Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="hontonai, post: 790943, member: 4703"]Sorry, I have to disagree.  It looks like 年 to me.Again, the calligraphy on the coin is a typical rendition of 七.  In fact, it is the more common version seen on these coins, although some have a character with a shorter, fatter horizontal strokeThe two characters bracketing "MEIJI" on LostDutchman's picture.And every year thereafter through Taisho 3 (1914), the final year of production for silver yen.  The "416" refers to the weight of the coin in grains.Yes, the changeover (with one minor exception) occurred in Showa 23 (1948).  On the OP's coin, the date is correctly read right to left, as shown on LD's pic. My basis for uncertainty whether it is genuine or one of the better executed Chinese "replicas" has to do with the position of the dragon's tail, ever so slightly overlapping the fourth scale, when it should only extend a short distance beyond the third.   I'd also be interested in learning the exact diameter, which should be 38.6mm, not the 38.1mm of later years; and weight, which should be 26.96g. If genuine, the clockwise direction of the spiral on the pearl in the dragon's claws makes it Type II, the less valuable of the two varieties recognized by Krause, (and the least valuable of the three varieties recognized by the Japanese Numismatic Dealers Assn).   Krause's 2008 XF values of  $1,250 (Type I) and $1,200 (Type II) are somewhat low.  On the other hand the 2010 JNDA comparable catalog values of ¥300,000 (~$3,300 - Type I) and ¥200,000 (~$2,200 - Type II) are a little on the optimistic side, although the 3:2 relationship between them is much more accurate IMHO.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches