Can anyone give me an opinion about this coin? I can't find information about the countermark and wonder if the vandalized portrait is connected to it being countermarked. The countermark looks like a double elephant and castle.
This is what I believe to be the story of this coin: it was brought to India and circulated for a time there wherein the likely regional countermark was applied to legitimize its usage. A native Indian did not like British rule so symbolic strikes were made against the depicted monarch. It is quite an historic piece when you think about it.
Interesting. I was unaware of countermarks being used on British coinage in India. Would like to learn more about this.
The elephant and castle is the symbol of Coventry, right? Such as on this Coventry Lady Godiva 1/2 penny Conder token from 1793. I doubt that coin made it as far as India unless there is an additional reason to think so. Vandalizing coins of monarchs you didn't like was not uncommon. For example: An 1807 5 Francs defaced by someone who disliked Napoleon An 1866 2 Francs stamped "Sedan" in protest of Napoleon III's defeat and capture by Prussia in the Battle of Sedan I think in an era without free speech, vandalizing coinage was one of the few ways one could quietly express disapproval of a monarch. The coinage would be to valuable to discard, ensuring multiple people would be likely to see it, and it would be very difficult for the authorities to find and punish the defacer.
Do you know why this might have been counter marked in Coventry? A merchant's mark? Very interesting information, thank you! I was reading that George III was generally well liked in Britain, or at least England. A coin with this late date probably wasn't circulating in the U.S. It's interesting to imagine what someone's motive would be for taking the trouble to deface the portrait like that. Do you think something like this is reasonably collectible? Any idea of a possible value for this thing?
A merchant's mark would be my guess, but I'm mostly familiar with countermarks in Asia. I haven't seen them much on European coins which stayed on that continent. I assume the defacement was done by a separate party. All the defaced coins I've bought (I think it's just those 2 I posted) were got at a significant discount compared to the price of an intact coin. I like them for the history, but I don't think there's much collector's value. George III might have been less popular after his madness left him incapable of governing (around 1810). I think his son and prince Regent, the future George IV, was disliked. Among other things he only had one daughter by his wife, but had many children by his mistresses, which made the succession complicated. Or so I hear.
