• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

British shilling error?

Started by 1973SProof,

9 posts in this topic

1973SProof

1973SProof

Posted
Posted

I don't know a lot about error coins -- often the descriptions of some of the types leave me a little mystified when looking at an actual example -- but it occurred to me that this may be one.

 

14217108047_6dd53031ea_c.jpg

 

14217108577_2e2fb834a5_c.jpg

 

 

I got it about 2 years ago in a group of british junk silver I bought -- mostly sixpence, a couple threepence, and this one shilling, which I felt was included because it was ugly -- that perhaps someone had run over it or something. In any event, it seemed logical to be in a lot priced entirely for its silver value.

 

But when I recently saw it again, this time knowing perhaps more about coins that when I first bought it, I noticed that the explanation I'd given myself before for it's shape didn't really make any sense -- and that it also looked a little like the pieces of other examples of broadstrike that I've seen -- though I'd imagine that would make the coin wider than it's supposed to be, right? Shillings are 23.5mm and this one is irregular but hovers around 22-22.3 mm.

 

I guess my second question would be, if this is an error, what kind of values are being placed on such things these days? I've heard the world error market is starting to pick up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1973SProof

1973SProof

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I don't mean to doubt you, but I do want to learn/understand. May I ask why it can't be a broadstrike error? I ask because I just saw a listing for a 1917/18 S quarter in an upcoming Stacks Bower's Baltimore auction and the flat edge around and the bleeding of the design elements like they're melting off the edge are really quite the same.

 

I realize that it's not as clean, but perhaps it was damaged subsequently, but is still an error? Likely it circulated around...

 

I just keep wracking my mind trying to imagine how I could do such a thing to a regularly struck coin if I wanted to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted

If it was a broadstrike the coin would be larger in diameter, all of the design would be present and the plain area between the lettering and the edge tends to curve UPWARD as you go from the lettering to the edge,. Especially on the hammer die side of the coin. On your coin it appears to slope downward from the lettering to the edge on both sides. Also on a broadstrike the transition from the edge of the design to the plain area is circular all the way around not uneven as on your coin. Finally the plain area is smooth and not rough and uneven as on your coin.

 

On the Stacks/Bowers piece you linked you will also not that in those places where the lettering is fading out into the plain areas the lettering is also stretched from the movement of the metal. That doesn't show on your coin.

 

Sorry but it is just a damaged coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
brg5658

brg5658

Posted
Posted
I don't mean to doubt you, but I do want to learn/understand. May I ask why it can't be a broadstrike error? I ask because I just saw a listing for a 1917/18 S quarter in an upcoming Stacks Bower's Baltimore auction and the flat edge around and the bleeding of the design elements like they're melting off the edge are really quite the same.

 

I realize that it's not as clean, but perhaps it was damaged subsequently, but is still an error? Likely it circulated around...

 

I just keep wracking my mind trying to imagine how I could do such a thing to a regularly struck coin if I wanted to...

 

A broad strike is named as such because it makes the planchet larger than the original diameter of the coin. This happens when the collar isn't properly in place at the time the planchet is struck. The rims of a broadstrike coin are not properly formed within the collar, and end up "squeezed" out around the die. I don't see any suggestion of a broadstrike error on your coin.

 

I agree with Conder, your coin doesn't appear to be an error -- it just looks to be a mistreated post-mint-damaged coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordmarcovan

lordmarcovan

Posted
Posted

I agree- definitely PMD.

 

But... y'know what I think that is? I think that might be a coin that somebody started to make into a ring, but didn't finish. Those "spooned" coin rings were at the height of their popularity in the WW2 era, and British and Aussie shillings as well as US quarters were commonly made into rings by servicemen.

 

There's my pet theory, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Conder101

Conder101

Posted
Posted

Why would you start a ring by grinding down the edges so they are thinner? The whole point about spooning is to make the edge THICKER.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lordmarcovan

lordmarcovan

Posted
Posted
Why would you start a ring by grinding down the edges so they are thinner? The whole point about spooning is to make the edge THICKER.

 

Hmm. You're right. They're sort of beveled,aren't they.

 

They looked more spooned/flattened to me in the pix.

 

So much for that theory. Guess I'm stumped, then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing