Possible Overdates on Gold Sovereigns and Other Coins

[SidS]

1 hour ago, Britannia47 said:

I refer you to my post last Wednesday - The 1861 is normal, as is 1870, thus concluding that the broken denticle is from 1862 to 1869 as far as this decade goes. 

I think we are all agreed now that this denticle is ‘deliberate’  for whatever unknown reason. Perhaps its the engravers version of the Free Masons handshake?! 😎

No the broken denticle is also present on 1850s era coins too, so it's before 1862. I had an 1860 with broken denticle as well.

[Britannia47]

4 hours ago, SidS said:

No the broken denticle is also present on 1850s era coins too, so it's before 1862. I had an 1860 with broken denticle as well.

I have just re examined my shield backs from this era. I stand corrected if you say the 1860 sovereign you 'had' had a broken denticle. I already mentioned earlier that my 1854 and 1855 were found in the same condition - I was referring to the 60s 'decade'  Oddly my 1857 is normal as well as the 1861.  Either way I accept L.C.s analysis. Perhaps a visit to the denticlist could shed light on the matter?!😬

[LawrenceChard]

On 02/05/2022 at 15:46, Britannia47 said:

Perhaps a visit to the denticlist could shed light on the matter?!😬

Is that a dentist with a bike?

😎

[LawrenceChard]

On 28/04/2022 at 04:38, SidS said:

Looked at photos of what I used to have, my findings are:

Broken denticle: 1854, 1858, 1860, 1862-1869

Normal denticle: 1850-1853, 1855-1857, 1859, 1861 and 1870-1873.

All the broken denticle issues have incuse WW that I can see.

 

On 28/04/2022 at 06:23, dicker said:

Has anyone seen any on and M or S branch Mint Sovs?  I have not.

Best

Dicker

 

On 28/04/2022 at 07:30, Britannia47 said:

Only have a couple. 1874M & 1881S, Both WW Relief with normal denticles. Perhaps just a London mint experiment mainly between 1862 - 1869 inclusive, although have just discovered 2 earlier sovereigns with broken denticles - 1854 & 1855! An 1843 however is normal. 

Last week, I looked at a few more shield sovereigns, for missing denticles:

1861 -

1862 missing but not very clear

1863 missing

1864 missing

1865 missing

1866 missing

1867 missing entirely! 😎

1868 missing

1869 missing

1870 - 

1871-S missing

1871-S missing

1872-L missing

I failed to find an 1861 or 1871 in stock, although I didn't look very hard.

1872-L

Although it does not look as clearly missing as some of the others.

 

[SidS]

34 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

 

 

Last week, I looked at a few more shield sovereigns, for missing denticles:

1861 -

1862 missing but not very clear

1863 missing

1864 missing

1865 missing

1866 missing

1867 missing entirely! 😎

1868 missing

1869 missing

1870 - 

1871-S missing

1871-S missing

1872-L missing

I failed to find an 1861 or 1871 in stock, although I didn't look very hard.

1872-L

Although it does not look as clearly missing as some of the others.

 

So both obverse types have it, incuse and relief. Suspect it's less damage to the master hub therefore and more intentional, best guess is as a guide to line up the last digit of the date.

[LawrenceChard]

11 hours ago, SidS said:

So both obverse types have it, incuse and relief. Suspect it's less damage to the master hub therefore and more intentional, best guess is as a guide to line up the last digit of the date.

I don't agree. This is almost certainly damage to a master hub.

But, yes it looks like incuse and raised WW both have the denticle damage.

 

Edited May 17, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[SidS]

9 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

I don't agree. This is almost certainly damage to a master hub.

But, yes it looks like incuse and raised WW both have the denticle damage.

 

Same master hub for both types then? Note also 1870s obverses are of a different type.

[LawrenceChard]

16 minutes ago, SidS said:

Same master hub for both types then? Note also 1870s obverses are of a different type.

I will take a closer look, but it might be a while yet.