1937 Edward Viii Threepence

[Coppers 58]

is up for auction along with a run of proof sets starting with a 1746.

http://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/mellors-and-kirk/catalogue-id-2871812?categoryid=160264&page=1

[Gary1000 41]

is up for auction along with a run of proof sets starting with a 1746.

http://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/mellors-and-kirk/catalogue-id-2871812?categoryid=160264&page=1

I don't like the carbon spot right in the middle of reverse. Spoils an otherwise good coin.

[Peckris 579]

is up for auction along with a run of proof sets starting with a 1746.

http://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/mellors-and-kirk/catalogue-id-2871812?categoryid=160264&page=1

I don't like the carbon spot right in the middle of reverse. Spoils an otherwise good coin.

I'd have it! (Not too worried about a tiny little spot like that).

Does anyone know which is the the rarer - pattern or proof?

[Colin88 54]

Personally I believe the proof to be the rarer, however that's really a question for Mark Rasmussen to answer definitively I would suggest.

[Red Riley 2]

Nonetheless, I think that estimate is likely to be very much on the conservative side. A 5-star rarity and imagine the kudos of having an Edward VIII in your collection!

[Peter 615]

The obverse shows considerable wear.

I wonder how many packs of 3d crisps it bought in the 60's.?

[Colin88 54]

The Ed VIII 3d estimate is ridiculously low as are all the estimates on the proof sets (Lot Numbers 286 onwards)...very silly really as none of them are going to go for anywhere near those low estimates....

[Varietalis 20]

The tone spot wouldn't bother me too much. Arguably the coin looks almost too pristine. That letter dated 1997 is crucial, without it I wouldn't bid even if I could afford it. Surely though there must be more provenance than just the letter? And why leave it 60 years to get someone to authenticate it?

[Peckris 579]

The tone spot wouldn't bother me too much. Arguably the coin looks almost too pristine. That letter dated 1997 is crucial, without it I wouldn't bid even if I could afford it. Surely though there must be more provenance than just the letter? And why leave it 60 years to get someone to authenticate it?

Could have been a shopkeeper who simply kept it as a curio. WW2 would have then put most other thoughts out of his head. In due time, it was inherited by someone who knew a little about its reputation and rarity and decided to send it off for authentication. Or it could have been any number of similar stories.

[DaveG38 405]

According to the Mellors and Kirk headline, this is a single collection auction. That's one hell of an expensive collection - all that gold and the proof sets!!

Edited September 12, 2013 by DaveG38

[Red Riley 2]

The tone spot wouldn't bother me too much. Arguably the coin looks almost too pristine. That letter dated 1997 is crucial, without it I wouldn't bid even if I could afford it. Surely though there must be more provenance than just the letter? And why leave it 60 years to get someone to authenticate it?

The story I have heard gives a very good reason for them not coming to market until long after they were minted. May be apocryphal but the story goes that quite a number of the new brass threepenny bits were sent to vending machine manufacturers during 1936 for testing purposes and once this was completed they were supposed to be sent back. In the meantime of course the abdication crisis was going on eventually leading to all the coins made with Edward's head on being melted... except those in the hands of the vending machine manufacturers, who If they had their heads screwed on claimed to have lost them. Therefore, if the story is correct all Edward VIII threepences at large were effectively stolen from the mint. Would also explain why nearly all Edward VIII coins to have turned up have been threepences. Can't remember where I heard this...

[Peckris 579]

The story I have heard gives a very good reason for them not coming to market until long after they were minted. May be apocryphal but the story goes that quite a number of the new brass threepenny bits were sent to vending machine manufacturers during 1936 for testing purposes and once this was completed they were supposed to be sent back. In the meantime of course the abdication crisis was going on eventually leading to all the coins made with Edward's head on being melted... except those in the hands of the vending machine manufacturers, who If they had their heads screwed on claimed to have lost them. Therefore, if the story is correct all Edward VIII threepences at large were effectively stolen from the mint. Would also explain why nearly all Edward VIII coins to have turned up have been threepences. Can't remember where I heard this...

That's quite correct Derek. Those pattern 3d's WERE supplied to test vending machines, and it was their non-return that accounts for the 'few' (how many?) that are at large today. No other UK Ed VIII coin was ever issued in any form (except a few proofs).

It's also the case that so rushed were the Mint to get out George VI coins for 1937 after the abdication that they virtually re-used every design : with the exception of the silver 3d (quite a nifty quick knock-up job), and the 6d (quick and nasty monogram effort), and a hasty minor redesign of the GV halfcrown reverse, all other designs were as for Edward. Even the portrait bust is virtually the same, which considering the two men weren't exactly identical twins, shows how pressured they were.