1911-C and 1918-I sovereigns

[banyancb]

30 minutes ago, dicker said:

Hi - is this another one you are not sure about?

Best

Dicker

 

 

Looks legit to me, but what do I know 🥲

Likewise with the 1911-S, I also think it’s legit
 

Just wanted to share another coin from the same dealer

Edited April 25, 2022 by banyancb

[LawrenceChard]

3 minutes ago, banyancb said:

They are… and outside of Portugal forget it, same as fish and chips, it’s never good outside of the UK.

 

Any thoughts about that shop? Or the new photos?

This shop?

https://www.chards.co.uk/blog/the-best-bullion-dealer-in-the-uk/632

It is my Local Coin Shop, one of the best!

New Photos?

Here's a good place to look.

😎

 

[banyancb]

4 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

This shop?

https://www.chards.co.uk/blog/the-best-bullion-dealer-in-the-uk/632

It is my Local Coin Shop, one of the best!

New Photos?

Here's a good place to look.

😎

 

I’ll pass by your shop next time I’m in the UK!

Regarding the photos… I need to get a proper camera, these were taken with the iPhone and magnifying glass…

[LawrenceChard]

34 minutes ago, banyancb said:

I’ll pass by your shop next time I’m in the UK!

Regarding the photos… I need to get a proper camera, these were taken with the iPhone and magnifying glass…

iPhone? Too much money!

😎

[banyancb]

24 minutes ago, LawrenceChard said:

iPhone? Too much money!

😎

Can’t spend it all on gold coins… these last few months I’ve stacked quite a few… hopefully real ones 😑

I really like older sovereigns, not a fan of the newer coins.

[GoldDiggerDave]

The 1851 is around Fine/good fine  at a push.  Imo.
 

The reverse looks like it has a large scratch from the top left of the shield, overall the reverse has a fair bit of wear, rim damage at 12 o’clock, the obverse I have seen worse if you have picked this up for bullion price or even a little over bullion then it’s okay for the collection or date run.
 

 I would not be paying a premium for this coin as it’s not a rare coin.  It’s still nice to have a young head providing you have not over paid. 

Have a look at auctions to get a feel for the grade and price 

 

https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=1851+Sovereign&searchtype=1

 

[banyancb]

17 minutes ago, GoldDiggerDave said:

The 1851 is around Fine/good fine  at a push.  Imo.
 

The reverse looks like it has a large scratch from the top left of the shield, overall the reverse has a fair bit of wear, rim damage at 12 o’clock, the obverse I have seen worse if you have picked this up for bullion price or even a little over bullion then it’s okay for the collection or date run.
 

 I would not be paying a premium for this coin as it’s not a rare coin.  It’s still nice to have a young head providing you have not over paid. 

Have a look at auctions to get a feel for the grade and price 

 

https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&searchterm=1851+Sovereign&searchtype=1

 

Definitely overpaid, live and learn. I’m more worried whether they are legitimate or not at this point, although not for this one specifically. I’ll keep looking at online pics for fakes and go to a jeweller to have them checked.
Any more comments on the others?

 

Great site, makes me wish I had started buying earlier…

[GoldDiggerDave]

@banyancb no matter when you start collecting coins you wish you bought years ago, it’s all part of the leaning curve. 
 

Even if you have over paid in year 1 by year 8-9 you are likely to look back and think it was cheap. 
 

invest in some sovereign and coin books, it will put you on the right path, the Spink guide shows prices which you might find helpful. 

 

[GoldDabbler]

3 hours ago, banyancb said:

Can’t spend it all on gold coins… these last few months I’ve stacked quite a few… hopefully real ones 😑

I really like older sovereigns, not a fan of the newer coins.

You don't like the newer coins? 

I think they're lovely 

 

 

[Foster88]

2 hours ago, banyancb said:

Definitely overpaid, live and learn. I’m more worried whether they are legitimate or not at this point, although not for this one specifically. I’ll keep looking at online pics for fakes and go to a jeweller to have them checked.
Any more comments on the others?

 

Great site, makes me wish I had started buying earlier…

Good idea but a jeweller may be able to check if they are 22ct gold but I doubt most, not all, but most jewellers wouldn’t be able to tell you if it’s genuine. Some fakes/counterfeit sovereigns may still be 22ct but still be a fake. 1911 is also supposed to be one of the most faked sovereign years sadly.

