Die number not listed

[Lea79]

Hi guys

[Clens92]

More likely that it's just not a known die number for that year.  They turn up every now and then - I wouldn't worry that it's fake; Marsh only documents the basics. 

[Danny-boy]

Would an unknown die number make it more valuable?

[Lea79]

Would an unknown die number make it more valuable?

That would b nice lol.

[barney]

Hi Lea i would not say its a fake the 299 die number is found on the 1873 half sovereign

[Lea79]

Hi barney

[HawkHybrid]

I think die numbers are batch numbers 1,2,3 etc until

they change the design/year. look up the largest die

number for your year in question and any number

below that should be valid die numbers.

 

HH

[sovereignsteve]

Hi barney that's good to kno. I wonder how many other die numbers are not listed. Maybe a thread would b a good idea to document them. Marsh's books are a little old now, maybe at some point someone else will take over and write more up to date versions. With the wealth of information on this forum I'm sure there are many who would thrive in the role. @sovereignsteve .

I would be most flattered if anyone thought I was qualified to write a new book on sovereigns.

There will be many more collectors and dealers out there who have more knowledge than I possess.

However, being a scientist by trade, I would have the required knowledge to be able to thoroughly research the subject and perhaps write such a book if I had the time and inclination. I must confess though, my writing skills are somewhat limited although my wife has actually written and self-published 2 novels and is well on the way to completeing a 3rd. Perhaps she could do the ghost writing?

[sovereignsteve]

It's never been completely explained why the mint used die numbers for a period nor has there been a complete list of die numbers used for each year.

As you say, the Marsh books are a little out of date, especially the half sovereign, and he was only going on his experience and that of some friends, collectors and dealers close to him at the time he was writing. I have heard of new die numbers cropping up from time to time but I'm not aware of anyone who actually collects with an emphasis on these, so no extra value will be associated with new ones. It may be that if someone found a new number that was completely dissociated from those already known, it may create some interest from collectors.

I'm thinking of something similar to the "827" sovereign type of 1863 which had a die number of 22. It is thought the 827 number was that of a certain ingot of gold used.

[Lea79]

I think ud be great at writing a book about sovereigns. I for 1 would be glad of a more up to date version for reference as I'm sure a lot of other collectors would. If you have the time you should definatly think about it.

[Danny-boy]

I'd crowd fund it!!!!

[sovereignsteve]

I think ud be great at writing a book about sovereigns. I for 1 would be glad of a more up to date version for reference as I'm sure a lot of other collectors would. If you have the time you should definatly think about it.

You're too kind.

Well hopefully I'll be retiring in a couple of years so maybe I could write the book when I'm not fishing!