NEW St. George and the Dragon coin with Garter inscription

[Allgoldcoins]

2 minutes ago, Paul said:

Tbc but I'd speculate it'll be between 250-350 in 2oz gold 

 ↓

[Alz111]

1 minute ago, Paul said:

Tbc but I'd speculate it'll be between 250-350 in 2oz gold 

I’d say 300 mintage in the 2oz gold and price £5550 

[Sovhead]

2 minutes ago, Paul said:

Tbc but I'd speculate it'll be between 250-350 in 2oz gold 

That’s VERY inexpensive 🤣🤣

[Paul]

7 minutes ago, Sovhead said:

That’s VERY inexpensive 🤣🤣

Can you price match ? @GoldDiggerDave said he'd knock a tenner off on a £5k spend 

 

[GoldDiggerDave]

1 hour ago, Paul said:

Can you price match ? @GoldDiggerDave said he'd knock a tenner off on a £5k spend 

 

I can source

[9x883]

Is this not the same design released on the 200th anniversary sovereigns in 2017?

[Paul]

1 minute ago, 9x883 said:

Is this not the same design released on the 200th anniversary sovereigns in 2017?

It's very close 

[Paul]

19 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

I can source

Can you do zero percent Scouser like tick

( asking for a friend)

[GoodAsGold]

26 minutes ago, Paul said:

It's very close 

Not that I can currently afford a 2oz gold coin but I hope this design doesn’t devalue our 2017 quintuples - the proof being hard to source in particular.

Hopefully the low mintage will not.

Edited January 25 by GoodAsGold
Text added

[DdraigAur]

1 hour ago, 9x883 said:

Is this not the same design released on the 200th anniversary sovereigns in 2017?

Based on that image it follows the design of the 1818-1820 crown rather than the 2017 proof sovereign.

Sword in hand, versus broken lance. Pistrucci’s name under the exergue, versus absent. Plain fields behind the garter legend, versus striations. 

I’m quite excited for this release and deciding if I can take the plunge with the gold. The proportions of that potential image are a little off putting. The denticles and rim extend too far and take up too much room for my liking. 

[westminstrel]

5 hours ago, Allgoldcoins said:

 ↓

Lower than 250? Okay that’s low. 😅

[Chrisplym]

If the mintage is lower than 250 to 350 then that’s Una and the Lion territory. I believe that for that first issue of the Great Engravers the 2oz gold edition limit was just 205 and total issue limit was 225.

[westminstrel]

Yeah that’s exactly right.

If we’re looking at sub-250 as @Allgoldcoins may have hinted (cheeky cheeky!), then indeed the Una mintages could be replicated; although I’m now thinking it could be even slightly lower at 200/210.

The big question is whether the RM will try to double dip by somehow releasing a variation with another 200 or so mintage. That’d just kill it. Let’s hope they don’t.

And separately, it’s also the silver mintages that will determine the overall success or failure of this release.

Here are max mintages once again:

2oz silver mintages

- Una and the Lion: 3000

- Three Graces: 3510

- Gothic Crown Portrait: 4256

- Gothic Crown Quartered Arms: 4006

- Petition Crown: 3260

 

2oz gold mintages

- Una and the Lion: 225

- Three Graces: 335

- Gothic Crown Portrait: 406

- Gothic Crown Quartered Arms: 411

- Petition Crown: 310

[westminstrel]

7 hours ago, GoodAsGold said:

Not that I can currently afford a 2oz gold coin but I hope this design doesn’t devalue our 2017 quintuples - the proof being hard to source in particular.

Hopefully the low mintage will not.

That reminds me, I need to be in the market for a 2017 £5 Proof Sovereign. 🙂

6 hours ago, DdraigAur said:

Based on that image it follows the design of the 1818-1820 crown rather than the 2017 proof sovereign.

Sword in hand, versus broken lance. Pistrucci’s name under the exergue, versus absent. Plain fields behind the garter legend, versus striations. 

I’m quite excited for this release and deciding if I can take the plunge with the gold. The proportions of that potential image are a little off putting. The denticles and rim extend too far and take up too much room for my liking. 

I agree. It stood out to me too. Not sure what’s their reasoning behind that design choice. Or maybe that image is a mock-up created by someone and not the official RM promo image.

