Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;(v), post: 581529, member: 18497&quot;]Not in Krause does not mean coin does not exist or not minted. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>There are many examples of Indian coins I can give-- Land Vital Resource Rs 2 not in my older Krause, but now in the latest edition. The 1960 Rupee pattern still not in Krause, but the most expensive pattern ever sold. The 20 paise pattern, not in Krause. There are many date/mint combinations of currency coins not in Krause, but they do exist.</p><p><br /></p><p>As far as this coin in concerned, it was plucked from a proof set. I have multiple 1954 proof sets, and there is only one other which has a 1954 proof with no Bombay mint mark. I am new to the boards but not to the hobby and know the difference between a proof and a gem BU and all these are definitely proofs. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /></p><p><br /></p><p>I do not know why this happened to be-- maybe the mint employees were playing or the C mint dies sent to Bombay, or coin restuck at Calcutta or whatever. This would remain a mystery unless someone does research and finds out. These instance add to the mystique surrounding early Republic of India coinage and also add to the charm of collecting.</p><p><br /></p><p>I have a Bombay Presidency 1804 2 pices proof mule (I will post the pictures later) which definitely is not a mistake and handiwork of mint employees. This came from London and the dies were never shipped to India, so no chance of restrike. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in