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.

Sign in to follow this  
JLS

1867 shilling with die number 19 and higher - 1868 obverse type ?

Recommended Posts

Tony Clayton's listing of die numbers suggests that all 1867 shillings with die number 19 + have the obverse of 1868 (which is a fairly scarce variety). I'm a bit sceptical, albeit working from a rather rubbish example with die number 19, it looks like an ordinary 1867 obverse to me with tight ringlets. What do people think ? 

https://imgur.com/a/LW367ri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two obverses for 1867 are the I of VICT to bead and the other to a space. The 1868 is I to space. There are two reverses for 1867, one with a smaller and the other with a larger gap between the LLs. The smaller gap is up to die 18, the larger gap is up to die 37. This all based on Davies p.60

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JLS said:

Tony Clayton's listing of die numbers suggests that all 1867 shillings with die number 19 + have the obverse of 1868 (which is a fairly scarce variety). I'm a bit sceptical, albeit working from a rather rubbish example with die number 19, it looks like an ordinary 1867 obverse to me with tight ringlets. What do people think ? 

https://imgur.com/a/LW367ri

It is not correct to assume that below DN 19 have obverse 4 and those 19+ have obverse 5.  From the observations that I have made over the years, the only 5+A pairing I have seen is DN 23 and the only 5+B are DN 16 and DN 17.  Almost all others are 4+A except DN 18 which is 4+B.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nick said:

It is not correct to assume that below DN 19 have obverse 4 and those 19+ have obverse 5.  From the observations that I have made over the years, the only 5+A pairing I have seen is DN 23 and the only 5+B are DN 16 and DN 17.  Almost all others are 4+A except DN 18 which is 4+B.

That's very interesting...I will watch out for DN 23...

Is Clayton's information just wrong on this point, or is there something I'm missing ? He clearly doesn't list any die numbers higher than 18 for obverse 4 as far as I can see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JLS said:

That's very interesting...I will watch out for DN 23...

Is Clayton's information just wrong on this point, or is there something I'm missing ? He clearly doesn't list any die numbers higher than 18 for obverse 4 as far as I can see. 

Davies records die no. 37 as the highest with obverse 4, but that doesn't exclude higher numbers found at a later date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JLS said:

That's very interesting...I will watch out for DN 23...

Is Clayton's information just wrong on this point, or is there something I'm missing ? He clearly doesn't list any die numbers higher than 18 for obverse 4 as far as I can see. 

As far as I know, only one specimen of die 23 is known with die pair 5+A.  All other die 23s (including mine!) are the usual 4+A so keeping a watch might well prove fruitless - I have been watching for another for years!!  I guess the one is a genuine mule - it is not necessary that both dies would be swapped in the press at the same time, so I suppose the obverse die was exchanged for some reason after the vast majority of this reverse die had been struck and then some more (but how many, and how many survive?) made with the obverse 5 die. I am sure SOME more will exist, but suspect it must be very very few. Any members got one?

Yes, Clayton's die number list is sometimes inaccurate and very out of date. Even Bull's data isn't totally full or accurate. I know there are some collectors who do meticulous die number research, and at least one of them has for some time been intending to publish a formal work (yes please!) with photos of all his erstwhile specimens. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Martinminerva said:

As far as I know, only one specimen of die 23 is known with die pair 5+A.  All other die 23s (including mine!) are the usual 4+A so keeping a watch might well prove fruitless - I have been watching for another for years!!  I guess the one is a genuine mule - it is not necessary that both dies would be swapped in the press at the same time, so I suppose the obverse die was exchanged for some reason after the vast majority of this reverse die had been struck and then some more (but how many, and how many survive?) made with the obverse 5 die. I am sure SOME more will exist, but suspect it must be very very few. Any members got one?

Have you seen any 5+A with any other die numbers? Are die number and die pairings not necessarily linked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, and in know of no other 5+A for any other die number for 1867.

As Nick says above

19 hours ago, Nick said:

From the observations that I have made over the years, the only 5+A pairing I have seen is DN 23 and the only 5+B are DN 16 and DN 17.  Almost all others are 4+A except DN 18 which is 4+B.

would seem to be totally correct, with the addition that all other die 23 seem to be the normal 4+A.

Regarding linkage, it varies between years and denominations. Most pairings seem to be consistent for die number, but I do have, for example,  two 1868 sixpences with die number 2,  but one is Davies pair 2+A and the other is 3+A. As I say above, a press operator could always change just one die in the case of damage, for example,  and thus lose consistency.

Just ripe for full research and publication, as I also say above!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed - so the 5+A is pretty rare I'm guessing, given that its unconfirmed in Davies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 27 December 2018 at 9:28 PM, Martinminerva said:

As far as I know, only one specimen of die 23 is known with die pair 5+A.  All other die 23s (including mine!) are the usual 4+A so keeping a watch might well prove fruitless - I have been watching for another for years!!  I guess the one is a genuine mule - it is not necessary that both dies would be swapped in the press at the same time, so I suppose the obverse die was exchanged for some reason after the vast majority of this reverse die had been struck and then some more (but how many, and how many survive?) made with the obverse 5 die. I am sure SOME more will exist, but suspect it must be very very few. Any members got one?

Yes, Clayton's die number list is sometimes inaccurate and very out of date. Even Bull's data isn't totally full or accurate. I know there are some collectors who do meticulous die number research, and at least one of them has for some time been intending to publish a formal work (yes please!) with photos of all his erstwhile specimens. 

 

Well, blow me. After years of searching I have finally got hold of another 1867 die 23 shilling which IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE 5+A mule !

Pictures below, alongside the normal 4+A pairing (mule on the right). Yes, a bit battered and worn, but presumably only the second known example? The original specimen sold at London Coins auction 122 in Sept 2008 Lot no 1791 for £320 in NEF. Are there any more out there?

 

image.jpeg

image.jpeg

Edited by Martinminerva
Typo !
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more image just to show reverse die is the same, rather than duplicated die number as occasionally happens elsewhere in the series. All die and date digits identically positioned and spaced.

image.jpeg

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
Sign in to follow this  

×