Is this a 1891 short tail sovereign

[KevjustKev]

Got me looking at mine now, and no idea what I'm looking for! Does the same apply for 1/2 sovs?

[KevjustKev]

If it's alright to put these here, a long and short?

[sovereignsteve]

Doesn't look to be a short tail there.

Although the question is probably moot as I don't think there are tail variations in those years.

Edited March 14, 2018 by sovereignsteve

[TheGoldSovereign]

27 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

Doesn't look to be a short tail there.

Although the question is probably moot as I don't think there are tail variations in those years.

It may look like it because of the wear, which is often where confusion comes from. IMO you can only really be very sure of the differences on high grade coins

Also yes no variations here as they are all long tails, not sure I would say its moot though 100%, because i've already found additional unrecorded tail varieties for other years, though of course they are older sovereigns

[zeusss4]

Sorry to jump in on an old thread

Was there a 1891 double sovereign minted? 

 

[sovereignsteve]

21 minutes ago, zeusss4 said:

Was there a 1891 double sovereign minted? 

 

No.

Next one after 1887 was 1893

[TheGoldSovereign]

On 05/03/2019 at 14:10, sovereignsteve said:

No.

Next one after 1887 was 1893

Your bump of this thread made me read it again and spotted my pictures on page 1, that looks like a nicer coin that I've recorded it as, and I have a 3:80 ratio on this coin so it's definitely rarer!

[sovereignsteve]

12 minutes ago, sg86 said:

Your bump of this thread made me read it again

yes me too!😁

What struck me was the hassle we caused for poor Lizzie. I wonder if we had anything to do with her leaving Chards?😉

[TheGoldSovereign]

2 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

yes me too!😁

What struck me was the hassle we caused for poor Lizzie. I wonder if we had anything to do with her leaving Chards?😉

O, hopefully not! 😲

[sovereignsteve]

On 06/03/2018 at 18:20, gold said:

Chards replied to me. They said one in fine is £600 and one in xf is £2000. Spink were no help, I emailed them twice with no response.

I would be surprised if Chards quoted a coin that was in XF grade, which is a US Sheldon type grade, not UK, which Chards tend to use. Unless of course, the coin was graded.

[LawrenceChard]

On 04/03/2018 at 20:45, sovereignsteve said:

except that the photo on the Chards page isn't a short tail. in fact I don't even think it has Melbourne mint mark.

I just looked, and I can clearly see an "M" mintmark, and a short-tail.

[sovereignsteve]

55 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

I just looked, and I can clearly see an "M" mintmark, and a short-tail.

woo, that's going back a bit, I can't remember the photo concerned, maybe it changed or I was looking at the wrong one😵

[LawrenceChard]

On 19/03/2019 at 18:21, sovereignsteve said:

What struck me was the hassle we caused for poor Lizzie. I wonder if we had anything to do with her leaving Chards?😉

No, she got head-hunted by Pink Link.

[LawrenceChard]

On 19/03/2019 at 18:25, sovereignsteve said:

I would be surprised if Chards quoted a coin that was in XF grade, which is a US Sheldon type grade, not UK, which Chards tend to use. Unless of course, the coin was graded.

You're dead right. We speak English here, not American, so EF not XF, even if that's what's written on the Skedule!

[LawrenceChard]

On 27/02/2018 at 14:01, sovereignsteve said:

It's definitely not a long tail but there is supposed to be a "medium" tail as well as short. I must confess to getting confused with length of horse tails and tend not to hurt my brain studying them too much.

Are you thinking yours is the ultra rare S3866B (MAM129)?

Defo IS a long tail

But, I have just asked Doug to do some comparison images.

[LawrenceChard]

On 01/03/2018 at 21:46, Xander said:

Australian Coins and Banknotes by Greg McDonald.

22nd Edition.

Why has it got BRITISH sovereigns in an Australian coin book?

[LawrenceChard]

On 04/03/2018 at 23:32, sovereignsteve said:

I can understand them not showing the exact coin, so long as they say so. After all, others do it too (Atties). However they should at least show a photo of the exact coin type they are selling.

Looks like whoever is compiling the web pages is getting sloppy.

I agree with all of that!

We are working on a programme to replace all our Human Resources with robots, but it's a long slow process, which I suspect is being sabotaged by our Human Resources.