You really ought to get them checked by a coin dealer or numistmast in person.

I hope yours turn out to be genuine for you.

[banyancb]

44 minutes ago, GoldDabbler said:

You don't like the newer coins? 

I think they're lovely 

 

 

I still buy one of the newer coins per year (only have 2021 and 2022 since I started collecting last year) but there’s something special about holding a 100+ years old gold coin in your hand… even if the condition is not great!

[Foster88]

4 hours ago, banyancb said:

there’s something special about holding a 100+ years old gold coin in your hand… 

It’s not, for me at least, holding an old sovereign or any old coin that makes it special. It’s the holding that bit of history in your hands and that link to the past that’s special and fascinating.

Who had it before?

Who held it before?

Who spent it before I held it?

All questions that we’ll never know the answer to.

That’s how I feel whenever I hold an old sovereign or any other old coin.

We’re mere custodians. We came with nothing, we leave with nothing.

Now, if only they could talk.

[GoldDiggerDave]

@Foster88 I wonder the same I also like to learn about the year date of the coin.  1851 Was the year William Wyon died bit of numismatic news.

 

[GoldDabbler]

9 hours ago, banyancb said:

I still buy one of the newer coins per year (only have 2021 and 2022 since I started collecting last year) but there’s something special about holding a 100+ years old gold coin in your hand… even if the condition is not great!

The old sovs have a charm about them no doubt. 

[banyancb]

Did a few tests with a relatively accurate scale.

The 1911-C is very underweight at 7.91 grams and the 1918-I is at 7.94.

Most sovereigns from the same seller are at 7.98, including the 1911-S shown in the pictures above.

 

Edited April 27, 2022 by banyancb

[banyancb]

The 1851 shieldback (from the same seller, pics earlier in this thread) is also underweight at 7.92 gr.

Most of my other shieldbacks from shops like BullionByPost are also underweight, et around 7.95 (maybe due to their age?) but this one is the lightest.
 

Perhaps something to do with the large dent it has in the rim above the crown?

 

[GoldDabbler]

4 hours ago, banyancb said:

Did a few tests with a relatively accurate scale.

The 1911-C is very underweight at 7.91 grams and the 1918-I is at 7.94.

Most sovereigns from the same seller are at 7.98, including the 1911-S shown in the pictures above.

What's going on with those sovs? Even if its because of and tear surely the lower weight will affect resale value? I'd be taking them back to the seller and asking why my gold is light. 

[banyancb]

10 minutes ago, GoldDabbler said:

What's going on with those sovs? Even if its because of and tear surely the lower weight will affect resale value? I'd be taking them back to the seller and asking why my gold is light. 

The 1911-C and 1918-I don’t have much wear and tear… the shieldback has a bit, but not enough to justify 7.92?

[GoldDabbler]

Just now, banyancb said:

The 1911-C and 1918-I don’t have much wear and tear… the shieldback has a bit, but not enough to justify 7.92?

I've no idea mate. I'm new to buying sovs. I'm going off the standard 22mm and 7.98 grams to check against my own. The low weights are sus in my opinion though. Can you give the seller a ring and see what he's got to say about it?

[SidS]

I've had shield reverse sovereigns that were in the 7.92g-7.93g weight range and they tend to be maximum of AF-F grades, often cleaned and certainly showing lots of wear. Usually 1840s-1860s dates.

The Bentley Collection of gold sovereigns had quite a few underweight specimens from those years too.

Remember up until WWI sovereigns were circulation coins and they did circulate (not to the extent that half sovereigns did of course - they were often very worn).

Bank notes started at £5 and upwards, thus most transactions from 10/- upwards to £4 10/- would almost certainly have involved gold coinage. Perhaps even transactions as low as 5/- would have seen gold used, with change returned.

By the 1870s crowns and half crowns had all but disappeared from circulations. Large purchases without gold coins would involve lots and lots of shillings and florins without gold.

There were several mint and government reports in the 1870s-1880s reporting the deplorable state of the coinage and how worn it was (both silver and gold). In part this is why pre-Victorian sovereigns were demonetised in the early 1890s. To help bring the coinage up to par.

Sovereigns of course had a legal tender weight but as attested to from surviving coins, hoard finds and official reports many were still circulating below their legal weight.

Don't underestimate the usage of gold coinage in the UK - an interesting report comes from the aftermath of the Titanic disaster in 1912 - The Mackay Bennett ship that recovered the deceased from the Atlantic and catalogued their effects, recorded any money recovered - stating whether it was banknotes, gold, silver or copper. The US money recovered was mostly paper with a smattering of gold, the British money was the opposite, some paper money but lots and lots of gold. One example, was a second class passenger (Number 17) who was recovered with £63 10/- in gold coins about his person.

So yes, don't expect Victorian shield sovereigns to be exact mint weight, it's only going to be the higher grade coins approaching mint state. That said, I think the Bentley Collection even had some near UNC coins that were lighter than they should have been.

Edited April 27, 2022 by SidS

[Hotdog]

Possibly, British travellers if they were emigrating, would be more likely to have their wealth in gold coins for ease of use/exchange in the new world. Returning Americans would possibly have spent theirs in Europe and would have easy access to more in their home country. 

[banyancb]

Quick update: the shop had no problem exchanging the coins for other ones. They were made of gold, but were they fake or not? Not sure I will ever know. The 1911-C was heavily scratched / aggressively cleaned so that might be why the weight was a bit off.

 

Anyway I had only bought the coins online and never had been there in person until now. It’s a small shop that specialises in coins and stamps. I highly recommend a visit if you are in Lisbon, they have some really great stuff there.

[GoldDabbler]

18 minutes ago, banyancb said:

Quick update: the shop had no problem exchanging the coins for other ones. They were made of gold, but were they fake or not? Not sure I will ever know. The 1911-C was heavily scratched / aggressively cleaned so that might be why the weight was a bit off.

 

Anyway I had only bought the coins online and never had been there in person until now. It’s a small shop that specialises in coins and stamps. I highly recommend a visit if you are in Lisbon, they have some really great stuff there.

Could the shop not tell if they were fake or not either? Are you sure your new coins are genuine? 

[Petra]

On 27/04/2022 at 18:58, SidS said:

I've had shield reverse sovereigns that were in the 7.92g-7.93g weight range and they tend to be maximum of AF-F grades, often cleaned and certainly showing lots of wear. Usually 1840s-1860s dates.

The Bentley Collection of gold sovereigns had quite a few underweight specimens from those years too.

Remember up until WWI sovereigns were circulation coins and they did circulate (not to the extent that half sovereigns did of course - they were often very worn).

Bank notes started at £5 and upwards, thus most transactions from 10/- upwards to £4 10/- would almost certainly have involved gold coinage. Perhaps even transactions as low as 5/- would have seen gold used, with change returned.

By the 1870s crowns and half crowns had all but disappeared from circulations. Large purchases without gold coins would involve lots and lots of shillings and florins without gold.

There were several mint and government reports in the 1870s-1880s reporting the deplorable state of the coinage and how worn it was (both silver and gold). In part this is why pre-Victorian sovereigns were demonetised in the early 1890s. To help bring the coinage up to par.

Sovereigns of course had a legal tender weight but as attested to from surviving coins, hoard finds and official reports many were still circulating below their legal weight.

Don't underestimate the usage of gold coinage in the UK - an interesting report comes from the aftermath of the Titanic disaster in 1912 - The Mackay Bennett ship that recovered the deceased from the Atlantic and catalogued their effects, recorded any money recovered - stating whether it was banknotes, gold, silver or copper. The US money recovered was mostly paper with a smattering of gold, the British money was the opposite, some paper money but lots and lots of gold. One example, was a second class passenger (Number 17) who was recovered with £63 10/- in gold coins about his person.

So yes, don't expect Victorian shield sovereigns to be exact mint weight, it's only going to be the higher grade coins approaching mint state. That said, I think the Bentley Collection even had some near UNC coins that were lighter than they should have been.

Without the use of the many, now collectible sovereign and half sovereign coin holders, the surviving coins would be in a far worse condition.

[banyancb]

9 minutes ago, GoldDabbler said:

Could the shop not tell if they were fake or not either? Are you sure your new coins are genuine? 

The shop said both the 1911-C and 1918-I were genuine.

 

The weight of all the other coins I bought is right, and there are no obvious red flags in terms of looks, even under magnification. I have compared them to other sovereigns I bought from coininvest and bullionbypost.

Edited May 8, 2022 by banyancb