1923 Florin Mule

[Hussulo 6]

Has anyone heard of this type:

http://www.coinsgb.com/George_V/Mule-1923-Florin.html

and can you give me an idea of scarcity or past sales etc.

Many thanks

[Gary D 76]

Has anyone heard of this type:

http://www.coinsgb.com/George_V/Mule-1923-Florin.html

and can you give me an idea of scarcity or past sales etc.

Many thanks

I've seen I think 3 on ebay, one I bought and resold in about F for £30. A second was again about fine that was on for a Buy it Now for £25 and unidentified, I thought about it for a while but it sold after a couple of weeks. I wasn't convince that I'd make any money on it as varities often are not very hot on ebay. My GVF I paid £120 at London Coins Dublin austion about 4-5 years ago.

[Hussulo 6]

Has anyone heard of this type:

http://www.coinsgb.com/George_V/Mule-1923-Florin.html

and can you give me an idea of scarcity or past sales etc.

Many thanks

I've seen I think 3 on ebay, one I bought and resold in about F for £30. A second was again about fine that was on for a Buy it Now for £25 and unidentified, I thought about it for a while but it sold after a couple of weeks. I wasn't convince that I'd make any money on it as varities often are not very hot on ebay. My GVF I paid £120 at London Coins Dublin austion about 4-5 years ago.

Thanks Gary,

I think I have one but I'll need to see it in hand when it arrives.

I'll upload pics once I get it.

[Gary D 76]

Has anyone heard of this type:

http://www.coinsgb.com/George_V/Mule-1923-Florin.html

and can you give me an idea of scarcity or past sales etc.

Many thanks

I've seen I think 3 on ebay, one I bought and resold in about F for £30. A second was again about fine that was on for a Buy it Now for £25 and unidentified, I thought about it for a while but it sold after a couple of weeks. I wasn't convince that I'd make any money on it as varities often are not very hot on ebay. My GVF I paid £120 at London Coins Dublin austion about 4-5 years ago.

Thanks Gary,

I think I have one but I'll need to see it in hand when it arrives.

I'll upload pics once I get it.

I always look for them and have come to the conclusion that if it is the I to tooth it's very obvious. If your not sure it's likely to be the common variety as the one can be deceiving.

[Hussulo 6]

The sellers image isn't very clear. I've just enlarged the area and it now appears as if it isn't the rarer variety.

Oh well

[Hussulo 6]

Sellers picture:

http://www.auctiva.com/hostedimages/showimage.aspx?gid=218798&ppid=1122ℑ=395928174&images=395928182,395928174&formats=0,0&format=0

In my defence it was getting late when I bid on it last night.

It also appears to have some blue? staining. Possibly PVC residue. I'll need to give it a dip in acetone when it arrives.

[Peckris 579]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

[Gary D 76]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752

[Peckris 579]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752

You're right - I'm not yet used to Davies - his placing Obverse 3 BEFORE 2 in the listing is a bit counter-intuitive!

Be that as it may - the obverse shown on CoinsGB seems to be the shallow design, therefore Obverse 3, therefore not the rare mule.

[Gary D 76]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752

You're right - I'm not yet used to Davies - his placing Obverse 3 BEFORE 2 in the listing is a bit counter-intuitive!

Be that as it may - the obverse shown on CoinsGB seems to be the shallow design, therefore Obverse 3, therefore not the rare mule.

I think you will find it is the rare mule. Just noticed that it's my coin.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752

You're right - I'm not yet used to Davies - his placing Obverse 3 BEFORE 2 in the listing is a bit counter-intuitive!

Be that as it may - the obverse shown on CoinsGB seems to be the shallow design, therefore Obverse 3, therefore not the rare mule.

I think you will find it is the rare mule. Just noticed that it's my coin.

Well the Auctiva image seems to show the "I" of BRITT pointing directly at a tooth. That would hopefully make it the rare mule.

[Peckris 579]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752

You're right - I'm not yet used to Davies - his placing Obverse 3 BEFORE 2 in the listing is a bit counter-intuitive!

Be that as it may - the obverse shown on CoinsGB seems to be the shallow design, therefore Obverse 3, therefore not the rare mule.

