Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Paulus

1745 Half Crown Roses Question

Recommended Posts

Hoping someone can shed some light ...

Bull/ESC lists the 45/45 variety (ESC 1686 (604A)) but not the 45/3, while Spink lists the 45/3 but not the 45/45 - do both exist, are the both the same but with a different 'interpretation', or is there a mistake in 1 of these reference books? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a different interpretation given the reference numbers are the same. I can't comment as I don't have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rob, here's my example, that I'm wondering about. I think I'm in the 45/45 camp ...

1745_hc_roses_5_over_3_01_ref_01648_lcgs__uin_42777_03_1600.jpg

image.png.4d69deb32cbc22a7f02a362d8ccd16ac.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Page 507 of Coincraft's 2000 Standard Catalogue of English and UK Coins lists a "5 over 3" with no mention of 45/45.  From your excellent pics I'll join you in the 45/45 camp though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's certainly a 5 over 5, but it is quite possible, even likely that both exist. The chances of them using up every 1743 die exactly on the end of the year is something I wouldn't bet on. You do get overstrikes for virtually every previous year from 1732 onward - 1732/1, 1734/3, 35/34, 36/35, 39/35, 39/37, 41/39, 42/40, 43/41, 46/45 and 48/47 all spring to mind, so there is no reason why 1745/3 should be an exception. The output in all years was sufficient that there would always be a few dies in use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×