Gary D Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 Is it a bird or is it a plane, no sorry getting carried away there.Is it an 8 or is it a 9, Under a x7 glass it looks to be a 9 and was listed as such, but under higher magnification it look more like an 8. Over to the floor. Quote
1887jubilee Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 Is it a bird or is it a plane, no sorry getting carried away there.Is it an 8 or is it a 9, Under a x7 glass it looks to be a 9 and was listed as such, but under higher magnification it look more like an 8. Over to the floor.What is it on? Or is the idea we express an opinion then you tell us? Could be 9/8 or 8 with a bit of blocked die or even 8 punch with a bit broken off, or 9 with a bit filled in. So there we have a few options. From what I can see it looks most like 9 with a bit filled in, ..........................................or 9 /0. Quote
Peckris Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 (edited) Is it a bird or is it a plane, no sorry getting carried away there.Is it an 8 or is it a 9, Under a x7 glass it looks to be a 9 and was listed as such, but under higher magnification it look more like an 8. Over to the floor.What's the coin? I can't see a possible 9/8 if it was the first two digits of the date, but if it was the last two digits, e.g. 1819/18 or 1919/18, I could certainly see it as an overdate.Ah, now I've posted, I see in your quoted reply not a thumbnail, but a filename 1919over8.jpg. So we're talking 3d here, right? Edited September 26, 2012 by Peckris Quote
Coinery Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 What's the coin? I can't see a possible 9/8 if it was the first two digits of the date, but if it was the last two digits, e.g. 1819/18 or 1919/18, I could certainly see it as an overdate.damn good point! Quote
Gary D Posted September 26, 2012 Author Posted September 26, 2012 My money's on a 9/8!1919 or 1918 or 1919 over 8 silver 3d. There was one on ebay a few months ago and I was not £75 convinced. It then appeared in a CGS slab in a recent London Coins auction so CGS must have been convinced. Looking at it again in the slab my money was still on a damaged 18. This one then turned up on ebay, UNC if is wasn't for the drilled in to it according to the seller. I thought it worth a couple of dollars to have a closer look. Quote
Coinery Posted September 26, 2012 Posted September 26, 2012 My money's on a 9/8!1919 or 1918 or 1919 over 8 silver 3d. There was one on ebay a few months ago and I was not £75 convinced. It then appeared in a CGS slab in a recent London Coins auction so CGS must have been convinced. Looking at it again in the slab my money was still on a damaged 18. This one then turned up on ebay, UNC if is wasn't for the drilled in to it according to the seller. I thought it worth a couple of dollars to have a closer look.I've just looked at around 15 9's and 8's on these 3d's and it had me thinking I'd be happy to have bought that as a 1919/1918 3D. For me, even though the image is pixelating a little, the back curve of the 9 is not sloping inwards nearly as much as the other 9's I saw, suggesting the bottom right-hand edge of an 8 is hinting. Adding to that the slight bump in the same back line, it provides further evidence for me that there is an underlying digit. Also, and more obviously, of course, the left hand mid-section is also suggestive of an 8 IMO.What's interesting however is the example in Dave G's book, which looks to me more like a straight 9 than a 9 does - I can't see the overdate in that image at all! Quote
copper123 Posted September 27, 2012 Posted September 27, 2012 Is it a 1918/1919 threepence?If so there have been many arguements over this but the general consencus is it is not an overdate. Quote
Coinery Posted September 27, 2012 Posted September 27, 2012 Is it a 1918/1919 threepence?If so there have been many arguements over this but the general consencus is it is not an overdate.I confess to being out of my depth with this period, but David Groom presents one in his book, P. Davies acknowledges their existence in his book, and Gary is saying that one has recently been acknowledged by CGS (I know!). Just out of interest, who are the consensus? Are these academics from the pre-Davies works?And, in all honesty, I really don't know, though I'd certainly be looking into it if I collected them. 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.