I think you will find it is the rare mule. Just noticed that it's my coin.

Then based on pointings alone, we seem to have uncovered a possible new obverse.

Based on other factors, I'm 90% sure your coin shows the recut shallow portrait :

• the truncation has that little 'blip' forward towards the G

• the lettering is the larger size

• the hair is not deeply modelled

• the V of GEORGIVS points slightly ABOVE the nose tip rather than directly to it

• the rim is narrow

• the flan is very slightly convex (concave on the pre-1920)

I kind of "wrote the book" on the differences between pre-1920 and post-1920 obverses, and I can generally tell them straight off. I'm not claiming 100% sureness, but all the points above hold good.

I've done a comparison of my own : to the left (sorry, poor quality, blown up double size from my database) the pre-1920, to the right, a 1921. What's particularly curious is that the pointing of the Obv 2 (left) doesn't SEEM to have the I of BRITT pointing straight to a tooth, but that fact will have to wait until I next look at my coins under a glass. However, I'm almost completely sure that your obverse is NOT the deeply engraved pre-1920.

There is still the matter of the pointings...

[Guest richbedforduk]

Is this variety unknown to Davies? He only mentions Obv 2 (high relief) and Obv 3 (shallow relief) for 1920, and only Obv 3 for 1923. The picture on CoinsGB clearly shows the shallow relief head.

Davies list both types, 1751 & 1752

You're right - I'm not yet used to Davies - his placing Obverse 3 BEFORE 2 in the listing is a bit counter-intuitive!

Be that as it may - the obverse shown on CoinsGB seems to be the shallow design, therefore Obverse 3, therefore not the rare mule.

I think you will find it is the rare mule. Just noticed that it's my coin.

Then based on pointings alone, we seem to have uncovered a possible new obverse.

Based on other factors, I'm 90% sure your coin shows the recut shallow portrait :

• the truncation has that little 'blip' forward towards the G

• the lettering is the larger size

• the hair is not deeply modelled

• the V of GEORGIVS points slightly ABOVE the nose tip rather than directly to it

• the rim is narrow

• the flan is very slightly convex (concave on the pre-1920)

I kind of "wrote the book" on the differences between pre-1920 and post-1920 obverses, and I can generally tell them straight off. I'm not claiming 100% sureness, but all the points above hold good.

I've done a comparison of my own : to the left (sorry, poor quality, blown up double size from my database) the pre-1920, to the right, a 1921. What's particularly curious is that the pointing of the Obv 2 (left) doesn't SEEM to have the I of BRITT pointing straight to a tooth, but that fact will have to wait until I next look at my coins under a glass. However, I'm almost completely sure that your obverse is NOT the deeply engraved pre-1920.

There is still the matter of the pointings...

You've done it again, got me all intersted in what you're talking about!!

I am just doing florins, so I have taken note of this. Not only am I doing florins, I am doing 1920-29. That said I know nothing and, probably because I have no 1923 florins of note, I cannot find anything relating to mine.

However, for what it's worth, I have noted this. If you project the right hand side of the 'V' (as in GEORGIVS 'V') across the face and to the truncation at the back of the neck, the line comes out at very different parts of the truncation. One on the angle, the other along the truncation baseline.

Does that help. If not, sorry, I will get back in my hole.

[Peckris 579]

However, for what it's worth, I have noted this. If you project the right hand side of the 'V' (as in GEORGIVS 'V') across the face and to the truncation at the back of the neck, the line comes out at very different parts of the truncation. One on the angle, the other along the truncation baseline.

I find that very difficult, as I don't have a straight edge that would rest easy against my LCD screen, but thanks for doing that. There are actually a massive number of tiny differences all of which add up to a distinctive 'feel'.

[Gary D 76]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

[Peckris 579]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

Then we ARE talking about an obverse that Davies doesn't know about. If you look at my picture above (Obv 2 left, 1914, and Obv 3 right, 1921) the I in GEORGIVS points to a bead on both.

[Gary D 76]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

Then we ARE talking about an obverse that Davies doesn't know about. If you look at my picture above (Obv 2 left, 1914, and Obv 3 right, 1921) the I in GEORGIVS points to a bead on both.

