HI EVERYONE I HAVE JUST BOUGHT A GEORGE 11 HALF GUINEA 1747 REALY NICE COIN I MIGHT SAY , IN THE ENGLISH BOOK OF COINS THE SPINK REF IS 3685. ON THE OBV SIDE AFTER GRATIA THERE USUALY A STOP DOT AFTER IT ON THIS COIN THERE IS NO DOT THERE, THINKING THEY MIGHT OF SHAVED IT OUT AS THE USED TO DO TO GET THE RIGHT WEIGHT OF THE GOLD. BUT NO THE EDGINGS ARE FINE CAN ANY ONE HELP I CANT SEEM TO FIND OUT ANYTHING IN THE BOOKS ABOUT IT, ANY OFFER OF HELP IS WELL APPRECIATED THANKS.:desk:
Howdy marterandson - Welcome to the Forum !! I moved your post to this area as it is more likely to get an answer here. I'll check my books and see if I can find anything.
Out of interest what's the milling on the edge of the coin like? (If it's still visible that is), is it ///// or >>>>? As far as i'm aware on the half guineas the //// was used throughout the run, however the tops of the legends look to be clipped a bit, i wouldn't be surprised if the guinea filers hadn't been at work on that one. If they have then it could explain where the dot has gone (especially if that dot was near the rim of the coin), if the edge milling looks a bit amateur and not consistent then i think it's likely that a filer has filed off gold from around the edge of the coin and reapplied the milling afterwards. It was a very prolific occurence on the guineas of this time (not so much on that halves) however during the 1740s the milling on the edge of the larger guinea coins was altered to >>>> so that it was harder for the filers to both file it and to replace the milling after they'd done. The half guineas were too small and too thin to permit this edge change thus they'd still be vulnerable. Your coin should also be slightly underweight as a result.
filing on edge hi, thats the first thing i looked at the edge and its like it all the way round //////, but as you say part of the letters are missing. the weight is just under 4 g the right weight is 4.2 so its been shaved somewhere i think. the coin is 20 mm in diameter so thats ok, they have done a good job around the edge if thats what they have done. the little buggers, but in those days how would the average person would'ent have a clue so no wonder they got away with it . thanks for repling.:hail: :hail:
dd: hi on the spinks book of uk coins it shows obv and rev and all of them show the dot strange realy
It looks like there was a dot after the A in GRATIA,a little dimple that looks like it might be the lower 1/3 of one anyway.If you compare the position of the other dots,you can see that they sit just slightly higher than the crossbars of the letter A's. The little dimple seems to be in exactly the same spot vertically and horizontally but the offstrike/or filing removed most of it??? Could be just the pic.
Sorry if my last post sounded a bit defensive, i was merely concurring with you there. Having read it again it does sound a bit blunt.
Sylvester,you DO know what high five means don't you?It's the international way of patting each other on the back.:high5: When it comes to this category of numismatics...you da man! On the other hand,it might be something as simple as a grease filled die...let's ask Doug.
Guys I don't think the dot was removed by clipping or filing at all - normal position is too far in from the rim for that to have happened. But it could have easily been the result of a filled die. Certainly wouldn't be hard to imagine a bit of debris, grease, dirt whatever back in those days clogging a depression in the die and causing the stop dot to not be formed when the coin was struck.
I'm not suggesting that the coin wasn't clipped or filed for it does appear that it was. I'm saying that the missing dot could not have been removed by the clipping or filling because it is too far in from the edge of the coin for that too have happened. Using a millimeter scale and measuring the original picture the dots are 6 1/2 mm in from the edge given the size of the picture. The crossbar of the A is also 6 1/2 mm in from the edge. Yet the crossbar of the A in GRATIA is plainly visible - so if it wasn't removed by filing then the dot wasn't removed by it either. So, with that possibilty removed that leaves two things that could possibly account for the missing dot. Either the coin is a counterfeit, which I don't really think is the case - or the coin was struck with a clogged die. I find the second possibility much more probable.
Ah i'm with you now. I thought you were suggesting the coin hadn't been filed at all, which i found a little perplexing. Although i tend to agree with you on the dot there. There should be one, i too considered the possibility of a contemporary counterfeit but the coin actually looks right (except for the cross in the crown which concerned me, as it looks to have the Pisa syndrome, but i figured that might be the way the coin is scanned/photoed). Clogged die would be the plausible suggestion.
