1902 Crown - Sydney Mint?

[Pavel]

Can someone please shed some light on this? Apparently, it was sold as a "Sydney Mint pattern" at a German auction some time back.

[Peckris 2]

What are you trying to learn?

I'm assuming that the small S below the horse's rear hoof is the Sydney mintmark. Also, the reverse design is noticeably smaller than on the regular London issue:

However, this is the first I've heard that there was a Sydney pattern, so there's not much I can add. I assume it's very rare.

[Pavel]

It was pointed out to me that the design is more like the five sovereigns issued at the same time, of which the Sydney Mint did strike some. Here's an example that went from the Sydney Mint to the Melbourne Mint to Museums Victoria:

https://collections.museumsvictoria.com.au/items/77707

I am wondering if they could have used the same dies to strike one from silver too?

Edited November 17, 2021 by Pavel

[VickySilver]

Wow, that pattern needs to be examined by the RM/ Graham Dyer. I really do not care for the look of the King - very softly struck and the proportions of the horse's hindparts, etc. just not looking quite right. The purported mintmark looks off or at least upside down. Out of curiosity, what did it sell for?

[Pavel]

It sold for US$ 4,400 at that auction. The mint mark seems to be the same as that of the five sovereigns.

[VickySilver]

The devices still appear faulty, obverse AND reverse.

[ozjohn]

On 11/17/2021 at 6:15 PM, Pavel said:

Can someone please shed some light on this? Apparently, it was sold as a "Sydney Mint pattern" at a German auction some time back.

Doesn't look right to me. Both the obverse and reverse are badly minted with the reverse showing a very low relief compared with the Sydney 5 pound piece in the Victoria museum with St. Georges head lacking most detail  and King Edwards beard and ear are in a similar condition. Also there is no line down the center of St Georges sword. The only other thing is the coin has seen some circulation but lacks the normal bumps and abrasions associated associated with circulation. Certainly much to be concerned about with this coin.

Edited November 25, 2021 by ozjohn
More info

[VickySilver]

The rims belie circulation. This coin is suspect and even though in my area I would reject without some sort of proof that it is legitimate (ie. it is a stinker).

[Rob]

Do we know for certain that it is silver? If it was a trial struck before the dies were hardened, then something not fully struck up becomes a possibility.

[VickySilver]

IMO there are just too many problems with this coin, and a few more:

Look at the details in Ed's ear top - struck fully. Lettering struck fully

Look at St. George' s sword arm - that detail loss does not look like incomplete strike

Look at contour of horse's "bottom" where original has a slight indent but NOT the subject coin

Look at dragon's head and "sickly" atrophic wings on the subject coin - it is all wrong. The dragon's head fully struck and the rest not.

Look at lower margin of horse' s chest with sternum terminus and adjunct muscles wrong

Etc, etc.

[Rob]

I see what you mean regarding the rump, but would still like to rule out the silver being a later strike, which it would have to be. The tail, highest hoof connection to the foreleg, notch in the cloak and the linear circle in parts are all showing signs consistent with the field being polished down, but you need to superimpose the images to establish how much peripheral loss of relief there is on the rump, if any. No narrowing of the relief increases the case for making it iffy, but that would be contradicted by the above points. 

[coinkat]

I would expect much more out of a pattern in terms of quality. Seems the catalog description would be helpful to establish some basic information. I am curious if the weight was provided in the Auction catalog description.  I would rather see it in hand before offering any commentary. 

[VickySilver]

Run, Forrest, Run!  I liked that line from Forrest Gump. This coin even on photos FAILS and really is the sort that irritates me beyond reason probably. It is right up my alley and the real thing would have held tremendous interest to me. A coin like this would have to come with pristine provenance to even be remotely considered and I feel sorry for the buyer....

[Peckris 2]

18 hours ago, VickySilver said:

Run, Forrest, Run!  I liked that line from Forrest Gump. This coin even on photos FAILS and really is the sort that irritates me beyond reason probably. It is right up my alley and the real thing would have held tremendous interest to me. A coin like this would have to come with pristine provenance to even be remotely considered and I feel sorry for the buyer....

The curious thing - if it's not kosher - is WHY anyone would create an unknown pattern with no provenance, for no reason at all, especially as it can be so easily doubted? Unless of course it was one person's pet project for domestic purposes only, but it then "got out".

[VickySilver]

True. No telling on motivation factors, but the coin just [possibly] irrationally irritates me. I would say though that 4k quid is no small change...

[Mr T]

In the 1970s a guy named David Gee produced fake 1902S two and five pound coins (in gold) - I thought this might be an off-metal attempt.

[VickySilver]

OK, no surprise and possibly the explanation then....