Jump to content

British India


Recommended Posts

  • 3 months later...

The original post went unanswered (I guess no experts on this here :)), but I will use it as an anchor for continuous discussion on british India, picked up a couple of coins recently.


The early 1840 mintage of the East India Company started with the small young head (YH) Queen Victoria bust, similar to the one minted on the small coinage back at England. KM-459




However the same year a different design was introduced with the larger bust and divided obverse legend. Raised W.W. on truncation - KM-460.




I know coins are not in the greatest shape, but any suggestions on how I can identify the sub-types will be appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original post asked about a NINETEEN-40 (not 1840). There are no 1840 1-anna coins. The Krause Standard Catalog of World Coins does not show much difference in value for the three circulating varieties. The Calcutta large head Proofs is priced about 10 times more than the others, but no mintage figures are given for them, all totals included in one number for large head (60 million) and for small (144 million).


Allow me to add my Very Fine rupee to the inventory. The Krause Standard Catalog of World Coins lists 16 varieties for the Victoria rupee: 8 with the running legend; and 8 with the divided legend. Count the berries. Is WW raised? Is WWB raised? and so on...



Link to comment
Share on other sites

However funny this sounds, this post started with the Canadian 1956 dime. Not the regular Elizabeth issue, but the one referenced as a dot variety. I have got one a couple of weeks ago, but was hard pressed to see where the seller found this dot until I could barely see it. Satisfied I left positive feedback for the seller althoguh I am not sure if I really got my worth out of that purchase.


So when I got yesterday another Bombay 1945 1/4 rupee (in a small lot with 10 or 11 other coins), I first simply put it aside until later, I actually was after the 1890H Hong Kong 5 cents in that lot. But when I started comparing it with the 2 I already had in order to decide what do I leave in the collection and what dump to sell later on, I suddenly realised that there is something in the field that does not belong there - a dot. A much bigger dot sticking out of the field right behind King's neck in the open field. So I looked at the other 2 specimen I had and found that one more had the dot while the third did not. But what really got me to write about it is that when I started posting coins to the OMNI and describing them I went on to point where, compared to the legend, the dot is I also realised that the 2 dots were in different locations. All 3 are decent average uncirculated coins, and all 3 are Bombay very large mintage - 181 million comparable with dime and quarter issues of a much bigger economy of the United States of the same year. Each one of the 3 has some sort of defect - one had flan lamination, the other one had a strike through, third had a small flan defect by under one of the letters in the legends. So we all know that dot's on the dies or master dies, unless put there by design, will come from rust and corrosion on the steel dies, but this just looks too good (read interesting) to simply write it off on the rusted dies. Maybe these are true varieties, I just could not find any references to them in Remick's British Commonwealth Coins (one does not look into Krause for variaties). I do not have Piedmore or any other catalog, so will appreciate if someone does have and can let me know if the existence of these varieties had been acknowledged by anyone.


Here are the coins for your reference:


Large low dot variety



Smaller higher dot valiety



Details of the dots



And the "no dot" variety


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Got a couple of new coins in the mail from Norway (I think :-) ) , time to share.

First is Victoria British India 1840 quarter rupee. I do not think I have had Madras minted type before and I first thought this was one with S on truncation and wanted to complain again on Krause mistakes (no dot after date id not match published varieties) but later found WW so it must be B for the more common KM-453.3/ To an unarmed eye looks like a beauty, picture too, under the magnification I can see that the obverse raised Queens portrait is weakly struck and a fair number of surface scratches. Reverse is almost proof like with mirror surfaces between letters. Must have been minted from the freshly polished dies.




And an even more commonly encountered George V half rupee. Still toning makes it look really nice.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice to see original rupees - I'm starting to see jeweler's copies, which I assume in India probably pass by weight just as the real ones are. (and akin to the middle eastern made copies of sovereigns, in full weight and karat)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...