Jump to content
  • The above Banner is a Sponsored Banner.

    Upgrade to Premium Membership to remove this Banner & All Google Ads. For full list of Premium Member benefits Click HERE.

  • Join The Silver Forum

    The Silver Forum is one of the largest and best loved silver and gold precious metals forums in the world, established since 2014. Join today for FREE! Browse the sponsor's topics (hidden to guests) for special deals and offers, check out the bargains in the members trade section and join in with our community reacting and commenting on topic posts. If you have any questions whatsoever about precious metals collecting and investing please join and start a topic and we will be here to help with our knowledge :) happy stacking/collecting. 21,000+ forum members and 1 million+ forum posts. For the latest up to date stats please see the stats in the right sidebar when browsing from desktop. Sign up for FREE to view the forum with reduced ads. 

Interesting 1871 Victoria Shield Sovereign 1 Over 1? Die Number 25


Recommended Posts

Interesting 1871 Victoria Shield Sovereign 1 Over 1? Die Number 25

The first "1" in the date has a die crack running from its top right, which is mildly interesting but not too unusual, but at the bottom left there seems to be a mis-placed "1" which has been overstruck.

1871GoldFullSovereignVictoriaYoungHeadShieldWWIncuseCoinSingleCollectableUnitedKingdomTheRoyalMintgVFaVFdienumber25obvwithoverlayshowingdiecrackcrop.thumb.jpg.7b0ad8f1aba1f7ff2e8a1a9ec0839d38.jpg

It could be just another die crack, which would be disappointing.

1871GoldFullSovereignVictoriaYoungHeadShieldWWIncuseCoinSingleCollectableUnitedKingdomTheRoyalMintgVFaVFdienumber25revwithoverlayshowingdienumbercrop.thumb.jpg.79aff9845de776a74430cceb48bdae8d.jpg

I received a message "Lawrence Chard any comments on this? That 2 looks blobby!"

Indeed it does, but I think that's all, just a blobby numeral!

😎

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not too sure about the number "1" but has the reverse a die clash or two?

Either side of the crown there's the impression of Victoria's neck. It might even be the cause of the die crack!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Booky586 said:

Not too sure about the number "1" but has the reverse a die clash or two?

Either side of the crown there's the impression of Victoria's neck. It might even be the cause of the die crack!

Yes, dies clashes were frequent on shilelds, some more obvious than others.

It will not have helped die longevity!

😎

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite a tricky one but on balance the bit at the bottom looks quite regular and prob a “1”

The 2 on the Die number is not that well executed but not unusual!

Some more examples 

Die 22

img.php?a=167&l=1012&f=o&s=l

 

Die 47

img.php?a=163&l=913&f=o&s=l


Die 30

img.php?a=162&l=1951&f=o&s=l
 

Die 18

img.php?a=160&l=2578&f=o&s=l

 

There are more that I have looked at but none that look like a 1 over 1!

The links are embedded so I have not nicked the images!

Not my circus, not my monkeys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, dicker said:

Quite a tricky one but on balance the bit at the bottom looks quite regular and prob a “1”

The 2 on the Die number is not that well executed but not unusual!

Some more examples 

Die 22

img.php?a=167&l=1012&f=o&s=l

 

Die 47

img.php?a=163&l=913&f=o&s=l


Die 30

img.php?a=162&l=1951&f=o&s=l
 

Die 18

img.php?a=160&l=2578&f=o&s=l

 

There are more that I have looked at but none that look like a 1 over 1!

The links are embedded so I have not nicked the images!

There seems to be a strong link between die cracks and the first 1 in 1871.

I wonder if any of those are from the same die.

😎

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think yes! These appear across a wide range of die numbers in 1871.  

I have not looked at Sovs in adjacent years - would be interesting.

Die cracks do seem to repeat in the same areas on specific years, most interestingly sometime with different obv and rev errors.

Not my circus, not my monkeys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Foster88 said:

Here’s another two 1871 sovereigns that I came across with the same die crack through the first ‘1’ in the date.

These aren’t my coins or my photos I should add.

@LawrenceChard @dicker

F1553393-A415-47EA-BB75-F8016291D8C9.jpeg

DF525B6E-3A22-440B-BB94-1038CF32138B.jpeg

The top one has its die crack in a different place.

The bottom one has a thick first "1" in date.

😎

Edited by LawrenceChard

Chards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dicker said:

Thanks!  Definitely a die weakness / flaw.

 Why?  I don’t know why this is seen across so many sovereigns of this date.

Thoughts anyone?

 

One thought I had was, now before I say, I have no idea how the dies were made back then. But could it be that all dies were made from a master die, maybe with the 18 already punched in as that wouldn’t change until 1900 and the last two numbers of the date added later to each die?

This might explain it and also explain why we now have varieties such as the 1862 sovereign which has both wide and narrow date varieties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Foster88 said:

One thought I had was, now before I say, I have no idea how the dies were made back then. But could it be that all dies were made from a master die, maybe with the 18 already punched in as that wouldn’t change until 1900 and the last two numbers of the date added later to each die?

This might explain it and also explain why we now have varieties such as the 1862 sovereign which has both wide and narrow date varieties.

1874 at the latest for London mint. I'm certain they would use different dies (or die components) to prepare the St. George issues - the date moving to the reverse.

Aussie mints kept striking shields until 1887 - primarily for the Asian/Middle Eastern markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, SidS said:

 

Aussie mints kept striking shields until 1887 - primarily for the Asian/Middle Eastern markets.

I was unaware of this.  I had read that the Shield design was retained in Australia because of the demand from the public.  

Not my circus, not my monkeys

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, dicker said:

I was unaware of this.  I had read that the Shield design was retained in Australia because of the demand from the public.  

I can't remember where I read that info though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Britannia47 said:

A previous Marsh (1999)  shows a die crack above the 1 of the 1871. I've checked mine (with die number 2) - also the 1970 and 1972 and found nothing untoward.  

Anyway, usual photo....😃

 

IMG_3450 (2).JPG

Are you sure you checked your 1970 and 1972 sovereigns? 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Cookies & terms of service

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies and to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use