ok, Spock, did they move Bombay to Yugoslavia or something. Please try and be less cryptic and enlighten us on what you are seeing.
well the coin wasnt made in india by the royal mint. althought the coin may have been made in india. Sovereign or guineas as they are called here (quite wrongly of course) are struck by the millions every year for ceremonial purposes and this coins looks to me to be very much like that. the coins were very easy to detect earlier but now they are improving the quality to such an extent that even reputed jewelers are fooled (they sell most of the gold coins here) even the original collector had no less than 5 and a half remade sovereigns in their collection. from what i see so far i am not convinced and many a counterfeit coin from india has made it into ngc slabs. of course i may also be wrong. now these coin dealers or makers are not fooling anyone. people come to buy gold coins from them rather than original sovereigns so they get what they want and everyone is happy the odd person who does collect them as coins ends up really unhappy
After looking in my Krause world coin guide, it looks like there was'nt any 1918's minted. Theres not a 1918 listed for KM#820. It could be an Australian coin KM #29.
In a nutshell it seems to be a standard counterfeit? Maybe we need to get NGC into this conversation. What is the Mint Mark on it? Ruben
just look at the finishing on the reverse. it doesnt seem right. kind of like the American coin we were discussing the other day. earlier i thought the dealer was being clever and washing his hands.
well its under british india trade coinage so ur sure to see it there. now i have my grievances with KM as well but we will save it for another day. needless to say if these people behaved the same way with us coins they would have folded up long ago
Km #525a Thanks for the info Spock. It was listed under the India-British section of Krause(KM#525A). It says that Sovereigns with shield reverse were exported to India for sums due. 1918 mintage of 1,295,000 coins. A 1918 P/L;restrike commands a price of over four times the regular Sovereign. I really like the Krause guides, but i'm not an expert.
No Problem. Anytime. but we cant let u be brainwahed by the KM nonsense. the only reason they minted the coins in india was becoz they were scared from the great war. although the coin has the date of 1918 it was minted till 1919 when they closed the branch down ( another bit of nonsense but i dont want to get into poltics here) the KM guides are a good starting point but they are full of ignorance for indian coins. i dont where this P/L nonsense came up from but apparently someone paid the mint officials to strike coins from 1835-1945 till a slate as 1970 but i am saddened to hear that even the poor sovereign got caught in that. now all bets are off.
The original post seemed to be concerned about the attribution of the piece, not the authenticity. Is that true ? If so, the focus has shifted. Spock, do you feel the piece is properly attributed ?
That implies the possibility it was minted in India by someone other than the Royal Mint. For my edification, who might that be ?
I think we are at a point where Spock is saying the coin is a fake, maybe faked by the official indian mint as late as 1970 Ruben
Who knows. Its all a big secret. Like I said before, Talk in riddles and see if anyone calls you on something.
yes if its an I mark it is from india the local jewelers here have a roaring business well thats a restrike if the mint does it but i doubt that this is by the mint. ok wont be on before april 1 burned through my account
can someone please enlighten me on this... what i mean to ask is what's way of telling whether the sovereign in hand is a real coin and not a fake... irrespective of the fact that its from a jeweller' store. Yes, i do understand that it will 99.99% just a copy coin if bought from a jeweller... but for sake of education.. btw the one i have seen is around the size of a dime or a bit bigger.. not sure about the weight..
