Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;satootoko, post: 7595, member: 669&quot;]Welcome aboard Jason.&nbsp; It&#039;s nice to have another member interested in Asian coins.</p><p><br /></p><p>.</p><p><br /></p><p>#1 does look very similar to Kann# 11, and is also dated year 14, which Krause equates to 1888 on the western calendar (p. 236, 1st column, 19th Century 3rd Ed. 2003).&nbsp; The lack of a valuation in Krause simply means there is no established valuation basis.&nbsp; For example, Kann#9 is also listed as rare, with no value, but there is a note that a Choice XF example realized $46,200 at a 1991 Superior Goodman auction.&nbsp; That said, there are enough apparent differences in detail between #1 and the picture in Krause accompanying the listing for Kann# 11 to raise questions.&nbsp; The ring of beads directly adjoins the legend on #1, and there appears to be solid lines on both sides of the beads on the Krause picture of Kann# 11.</p><p><br /></p><p>#2 is a 1 yuan, dated as Republic year 3, which equates to 1914, rather than 1911 or 1912.&nbsp; It very closely resembles Pn32, a pattern coin never struck for circulation, cross-referenced to Kann#643, and valued at $2,250 in the 20th/21st Century 30th Ed. (p. 477, second column).&nbsp; I don’t have access to Kann, so can’t confirm the reference.</p><p><br /></p><p>#3 is also 1 yuan, dated 1912 (Republic <i><b>First</b></i> Year, not&nbsp; <i><b>1</b></i> Year).&nbsp; My specialty is post-1869 Japanese coinage, where it is customary to date coins “gan” or “first” rather than “ichi” or “one” in the first year of an Emperor’s reign, and I have no idea whether that usage, shown on this coin, is common or unusual on Chinese coinage.&nbsp; Besides the 4-dot replacement for the obverse rosettes, I can only see one difference in the design from Y#456 shown in the first column of page 467 in the Krause 30th Ed.&nbsp; The character at the bottom of the central circle on the reverse is “yon” or &quot;shi&quot; in Japanese, and means “four”.&nbsp; The picture of #3&#039;s reverse is upside down, and the line at the bottom of the four in the picture - actually the top of the character - should touch the vertical lines at both ends.&nbsp; It does so in the Y#456 picture in Krause; instead of having the very noticeable gap at the corner of the character in #3.</p><p><br /></p><p>All of that said, it is sometimes possible to tag a cast counterfeit from it&#039;s picture, but it is almost impossible to verify a genuine coin without an &quot;in hand&quot; examination.&nbsp; Each of the coins listed is suspicious, but in view of the frequent contemporary mint varieties in the late Empire/early Republic years, I&#039;m not prepared to condemn any of them without further examination.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Naturally if such a site is developed I&#039;d like to see coverage of Japanese, and perhaps Korean &amp; Indochinese coinage; along with Trade Dollars from Britain, the U.S., Japan, Mexico and other European countries as well.&nbsp; It has been said that there are more counterfeit than genuine Japanese silver yen coins, both contemporary cast and electrotyped circulation coinage, and modern forgeries intended for sale to collectors, and the same applies to the other silver coins used for international trade in late 19th Century/early 20th Century Asia.</p><p><br /></p><p>Sorry about the length of this post, but that&#039;s the way it goes sometimes <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie8" alt=":D" 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