1697 1/2d. V over lower V.

[Michael-Roo]

Has anyone seen one of these before? It isn't listed anywhere as a known variety.

V over a much lower V in Tertivs. Not simply a double struck letter. The underlying V is way out of alignment.

Apologies. The condition isn't great, but the variety is very clear.

Your thought please?

Ta.

[Coinery]

Has anyone seen one of these before? It isn't listed anywhere as a known variety.

V over a much lower V in Tertivs. Not simply a double struck letter. The underlying V is way out of alignment.

Apologies. The condition isn't great, but the variety is very clear.

Your thought please?

Ta.

2014-11-08 12.17.04.jpg

I'd say it's not a variety, but rather a die identifier...it looks to me, especially as you can also see the shadow of an 'I', that a coin got stuck in the machine and damaged the die? Or, and I don't know anything about this, do they reuse (grind off [not completely]) the old dies, as they sometimes do with hammered?

[Michael-Roo]

Has anyone seen one of these before? It isn't listed anywhere as a known variety.

V over a much lower V in Tertivs. Not simply a double struck letter. The underlying V is way out of alignment.

Apologies. The condition isn't great, but the variety is very clear.

Your thought please?

Ta.

2014-11-08 12.17.04.jpg

I'd say it's not a variety, but rather a die identifier...it looks to me, especially as you can also see the shadow of an 'I', that a coin got stuck in the machine and damaged the die? Or, and I don't know anything about this, do they reuse (grind off [not completely]) the old dies, as they sometimes do with hammered?

Thanks for that. Very interesting, and something I'd not considered. I hadn't noticed a shadow 'I' either. Do you mean slightly angled and just to the left of the Tertivs 'I'? if it is it would probably also be in alignment with the wonky lower V'.

Reaching for my loupe……...

[Coinery]

Has anyone seen one of these before? It isn't listed anywhere as a known variety.

V over a much lower V in Tertivs. Not simply a double struck letter. The underlying V is way out of alignment.

Apologies. The condition isn't great, but the variety is very clear.

Your thought please?

Ta.

2014-11-08 12.17.04.jpg

I'd say it's not a variety, but rather a die identifier...it looks to me, especially as you can also see the shadow of an 'I', that a coin got stuck in the machine and damaged the die? Or, and I don't know anything about this, do they reuse (grind off [not completely]) the old dies, as they sometimes do with hammered?

Thanks for that. Very interesting, and something I'd not considered. I hadn't noticed a shadow 'I' either. Do you mean slightly angled and just to the left of the Tertivs 'I'? if it is it would probably also be in alignment with the wonky lower V'.

Reaching for my loupe...

Yes, there's also what looks to be a shadow of a letter, maybe V, after the S too?

[Michael-Roo]

Has anyone seen one of these before? It isn't listed anywhere as a known variety.

V over a much lower V in Tertivs. Not simply a double struck letter. The underlying V is way out of alignment.

Apologies. The condition isn't great, but the variety is very clear.

Your thought please?

Ta.

2014-11-08 12.17.04.jpg

I'd say it's not a variety, but rather a die identifier...it looks to me, especially as you can also see the shadow of an 'I', that a coin got stuck in the machine and damaged the die? Or, and I don't know anything about this, do they reuse (grind off [not completely]) the old dies, as they sometimes do with hammered?

Thanks for that. Very interesting, and something I'd not considered. I hadn't noticed a shadow 'I' either. Do you mean slightly angled and just to the left of the Tertivs 'I'? if it is it would probably also be in alignment with the wonky lower V'.

Reaching for my loupe...

Yes, there's also what looks to be a shadow of a letter, maybe V, after the S too?

You could be right. I hadn't noticed that either. Hard to tell if its the shadow of a letter or simply surface wear.

[DaveG38]

What impact would these theories have about the damage to the hair? How does that factor into the explanations or is it totally unrelated?

[Michael-Roo]

What impact would these theories have about the damage to the hair? How does that factor into the explanations or is it totally unrelated?

Good question Dave. I would guess that's post mint damage?

[DaveG38]

What impact would these theories have about the damage to the hair? How does that factor into the explanations or is it totally unrelated?

Good question Dave. I would guess that's post mint damage?

I just wondered if there is any scenario in which the doubled letters could have occurred at the same time as the damage. Looking at it, I'm equally curious about what could have caused those two dents, as much as the letter doubling.

Edited November 9, 2014 by DaveG38

[Michael-Roo]

What impact would these theories have about the damage to the hair? How does that factor into the explanations or is it totally unrelated?

Good question Dave. I would guess that's post mint damage?

I just wondered if there is any scenario in which the doubled letters could have occurred at the same time as the damage. Looking at it, I'm equally curious about what could have caused those two dents as the letter doubling.

I'm sure that's quite possible. Rob would be the bloke to answer this. Hopefully, he'll give us his opinion.

[Rob]

I can't see the displaced S on my screen, but that might be a contrast issue. If in line with the other legend characters, then it is most likely a double strike IMO. I can't see any way in which it can be related to the holes in the head. Maybe they are due to 18th century hammer damage? It looks too smooth to be a flan lamination problem.

[Michael-Roo]

Hi Rob.

No displaced 'S'. My original post relates to the strong and obvious extra letter 'V' which sits underneath, way below and to the left of 'V' in Tertivs. Much too far out of alignment to be a double strike.

I do think the damage in the hair area must have happened later.

[Rob]

I can only see the V. I'd go for badly aligned on the first clout with the hammer, then the position corrected on subsequent blows. Whilst I don't have any examples with a corrected positiion, I have lots with hopelessly misaligned letters, overstruck letter errors or just spelling mistakes on completed dies, as the literacy and skills of the engraver were clearly lacking in many instances.

[Coinery]

I can only see the V. I'd go for badly aligned on the first clout with the hammer, then the position corrected on subsequent blows. Whilst I don't have any examples with a corrected positiion, I have lots with hopelessly misaligned letters, overstruck letter errors or just spelling mistakes on completed dies, as the literacy and skills of the engraver were clearly lacking in many instances.

The ghost/shadow after the S also looks to be a V, and the other straight-edged shadow of a letter before the I is not in alignment with the strong V beside it, which makes me wonder about a coin getting stuck in the machinery and damaging the die?

Do you know whether they were grinding off and remaking dies from old stock in this period, as was common with the hammered coinage?

[Rob]

Do you know whether they were grinding off and remaking dies from old stock in this period, as was common with the hammered coinage?

I don't know for certain but would think not as you have a piece of machinery involved now which has to locate in the top and bottom of the fly-press. You see quite a lot of underlying detail on some hammered coins, but rarely see anything which could be rationalised to a previous die on the milled. Recut or overstruck corrrections to letters are common, but they usually involve the preceding or following letter in the legend, suggesting a misprunt.