Seriously the image disclaimer is a useful precaution, which tends to go on most pages. You might be surprised how many people buy a one ounce "our choice" gold bar, then complain it is no the same make shown, or the same serial number, or...

On individual coins, we are happy to confirm whether the photo shown is same, or to supply actual coin photo (sometimes a mobile phone pic) on request.

More recently, we have been keying coin IDs into some of the images, as part of our web development programme.

One of my hobbies is finding errors on our websites. We used to offer "Win a Pint" for anyone spotting what we euphemistically called our deliberate errors. We should reinstate it.

[Xander]

2 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

Why has it got BRITISH sovereigns in an Australian coin book?

It could be that, by 1900, 40% of the Sovereigns in BRITAIN had been minted in Australia. I would say that would entitle them. Most Australians probably couldn't give a flying Ffff.

 

[LawrenceChard]

6 minutes ago, Xander said:

It could be that, by 1900, 40% of the Sovereigns in BRITAIN had been minted in Australia. I would say that would entitle them. Most Australians probably couldn't give a flying Ffff.

 

I was joking, well partly. Krause does the same.

In that case, logically this, and many others, should be listed as a British coin:

Because it was minted in Birmingham.
1939 British West Africa Silver 3 Three Pence Coin KN Mint Kings Norton Birmingham - Reverse

[Xander]

4 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

I was joking, well partly. Krause does the same.

In that case, logically this, and many others, should be listed as a British coin:

Because it was minted in Birmingham.
1939 British West Africa Silver 3 Three Pence Coin KN Mint Kings Norton Birmingham - Reverse

Very true, we seem to have a great talent for complicating just about anything. for example, component parts  manufactured in China, assembled in Germany, result, made in Germany? 

Can you imagine what it must be like being involved in the Brexit negotiations.

[LawrenceChard]

16 minutes ago, Xander said:

Very true, we seem to have a great talent for complicating just about anything. for example, component parts  manufactured in China, assembled in Germany, result, made in Germany? 

Can you imagine what it must be like being involved in the Brexit negotiations.

Fun?

[sovereignsteve]

9 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

I just looked, and I can clearly see an "M" mintmark, and a short-tail.

I had another look and you are right, I can clearly see a M mint mark.

Lizzie must have got the photo changed, as I wouldn't have made that mistake and others looked and agreed with me.

[sovereignsteve]

3 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

Defo IS a long tail

you quote me out of context. My comment was referring to the photo posted by the OP.

This thread got quite confusing, I'm out!

EDIT: Actually on the subject of tails; I remember you once mentioning you discovered a new variety and passed it on to MAM. Is my memory correct and are you willing to elaborate?😉

[LawrenceChard]

15 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

I had another look and you are right, I can clearly see a M mint mark.

Lizzie must have got the photo changed, as I wouldn't have made that mistake and others looked and agreed with me.

Yes, I am sure you are right.

[LawrenceChard]

10 minutes ago, sovereignsteve said:

you quote me out of context. My comment was referring to the photo posted by the OP.

This thread got quite confusing, I'm out!

EDIT: Actually on the subject of tails; I remember you once mentioning you discovered a new variety and passed it on to MAM. Is my memory correct and are you willing to elaborate?😉

Sorry.

Yes, some threads can get confusing.

I had to scratch my head for a moment about MAM, but got there. Yes, probably less than a year before he died, I telephoned him about this very topic, the 1891 short tail horse sovereigns.

I was aware they were listed in Spink, and thought I would talk to him about them, and had noticed they were not mentioned in his, then quite recent, Gold Sovereign edition, which had been published after it was in Spink.

His answer was that he wanted to research it further before publishing it. I was not entirely convinced by this, or his view that there were probably only about 6 existing. Spink had listed it as "Extremely Rare", which I also doubted.

Turns out I was right. We have certainly owned more than 6!

I think I may also have discussed the 1891-M short tail horse with him, but this may be faulty memory on my part. When I discovered our first one, it was unpublished at the time.

While I am at it, "long" and "short" tail designations are not a great way to classify them.

The two types are from completely recut dies, with almost every aspect and detail different. It just happens that long and short tails on the horse are the most obvious difference.

In my opinion, this also relegates "medium" tails a less important status.

If you look at an 1890 and an 1892, the first is long, the second is short. The later die type is quite clumpy and ugly compared with the earlier type.