I have seen the mintmark is well centered.
I am just only learning about these so bare with me if my original post didn't make sense. Also I like your username. I have a very nice denarius of Pertinax that is a treasure in my collection. I appreciate your reply.
|
| | Forum: World Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| 1695 France Louis Xiv Quinzain Mintmark Mystery
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 04/01/2024 9:11 pm
|
Hi everyone. This quinzain is attributed to Gaudry #93 and is clearly in rough shape. It was originally a 15 denier that was overstruck and then counterstamped. I believe this is part of Louis XIV money reforms of the time. Nonetheless, it still shows a good amount of detail to leave me curious about what the mintmark is.
Gaudry only lists mintmarks A, Y & T for 1695. What is visible on the coin makes no sense for any of those, but it does make sense for mintmark "D" (which contained serifs)
The mintmark is located on the reverse and is within the central circle that is partially obscured due to the oval counterstamp containing a fleur-di-lis. (It is that countermark which re-valued it to a quinzain from 15 denier).
What is everyones thoughts of this being a mintmark D?
French minor coinage is largely understudied, and this came from a tumultuous time of reforms, so it is very likely that it could simply be a new discovery.
The third photo is a blow-up of the central circle, and what I see as a D with a serif coming off of it and it is seen next to the minor punch or tick mark on the coin.
Thanks everyone.
 |
| | Forum: World Variety and Error Coins |
|
| 1723 Hibernia Farthing Variety Assistance
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 03/09/2024 9:50 pm
|
Hello Everyone. I believe the variety of this farthing to be 4.101-Gc.36. I do not have Sydney Martin's book but I have found similar examples with this attribution. It has the die crack from the e in DEI and it goes through the head of George I into the right field. There is also a die crack that runs across all letters in GRATIA and terminates on the rim just below. The reverse has 11 harp strings. I believe this is later die state based on the length of the crack running out of the bust and the addition of the other as mentioned. I appreciate any assistance given. Also, this is graded NGC VF-35 if anyone was curious. Thanks a bunch!!
Obverse
Die cracks as mentioned
Reverse
 |
| | Forum: US Classic and Colonial Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| 1874 Hermosillo 10 Centavos Doubled Obverse & Reverse
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 11/22/2023 8:29 pm
|
This 1874 10 centavo is the first year of issue for the Hermosillo mint and it does not have a listed mintage. Despite that, this is understood to be a rarer low-mintage date. These earlier examples were often crudely struck as is the case for this example. The error noted here is the pretty clear doubling on both sides to include the eagle and the snake. The next error of note is that the 0 in the 10 on the reverse appears to be a backward Q. While there may be another explanation for that extra bit of metal, that is my interpretation of what I see. Also of note is that a friend swears that this is an overdate but I am not wholly convinced. The 4 is certainly re-punched and it does look busy under the 74 so for now I can only settle for maybe. Overdates are common on these coins so I would value community feedback on whether this is an overdate or not. I have been collecting the Mexican Republic 5 and 10 centavo coins for many years now and it has been my experience that finding doubled examples is rare let alone an example exhibiting it on both sides. To close this out I did find another example on another forum thread that is a bit better grade than my example and it is diagnostically the same. That leads me to wonder if this is common for this uncommon year. Either way it was too fun of a discovery, so I thought that it would be great to share. I hope everyone is healthy and that all have a Happy Holiday Season!!
 |
| | Forum: World Variety and Error Coins |
| |
| 1786 Pau Ecu, Will It Straight Grade?
|
|
MaximillianMike
Valued Member
United States
85 Posts |
Posted 04/17/2023 5:52 pm
|
| Are you referring to the ones on the reverse rim? If so, those are characteristic to ECU's. The scratches on the obverse at left in the field and on the bust are not. They seem very minor though just don't want to waste money if it would come back details. Thanks for the reply. |
| | Forum: World Coin Grading |
|
|
| Coin Community Forum |
© 2005 - 2025 Coin Community Forums |
| It took 0.45 seconds to rattle this change. |
 |
|
