| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 1,660 |
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
Hi I have this nice coin which I believe is George lll - text reads Gulielmus lll and it is dated 1836 on the other side. I can't work out what the denomination is and also any idea of value. Many thanks for any information!   Coin identified, title edited - Sap |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Sweden
2124 Posts |
|
|
New Member
 United Kingdom
8 Posts |
Hi thanks - it is 9.6 gms and approx 3 cm diameter.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Sweden
2124 Posts |
So the diameter matches that of a half crown, but 9.6 g is seriously underweight, it should be about 14 g. That and the somewhat porous surface gives me some concern about its authenticity, but one of our experts on British coins will hopefully give their opinion too.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
Erafjel has identified the type correctly.
I have an example of these in about VF condition.
When I saw the picture, I instantly thought 'forgery'.
Weight confirms.
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
Hi how interesting. Does it have any interest or age or value with this information?
Many thanks
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United Kingdom
18014 Posts |
Quote:
Does it have any interest or age or value with this information? It's almost certainly a contemporary forgery made to circulate, rather than a more recent one to deceive a collector. Some people do indeed collect and study contemporary forgeries. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
735 Posts |
I concur.
Contemporary cast copy.
|
|
Moderator
 Australia
16868 Posts |
And for the record, it's George IV. George III was long gone by 1836.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Russian Federation
5180 Posts |
Quote:
And for the record, it's George IV. George III was long gone by 1836. It's actually William IV. Those Latin names can be deceptive. |
|
Moderator
Australia
16868 Posts |
Quote:
It's actually William IV. Those Latin names can be deceptive. Ha ha! Of course you're correct, how silly of me.I should double-check such things before typing too quickly.  Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
Of course, if there is one thing I have committed to memory it is Kings and Queens' dates! Thanks for all the help.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
4628 Posts |
Agree with the above. The coin is likely a contemporary copy of a William IV Halfcrown. It looks like it was likely uttered back in the 1830s or 1840s rather than a modern Chinese fake. The genuine coin should look like this.   In "Average" condition. However the weight should be 14.13 grams for a UNC piece, this condition 13.5 seems more suitable, a worn flat dog around 12 grams. Uttering was the term given to making fake coins back then. Until 1832 you could be hanged for making a fake £1 note, and making fake halfcrowns would win you a trip to Australia for at least 7 years - One way!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1616 Posts |
Quote:
making fake halfcrowns would win you a trip to Australia for at least 7 years - One way!
I heard on a docu that some actually chose death by hanging rather than transportation. Ironic choosing death given that most convicts were released earlier than their sentence dictated and ended up doing far better than if they had stayed in the UK. Alas, some poor sods did end up in NZ after serving time in Oz. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2567 Posts |
Quote: Alas, some poor sods did end up in NZ after serving time in Oz. you're goin' straight ta heck for that one!The Ox moves slowly, but the Earth is patient.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 1,660 |
|
Posted 09/22/2022 07:52 am
