This is probably for you India coin buffs... NGC doesn't seem to have this coin listed, the 1873 India 1 Rupee. It's a proof right? But, they don't even have the regular strike listed... But maybe I'm reading the date wrong... is it an 1878? If you think it says 1873, is it the only one "known"? (unfortunately for everyone, the pics are taken from a sold listing, but it's still interesting to discuss, right?) If it's an 1878 year, then maybe it's a date error as that last digit almost certainly looks like a "3" more so than an "8". For such a strong strike, it seems that a grease filled die wouldn't explain it without some residue of the rest of the "8" closing the loop. If it's 1873, then maybe it's a specimen that didn't make it into circulation until the next year. Or maybe it's a fake! I checked to see if the "3" font from a different year was the same compared to the last digit on this coin. However, the "3" digit on the 1883 India 1 Rupee doesn't look similar at all (last image below). Also, is that black tarnish or environmental damage? Maybe it's a bulls-eye carbon spot pattern... maybe it survived a fire. And, any idea on what it's worth? Thanks in advance! Pics from the 'net. NGC skips right past 1873 - there appears to be a hiatus by the mint to produce this coin type between 1871 and 1873, inclusive. The 1883 year's "3" digit doesn't look like the "3" digit on the example above. Perhaps they simply used a different font for the "3" numeral for the specimen above, since it is a specimen (?).
http://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces3345.html Numista does not list it.. How much did it sell for? Where was it listed?
That is not a genuine coin. Poor quality work on the design details, dentils and rims. Very sub-par from what one can expect for proofs and even regular business strikes from this series. And that's not even considering that the maker marks are on the coin, to the bottom left of the bust. A common trait of novelty and jewelry copies.
Is there a novelty coin example you can find for us? I'm coming up blank on the Google searches. It would be good to see and know for future reference. Also, when I saw the "RK" initials, I immediately thought Rudyard Kipling. But, low and behold, he was but a child in 1873. And, would specimens or specimen candidates necessarily look the same? What if a set of designs were made to choose from for the 1874 onward Rupee series?
Here's a similar one - is the first one a fake, too? I don't see the maker's mark initials on this one but it has the same black one. The second I believe is a known real example. The black around the first coin's edge seems to cover the details, intentional or not. Pics from the 'net.
altho theres is nice tonignn this piece is fake i just check the standard book of world coins no listing at all not even types
How about the 1919? Is it a restrike/PL or proof? It looks very different from the other 1919 one. And, are coins that are designed as proposals, prior to specimens, reported? Assuming that coins were made and not merely drawn by hand on paper back then during the final stages.
I'm not an active collector of them, but I think that the proofs had a quite wide rim like the black one.
The 1873/8 or 1919 black one? But I suppose they're both wide. The black color really makes it hard to make out the details near the edge. They seem to cut sharply instead of rounding at the edge as proof coins do. Here are an 1874 Rupee Proof-Like Restrike, and a 1914 Proof, respectively (pics from the 'net):
Are you still trying to figure out if the coin is genuine or something else? I kind of lost track lol
The non-black coins are also way off on the details? Does that mean that most of the coins I posted are fakes? lol Granted, I didn't really read the webpage, and simply copy-pasted the prettiest looking ones.
If the 1919 was a genuine proof or PL it would have consistena nd squared rims all around as well as more defined detail in the face and hair. All I'm saying is that based on the photos I would not buy either of the two coins as genuine.
