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.

Recommended Posts

Is there an easy way to tell obverse 1 from obverse 2? I'm guessing the denticle count is the same and otherwise that's what would books would say.

It seems like the flatness or dip of the forehead might be the easiest distinguishing feature but I'm not sure. I can't quite make sense of the eye-brow difference.

Based on the dip in the forehead I guess https://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/items/52386 and https://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/items/73888 are both obverse 1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the 1927 crown the Kings's eyebrow can be seen with the hair of the eyebrow showing. Perhaps on the 1928 halfcrown for some it can be seen while on others it cannot. Only a suggestion as I only noticed the hair on the eyebrow after obtaining a 1927 crown where the effigy is larger and I am assuming this was included in the effigy for the other ME issues.

The 1928 proof halfcrown held by the Victoria museum is a cracking coin.

Edited by ozjohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Davies, obv.1 has a prominent eyebrow and obv.2 a shallow one. The latter is the 1926 modified effigy punch and the coin has a thick obverse rim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have a picture of an obverse 2? I've read both Davies and Groom and the small black and white pictures don't really make the eyebrow differences obvious.

I think Museum Victoria's first one is a bit nicer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to the onedrive link I THINK I can say that this is 2+B - please correct me if I am wrong. This is the one in my collection - full size images in my onedrive if anyone needs them.

1928 2+B HC 1-horz Red.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Paddy said:

Thanks to the onedrive link I THINK I can say that this is 2+B - please correct me if I am wrong. This is the one in my collection - full size images in my onedrive if anyone needs them.

It may be, but the obverse rim doesn't seem to be any thicker than that of obverse 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nick said:

It may be, but the obverse rim doesn't seem to be any thicker than that of obverse 1.

I went more on the ones in the onedrive link further up - the more rounded forehead seems to be the most obvious difference. In the Onedrive link the rims do not (to me) look any different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Paddy said:

I went more on the ones in the onedrive link further up - the more rounded forehead seems to be the most obvious difference. In the Onedrive link the rims do not (to me) look any different.

If 1928 obverse 2 is the same as the 1926 ME obverse then there should be observable differences between obverses 1 and 2.  The 1926 ME has I of BRITT to tooth, 1928 obv 1 has I of BRITT to space.

However, neither your 1928 nor Gary's has I of BRITT to tooth, so I don't know whether that is a valid discriminator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davies says it uses the ME punch, which presumably excludes the legend or else there would be no variation in the position of letters to discriminate between dies within a type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davies also says the 1928 2B should rock if placed head down on a flat surface due to the high relief, have you tried that Paddy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sleepy said:

Davies also says the 1928 2B should rock if placed head down on a flat surface due to the high relief, have you tried that Paddy?

Just tried it and it fails that test! Maybe we are back to a Obverse 1. I was only going on the pictures in the Onedrive link...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one from the Onedrive link looks like it does have a flatter forehead - compare to the Museum Victoria images which have a small trench above the eyebrow.

But the eyebrows in the Museum Victoria images don't match either, and the Onedrive one has a flat eyebrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall the rock test but I don't have the collection with me at the moment so can't check. To see the rim difference you really need to place the two observes side by side.

Edited by Gary D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1 May 2019 at 7:05 PM, Gary D said:

I seem to recall the rock test but I don't have the collection with me at the moment so can't check. To see the rim difference you really need to place the two observes side by side.

Me too, but whatever you do, use pumice and not granite...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I still can't figure it - Paddy's example seems to have a flatter forehead than the two Museum Victoria examples. One of the Museum Victoria examples seems to have a less defined eyebrow, as does Paddy's. Paddy's has a uniformly thick rim but the two Museum Victoria examples have rims that are much thinner on one side.

The arrow in David Groom's book isn't clear either - it looks like it's pointing at a nick in the eyebrow.

I'm tempted to say they're the same design and that difference is due to strike pressure or using an old proof die or something, but without a definitive image of obverse 2 it's up in the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mr T said:

I'm tempted to say they're the same design and that difference is due to strike pressure or using an old proof die or something, but without a definitive image of obverse 2 it's up in the air.

I was also of the same opinion, until I compared the 1926 ME with 1928 obverse 1 with both pictures taken using the same lighting position.  Whilst I can't see the differences that are supposed to differentiate the two, I can see a difference with the side of the nose.  However, I very much doubt any difference would be apparent using any other image.

 

HC-192x.jpg

 

NB. 1926 ME is on the left.

Edited by Nick
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks NIck - whereabouts is the difference in the nose?

It looks like the eyebrows are subtely different - the one on the left seems to have a bit of a depression in the middle while on the one on the right it seems to taper uniformly down to the eye. Based on that Paddy's and the second Museum Victoria might be obverse 2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone got a copy of David Grooms book on British Silver Coins, and does it add anything to the above conversation. I've stared at the images until I've gone cross eyed and I can't see any difference between the 2 images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Groom's book says the differences are flatness of the forehead, definition of eyebrow (which I think is most obvious in the various pictures), thickness of rim and relief of effigy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2019 at 2:36 AM, Mr T said:

Thanks Nick - whereabouts is the difference in the nose?

Not in the profile, but in the depth of engraving.  The ME nose looks to have more cut away, such that the bridge of the nose is narrower than the 1928, and the side of the nose looks flatter almost down as far as the nostril.

Edited by Nick
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If yiou look at Nick's pictures, at the very top left of each, the left coin looks to have a wider border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Gary D said:

If yiou look at Nick's pictures, at the very top left of each, the left coin looks to have a wider border.

The ME does have a wider border, but it also has different letter pointings.  It doesn't make sense that they would use the bust and border from the ME and the legend from the 1928.  Surely they would just use the entire ME obverse or an existing 1928 obverse.

Share this post


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

Not in the profile, but in the depth of engraving.  The ME nose looks to have more cut away, such that the bridge of the nose is narrower than the 1928, and the side of the nose looks flatter almost down as far as the nostril.

Oh yes the bridge of the nose does look thinner on the 1928, though obverse 1 having the thinner nose bridge is at odds with the Museum Victoria examples being obverse 1 and Paddy's example being an obverse 2.

1 hour ago, Nick said:

It doesn't make sense that they would use the bust and border from the ME and the legend from the 1928.  Surely they would just use the entire ME obverse or an existing 1928 obverse.

Isn't that what the books suggest happened though? It seems like the only difference is the portrait as odd at that seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an E book called The Identification of British 20th. Century Silver Coin Varieties  which discusses all the varieties of the 1928 halfcrown obverses and reverses with photos also including the rocking test described in this thread. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Identification-British-Century-Silver-Varieties/dp/1445753014I  Perhaps this may be of use for this discussion.

  • Like 1

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

×