This is another great article contribute by Ian Hartshorn
Listed with his permission
Read about the 2¢ coin here
Missing 'SD'
back to
index (Follow this link it will take
you to Ian’s book and a number of articles)
Omitted,
Missing or Filled
What happened to the 'SD' on some our 2 cent
coins
By Ian Hartshorn
Two simple words "Omitted" & "Missing" can have the same or vastly different meanings when it comes to coins. With pre-decimal coins both words can apply, but with decimal coins 'missing' is the appropriate one to use at this time. This is in relation to the pre-decimal mintmarks and the decimal designer initials.
To clarify the 'omitted/missing' words, in pre-decimal times the mintmark "I" for the Indian minted pennies was punched onto a die or hub. If, for some reason, the "I" was not punched onto the die/hub, then it was "omitted" from the die. If the mintmark was initially on the working die, but didn't show up on a coin, then "missing" from the die would be the appropriate term (an example of this is die filling). On decimal coins, the designer's initials are on the plaster casts, and if all goes well, will appear on the reduction punch and then on to the working die. The "SD" initials could only be termed "missing".
This last statement about the decimal coins having the designer's initials on the plaster casts may-be contentious. To date I have not been able to establish that the initials are on the plaster casts. However, after corresponding with Steve Pearce RAM (Manager, Visitor Services and Museum), Tony Byrnes (ex RAM employee) and other prominent dealers/collectors, all evidence leads me to the conclusion that the designer's initials are on the plaster casts.
The missing SD initials on 2 cent coins came to light soon after decimal
currency was introduced back in 1966, with a letter to the Editor in the
Australian Coin Review (ACR) August 1966 by Mr. J. Cook. A number of other keen
collectors of decimal coins found more of these types of coins in the ensuing
years, - with a Pat Gibson of Southport answering a query in July 1975, quote -
"In closing to help answer 'Paul Adler's' variety question about the 1966
two cent piece: Some friends and myself 'chased' the 1966 two cent, no
designer's initials, back when they were first issued and we all ended up with
a few each, thus establishing the fact that they were of no great rarity and
though a good variety will probably not amount to anything. The same variety
also exists in the 1967 two cent piece but much harder to find. - Yours
etc,"
The "missing SD" two cents first came to my attention in the ACR -
Dec 1996 (Letters) by Jerry Hamelfarb. I found I had a
1968 in my collection, and in the ensuing years found some 1966, 67 and 81
examples. Several years further on, some more information came to light in the
Tasmanian Numismatist Internet Edition - Feb. 2001, March 2001 and May 2002.
Two excerpts from these; Feb 2001 - "This is in fact a proven
example that the ACGS has graded and Spinks has acknowledged. It's not a soft
strike or filled die as there is no residual material under extreme
magnification - this was a die that simply didn't have the initials engraved."
May 2002 - "It is not a deteriorated or plugged die as the coins
are well struck and show no disturbance to the 'Flow' lines. Under a 20x
stereoscope-they were struck that way - without the SD as opposed to other
2cent pieces that do show deterioration of the letters SD".
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 2001 "Mos (Byrnes) advises
caution in inspection and then drawing incorrect conclusions about decimal
bronze varieties - particularly those that have also had a chance to age a
little 'ungracefully' over the last 35 years - as many examples of soft-strikes
and filled dies are becoming evident."
It was the above excerpt from the TNS newsletter that prompted me to contact
Coin Grading Australia (CGA) to see if they had come across any 2 cent coins
with the missing initials, especially with the 1981 date and what they thought
about them.
Frank Thomas (CGA) was keen to talk about these coins, and mentioned that he has found that most examples of the missing SD are a case of a "filled die" in the vicinity of the designers initials. He also mentioned he was keen to establish if possible, whether the missing SD was a filled die or not. After sending him two 1981 gEF coins, an opportunity to put together a parcel of uncirculated coins arose. With the help of Peter Andrews and Murray Pearce (Ebid/Downies) and some Uncs of my own, a total of ten coins; - 1x1966, 5x1967, 1x1968, all Unc, 2x1981 gEF, and 1x1966 lower grade (to check on a doubling aspect of the coin) were able to be checked at the one time
Several people including Scott Wren, Frank Thomas and staff at CGA and myself were able to check all the coins together, with Peter Andrews checking the majority of the UNCs. We all come to the same conclusion, that for whatever the reason, in most cases, the SD initials were missing from the die/s before going into service.
Some selective comments:
Given that the lizard's back left foot looks similarly weak on the coins struck from both dies I am beginning to suspect that the filling of the initials occurred on the master die, so that the SD was always missing from a few working dies. In this sense, maybe we can describe the 1967 2c no SD as a genuine missing initials variety.
1967 A fairly hard 'Missing SD' to fault, as I could find no real tell-tale
sign of any remnants of the 'SD' under x30 magnification ... but again, it
would be a very bold and audacious move to call such a coin as anything other
than a very nice example of a 'missing SD'
1968, this is the one that in my own opinion, as well as Frank's, that we feel
that this particular coin may have undergone some "Cleaning" at some
point in its life? This coin shows the obligatory weak back foot that is
synonymous with the 1968 2c. And there is a discernible 'S' just visible ? well I was able to
observe it anyway, that would probably change if I was to look at it again in 6
months time.
The 1966 lower grade coin was too far gone to make any judgement
on the doubling aspect or the SD.
A 1981 - "Incongruous field disturbances" (the field at the effected
area is out of place with the surrounding field) suggesting it is a filled die.
The comment by Scott Wren on the 1981 coins was very interesting. Some 8 months later, after sending out queries and waiting for responses as to whether the SD is on the plasters or not, a chance purchase of a roll of 1981 2c coins (auto count roll with the end of the wrapper damaged and sold at a discount), contained eleven coins with the missing SDs. What made these coins so interesting were the numerous parallel raised lines in the vicinity of where the designer's initials should be, my first impression was some sort of grinding/filing/polishing had taken place to the die, before putting it into service (maybe).
|
|
|
|
1981 2c coin note the parallel lines under the claw, all eleven coins exhibited these raised lines. On some coins the marks/lines are more prominent than others, possibly due to die wear. |
The arrow points to
highest (raised) line and shows up on all eleven coins. The claw above the
arrow does not have a sharp point, but slightly blunted, being one of the
traits that leads me to believe that this coin was
minted at |
Sending three of these 1981 coins off for other opinions, it is fair to say that the raised marks/lines on the field around the legs of the lizard were on the die as incuse marks and appear to have been some sort of cleaning/polishing action. Having held the view that the SDs were missing from the die/s before going into service on the earlier dated coins, and not filling during the coining process, these 1981 coins help reinforce my opinion that the missing SDs are a die variety.
Two things we do know about these coins: (i) The 1966,'67 and '68 are all from the Perth Mint.
(ii) The debate as to whether these are a filled die (ocurring
during striking) or the SD was missing from the die/s before going into service
for what ever reason, will continue.
My own thoughts on the subject are, that while there were three mints involved in minting the 1981 two cent, Canberra, Perth and Wales, at this stage I'm more inclined to believe the Perth mint to be responsible due to some traits similar to other 2 cent coins in the same era. The missing SD was missing from the die/s before going into service - due to the hubbing, annealing, cleaning/polishing processes. As to the scarcity/rarity of these coins, going by the mintage figures; 1966 - 217.73 million (scarce), 1981 - 81.06m & 1967 - 73.25m (very scarce) the 1968 - 16.99m (rare). I have observed the 1966 and 1967 coming up for sale in Unc grade and all dates in varing circulated grades from time to time, based on these observations, I suggest this Guide for the 1966 (extra for the others) VF $40, - EF $65, - Unc $100 to those chasing an example for their collection.
Please note:- All comments are personal
opinions only, they may not be the position or opinion of the company/business
the individuals work for.
Participants - and many thanks to; Scott Wren, Peter
Andrews & Murray Pearce (Ebid/Downies), Frank Thomas & Staff (Coin
Grading Aust.) Steve Pearce (Royal Aust. Mint), and Tony Byrnes
References - Tasmanian Numismatist Internet Edition - Feb 2001, March
2001 May 2002
Australian Coin Review - Aug 1966 v3n2 p3, July 1975 v12n1 p1 & Dec 1996
Issue 388 p36
Renniks Australian Coin & Banknote Values 20th Edition … mintage
figures
Some musing on the subject
Hi Ian
Another thought:
2c die is made by two strikes of transfer punch. It is possible that a
different punch is used for each strike. If both are missing SD, then die is
missing SD. If both have SD then the die has a (normal) thick SD. If only one
has an SD, then the SD on the die is quite thin. I never did find a missing SD
1968 at Downies but did find a few with the thin SD. I was looking at my 1973
missing the SD and opens up the possibility of finding a 1973missing SD.
Regards
Peter.
Ian, my own unc 66 example is definitely a filled die
as under 30x can see remnants of the 'S'
Ian, can we add any useful remark concerning the reverse doubled 1967 no SD?
*****
I0 x Assorted dates 2c Missing SDs
In regards to these coins, which exhibited what we have agreed should
rightfully be called 'Missing SDs' in the sense that
this designation covers the following three main (but not limited to)
explanations:
Filled Dies - in the most prone aspect of the design ie; the designers initials and mintmarks
Weak/Inadequate Metal Flow - to the intricate elements of the design ? again as above, most
effects the designers initials and mintmarks especially;
Late State Die Deterioration - which lends itself to the last
explanation, and more or less concerns Inadequate Metal Flow owing to the
deterioration of the die, and the designs thus...
*****
Why does this only happen to coins from the
Happy hunting