I was quoting Davies

[Peckris 579]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

Then we ARE talking about an obverse that Davies doesn't know about. If you look at my picture above (Obv 2 left, 1914, and Obv 3 right, 1921) the I in GEORGIVS points to a bead on both.

I was quoting Davies

Then either Davies is mistaken or I have found a new variety. I've just checked my 1914 under a glass, and both the I of BRITT and GEORGIVS point to a bead. Unmistakeably.

The photo on your site - pointing apart - is the shallow portrait (i.e. mostly like Obv 3). The I of GEORGIVS on your coin is to the right of a bead. On my 1926 it's to the left of a bead. And on my 1921 it appears to be directly to a bead.

I think this whole topic needs to be revisited.

[Gary D 76]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

Then we ARE talking about an obverse that Davies doesn't know about. If you look at my picture above (Obv 2 left, 1914, and Obv 3 right, 1921) the I in GEORGIVS points to a bead on both.

I was quoting Davies

Then either Davies is mistaken or I have found a new variety. I've just checked my 1914 under a glass, and both the I of BRITT and GEORGIVS point to a bead. Unmistakeably.

The photo on your site - pointing apart - is the shallow portrait (i.e. mostly like Obv 3). The I of GEORGIVS on your coin is to the right of a bead. On my 1926 it's to the left of a bead. And on my 1921 it appears to be directly to a bead.

I think this whole topic needs to be revisited.

The problem with photos is that the pointing can be very deceptive, and I think Davies is sometime a little off. It's a bit like the discussion about the 1911 penny where there is the shallow neck with I to tooth (Gouby X) and the normal round/flat neck with I to space. The round/flat neck can look quiet shallow on some examples. With the coin in hand the pointing definitly matches Davies description.

[Peckris 579]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

Then we ARE talking about an obverse that Davies doesn't know about. If you look at my picture above (Obv 2 left, 1914, and Obv 3 right, 1921) the I in GEORGIVS points to a bead on both.

I was quoting Davies

Then either Davies is mistaken or I have found a new variety. I've just checked my 1914 under a glass, and both the I of BRITT and GEORGIVS point to a bead. Unmistakeably.

The photo on your site - pointing apart - is the shallow portrait (i.e. mostly like Obv 3). The I of GEORGIVS on your coin is to the right of a bead. On my 1926 it's to the left of a bead. And on my 1921 it appears to be directly to a bead.

I think this whole topic needs to be revisited.

The problem with photos is that the pointing can be very deceptive, and I think Davies is sometime a little off. It's a bit like the discussion about the 1911 penny where there is the shallow neck with I to tooth (Gouby X) and the normal round/flat neck with I to space. The round/flat neck can look quiet shallow on some examples. With the coin in hand the pointing definitly matches Davies description.

You're absolutely right about pointings - last night I was checking under artificial light - this morning, in clear daylight with good visibility, the position is different :

1914 (Obv 2) : I of BRITT to a bead, I of GEORGIVS to a space (more or less)

1921 (Obv 3) : I of BRITT to the left of a bead, I of GEORGIVS to a bead (almost dead on)

1926 (Obv ?) : I of BRITT to the left of a bead, I of GEORGIVS to the left of a bead

All three coins are minimum AUNC

Ok, here's the problem(s)

1. Davies doesn't mention the I of BRITT, he only talks about the I of GEORGIVS. And he only talks about two obverses post-1911 (2 and 3). Yet from the pointings there seem to be at least three, but possibly four (see below).

2. I've not seen or studied a 1923 'mule' before, and despite googling, the only example I can look at is the picture on your website, which shows a clear example of a shallow portrait florin (pointings apart, everything else about it indicates this). Now, that means there are various conclusions we can draw.

Conclusion A. Davies is right, there is a rare 1923 mule with the pre-1920 obverse (2). Yours isn't it. The pointings are correct for it, but the design is the shallow portrait. Which would make your coin a new variety, unrecorded by Davies.

Conclusion B. Davies is partly right, partly wrong. Right, in that there is a 1923 rare variety with similar pointings to the pre-1920 obverse. Wrong, in that it's not a mule as it features the shallow portrait, and should be considered a new obverse. Yours would be that.