[westminstrel]

10 hours ago, Alz111 said:

Are you able to share where you got this from?

[GoldDiggerDave]

7 hours ago, DdraigAur said:

Based on that image it follows the design of the 1818-1820 crown rather than the 2017 proof sovereign.

Sword in hand, versus broken lance. Pistrucci’s name under the exergue, versus absent. Plain fields behind the garter legend, versus striations. 

I’m quite excited for this release and deciding if I can take the plunge with the gold. The proportions of that potential image are a little off putting. The denticles and rim extend too far and take up too much room for my liking. 

There is so much to religious  iconography of St George Slaying the Dragon that most overlook or meanings or get lost overtime,  Ascalon, the holy sword that becomes a spear is named after the city of  Ashkelon in modern Isreal is only one element of this highly religious symbol.  

We have a Sword/spear named after a city in Isreal, a Turkish solider who was martyred for his religious beliefs , and theres other religious symbolic elements that I dare not say what they actually mean to some faiths.   

The "sprit" of St  George, is used in many European faiths and religions, I have researched the myth and the man for years.    The earliest depiction of St George I have seen with my own eyes dates back to around 400-700 AD, a burial shroud made by the coptic christians.  St George was put to death in 303 AD so it would make it one of the earliest depictions there is.      

Theres all sorts of interesting references of St George the military saint  in the crusades  and of course the battle of Agincourt.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[westminstrel]

23 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

There is so much to religious  iconography of St George Slaying the Dragon that most overlook or meanings or get lost overtime,  Ascalon, the holy sword that becomes a spear is named after the city of  Ashkelon in modern Isreal is only one element of this highly religious symbol.  

We have a Sword/spear named after a city in Isreal, a Turkish solider who was martyred for his religious beliefs , and theres other religious symbolic elements that I dare not say what they actually mean to some faiths.   

The "sprit" of St  George, is used in many European faiths and religions, I have researched the myth and the man for years.    The earliest depiction of St George I have seen with my own eyes dates back to around 400-700 AD, a burial shroud made by the coptic christians.  St George was put to death in 303 AD so it would make it one of the earliest depictions there is.      

Theres all sorts of interesting references of St George the military saint  in the crusades  and of course the battle of Agincourt.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

I love the religious aspects behind the design, and interestingly, the Petition Crown also had a teeny tiny St. George and Dragon at its center.

Edited January 26 by westminstrel

[Britannia47]

12 hours ago, Alz111 said:

I’m a bit suspicious of the above, despite the accurate ‘blurb’ The obverse is OK, but the G&D is something a marketing company would do. If genuine, this would be unique….

Photo shows the original holding a broken spear handle, followed by the first GIV ‘sword in hand’ image which started in 1821, the RMs 2017 proof version, and a mini G&D on the Victorian silver half crown!

Banknotes also carried the G&D. This one from 1958 is a ‘Fiver’!

[ak74]

Some info from EIC

[Paul]

 

 

[paulmerton]

11 hours ago, 9x883 said:

Is this not the same design released on the 200th anniversary sovereigns in 2017?

Look at the size of the denticles - it's based on the entire design of the crown rather than the sovereign.

1 minute ago, ak74 said:

Some info from EIC

Wrong coins 🤣

[westminstrel]

14 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

Look at the size of the denticles - it's based on the entire design of the crown rather than the sovereign.

I think what’s throwing the design off (versus the original Crown) is the inclusion of that plain concentric space around the denticles.

Edited January 26 by westminstrel

[paulmerton]

Just now, westminstrel said:

I think what’s throwing the design off (versus the original Crown) is the inclusion of that plain concentric space around the denticles. 

I can provide a service to trim off the excess metal around the border to make it look more authentic. I won't even charge for disposal of the shavings!

[westminstrel]

1 minute ago, paulmerton said:

I can provide a service to trim off the excess metal around the border to make it look more authentic. I won't even charge for disposal of the shavings!

You may keep the excess and hand me the rest of your coin. 😜

[paulmerton]

Just now, westminstrel said:

You may keep the excess and hand me the rest of your coin. 😜

I'm only going for a silver one, you won't be interested 🤣