Mr T Posted January 2, 2020 Posted January 2, 2020 Is there a better way to pick these than the flat/curved-base letters? https://www.drakesterling.com/catalog/product/view/id/128122/s/1893-half-crown-2/category/54/ looks like a reverse A. https://onlinecoin.club/Coins/Country/United_Kingdom/Halfcrown_1893/ looks like a reverse B, as does https://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/items/70926 At a glance they look roughly the same, denticle alignment-wise - I didn't count but will if there's no other obvious distinguishing difference. Quote
Nick Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 (edited) On 1/2/2020 at 11:38 PM, Mr T said: Is there a better way to pick these than the flat/curved-base letters? Just look at the length of the teeth. Rev A has long teeth, Rev B has short. Rev A only appears on some 1893 and some 1896. Edited January 6, 2020 by Nick Quote
Paddy Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 I have so far avoided getting into varieties on Victorian Silver, and I have no books on them - could you expand on the above a bit? Spink mentions a longer tooth variety for the 1896, but not for the 1893. Do both occur on both dates? The 1896 value jumps from £125 in VF for the shorter tooth to £165 for the longer tooth - are there comparable figures for the the 1893? I have a very nice 1893, which I think is longer tooth and I would be interested to know if I have picked up a rarity! 2 Quote
Sleepy Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 Compared to my 1896 it looks like a longer tooth variety. Quote
Sword Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 (edited) 6 hours ago, Paddy said: I have so far avoided getting into varieties on Victorian Silver, and I have no books on them - could you expand on the above a bit? Spink mentions a longer tooth variety for the 1896, but not for the 1893. Do both occur on both dates? The 1896 value jumps from £125 in VF for the shorter tooth to £165 for the longer tooth - are there comparable figures for the the 1893? I have a very nice 1893, which I think is longer tooth and I would be interested to know if I have picked up a rarity! Both the 1893 and 1896 have the long teeth (A) and short teeth (B) varieties. For the 1893, the long teeth (A) is for the currency and B for the proof. The rarer currency variety is the obverse 2. For 1896, the obverse is 2 and the rarer reverse is the long teeth A. Photos below are from Davies, (which gives prices in 1982.) Unfortunately, the prices in Davies has never been updated as a second edition has not been published. Edited January 6, 2020 by Sword Quote
Paddy Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 That is brilliant - thank you. Mine is definitely 1 and A, so the standard issue for 1893 and so nothing to get too excited about. (Although a pretty good example I think!) Thanks again. Quote
Sword Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 It's indeed a very nice example. The rim is particularly good. Quote
Peckris 2 Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 2 hours ago, Sword said: Unfortunately, the prices in Davies has never been updated as a second edition has not been published. In a way that doesn't matter. Looking at the 1982 prices gives you some idea of the relative scarcity, and you can then use the current values of the standard issue to calculate the value of the scarcer variety; possibly adding a slight premium to allow for the greater modern interest in rare varieties. 2 Quote
Rob Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 Any pricing is of necessity a bit hit and miss as you aren't buying coins with a RRP. As Peck says, the pricing on any occasion should give a rough indication of relative rarity, which is about as much as one could hope for, because you are still going to pay under or over the 'going rate' (whatever that means?). The only relevant bits are whether you like the coin and are happy with the price. The latter applies at the time of purchase and not with hindsight because there's always someone willing to say you overpaid - as they got the same for 99p on ebay. Quote
Paddy Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 10 hours ago, Rob said: Any pricing is of necessity a bit hit and miss as you aren't buying coins with a RRP. As Peck says, the pricing on any occasion should give a rough indication of relative rarity, which is about as much as one could hope for, because you are still going to pay under or over the 'going rate' (whatever that means?). The only relevant bits are whether you like the coin and are happy with the price. The latter applies at the time of purchase and not with hindsight because there's always someone willing to say you overpaid - as they got the same for 99p on ebay. I agree completely. My enquiry on relative price was simply to get an idea of relative scarcity as the coin is definitely not for sale. And yes - I do like it very much. I think the reverse design on the veiled head half crowns is one of the best they came up with. Quote
Sword Posted January 7, 2020 Posted January 7, 2020 12 hours ago, Paddy said: And yes - I do like it very much. I think the reverse design on the veiled head half crowns is one of the best they came up with. I think it is a very pleasing design too. It has an ornate garter chain and crown but the large amount of space allocated for the legend ensures that the design is not overcrowded or appear fussy. The pointed Norman style shape shield is soften nicely into a round shape by blending in with the garter chain. 2 Quote
copper123 Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 Hard to find in mint state - I presume because it was a lot of money to put aside in 1893 a crown is easy funny enough though its around £150 Quote
Peckris 2 Posted January 8, 2020 Posted January 8, 2020 10 hours ago, copper123 said: Hard to find in mint state - I presume because it was a lot of money to put aside in 1893 a crown is easy funny enough though its around £150 1893 and 1897 are comparatively easy. The real difficult date is 1894. Quote
Sword Posted January 9, 2020 Posted January 9, 2020 20 hours ago, Peckris 2 said: 1893 and 1897 are comparatively easy. The real difficult date is 1894. I agree. In the case of Old Head crowns, I think with the exception of 1893, it is difficult to get UNC examples for any of the other dates. I also think that UNC crowns are harder to come by than UNC halfcrowns. UNC Old Head crowns (with the exception of 1893) have really got expensive. Quote
Mr T Posted January 11, 2020 Author Posted January 11, 2020 They're both 156 denticles - Davies makes the note that the length of the denticles varies from year to year as well. Quote
VickySilver Posted January 12, 2020 Posted January 12, 2020 Ah, a few pirates breaking the thread. May I join? IMO, the Regnal LVII 1893 is pretty scarce as are a coupe of others.... I just like seeing fully struck and unmucked with crowns of any date. I still lack a few and have been lazy. Seems like I do better with Vicky shillings and 6ds. Quote
Sword Posted January 12, 2020 Posted January 12, 2020 2 hours ago, VickySilver said: I just like seeing fully struck and unmucked with crowns of any date. It's really difficult to find an UNC Old Head crown with St George's chest, strap and helmet all fully struck. There is nearly always a flat spot on the strap even on the top examples. Quote
Mr T Posted January 22, 2020 Author Posted January 22, 2020 On 1/13/2020 at 5:21 AM, VickySilver said: Ah, a few pirates breaking the thread. May I join? IMO, the Regnal LVII 1893 is pretty scarce as are a coupe of others.... Any that aren't listed in Davies? Quote
Sword Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 9 hours ago, Mr T said: Any that aren't listed in Davies? CGS /LC describes this as "1893LVI Davies Obverse 1 (T of VICTORIA points to a bead), Reverse streamer similar to Reverse A with a more levelled appearance, the date digits also closer together (listed by CGS as their variety 20 dies 1+G, unlisted elsewhere)" 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.