I did flick back and forward from your florins page (1914) and your 1923 mule page, studying the pictures. It's no substitute for handling the actual coin, but everything about the picture tells me it's the shallow post-1920 design. I listed the relevant features in a post above.

[Gary D 76]

A further pointer is the pointing of the I in GEORGIVS. Obv.2 I to space full neck, and Obv.3 I to bead large low relief head.

I

Then we ARE talking about an obverse that Davies doesn't know about. If you look at my picture above (Obv 2 left, 1914, and Obv 3 right, 1921) the I in GEORGIVS points to a bead on both.

I was quoting Davies

Then either Davies is mistaken or I have found a new variety. I've just checked my 1914 under a glass, and both the I of BRITT and GEORGIVS point to a bead. Unmistakeably.

The photo on your site - pointing apart - is the shallow portrait (i.e. mostly like Obv 3). The I of GEORGIVS on your coin is to the right of a bead. On my 1926 it's to the left of a bead. And on my 1921 it appears to be directly to a bead.

I think this whole topic needs to be revisited.

The problem with photos is that the pointing can be very deceptive, and I think Davies is sometime a little off. It's a bit like the discussion about the 1911 penny where there is the shallow neck with I to tooth (Gouby X) and the normal round/flat neck with I to space. The round/flat neck can look quiet shallow on some examples. With the coin in hand the pointing definitly matches Davies description.

You're absolutely right about pointings - last night I was checking under artificial light - this morning, in clear daylight with good visibility, the position is different :

1914 (Obv 2) : I of BRITT to a bead, I of GEORGIVS to a space (more or less)

1921 (Obv 3) : I of BRITT to the left of a bead, I of GEORGIVS to a bead (almost dead on)

1926 (Obv ?) : I of BRITT to the left of a bead, I of GEORGIVS to the left of a bead

All three coins are minimum AUNC

Ok, here's the problem(s)

1. Davies doesn't mention the I of BRITT, he only talks about the I of GEORGIVS. And he only talks about two obverses post-1911 (2 and 3). Yet from the pointings there seem to be at least three, but possibly four (see below).

2. I've not seen or studied a 1923 'mule' before, and despite googling, the only example I can look at is the picture on your website, which shows a clear example of a shallow portrait florin (pointings apart, everything else about it indicates this). Now, that means there are various conclusions we can draw.

Conclusion A. Davies is right, there is a rare 1923 mule with the pre-1920 obverse (2). Yours isn't it. The pointings are correct for it, but the design is the shallow portrait. Which would make your coin a new variety, unrecorded by Davies.

Conclusion B. Davies is partly right, partly wrong. Right, in that there is a 1923 rare variety with similar pointings to the pre-1920 obverse. Wrong, in that it's not a mule as it features the shallow portrait, and should be considered a new obverse. Yours would be that.

I did flick back and forward from your florins page (1914) and your 1923 mule page, studying the pictures. It's no substitute for handling the actual coin, but everything about the picture tells me it's the shallow post-1920 design. I listed the relevant features in a post above.

I need to look at this more closely when I get home tonight. The I of BRITT I got from Michael Gouby's site.

1920 & 1923 2 Obverse dies

Obv. 2 I of BRITT to bead (Very rare in 1923)

Obv. 3 I of BRITT to gap (Flat head *) [1921 -26] * With only SLIGHT wear the head looks only 'F

[Gary D 76]

Here are the three 1920 Florins and both 1923 Florins

[Hussulo 6]

I'm just home. It had a blue stain dipped it in acetone which removed it (must have been PVC residue).

Here's the pictures:

I don't own a Davies but have ordered one from Rob.

Any opinions of variety?

[Guest richbedforduk]

I'm just home. It had a blue stain dipped it in acetone which removed it (must have been PVC residue).

Here's the pictures:

I don't own a Davies but have ordered one from Rob.

Any opinions of variety?

I really like that shade of blue.

[Gary D 76]

I'm just home. It had a blue stain dipped it in acetone which removed it (must have been PVC residue).

Here's the pictures:

I don't own a Davies but have ordered one from Rob.

Any opinions of variety?

I make it obv 3 davies 1752