While I know this isn't necessarily a "rare" coin nor is it a true "error" coin, this example is pretty darn cool and I thought I'd share it with ya all.
More an overstrike than an overdate, but yes, that's a very cool example. I've never seen one with the undertype quite so clear, let alone one with the host coin's date still visible!
Thanks! The story on these coins, which I'm sure most already know, is due to heavy shortages of metals as a result of WWI, the Italian government was forced to reuse 20 centesimi minted in 1894 and 1895 as planchets for their 1918 and 1919 coinage. As a result, you end up with new coins showing signs of their former mintage. While the mintages for the years were quite high, not many of them came out with such clear images of their former selves like this guy.
Thanks! The story on these coins, which I'm sure most already know, is due to heavy shortages of metals as a result of WWI, the Italian government was forced to reuse 20 centesimi minted in 1894 and 1895 as planchets for their 1918 and 1919 coinage. As a result, you end up with new coins showing signs of their former mintage. While the mintages for the years were quite high, not many of them came out with such clear images of their former selves like this guy.
What I've never understood is why this was necessary?
I mean, as your coin so dramatically demonstrates with that awesome positioning of the "20" on the overlapping strikes, we're talking about the same denomination and same sized planchet. So why overstrike them at all? Why not just circulate the earlier type coins as they were? They weren't revalued or demonetized somehow, were they?
Anyway, that's just a rhetorical question, really. I'm glad they created the overstrikes to make things more interesting for us a century later.
Were all of these coins struck on old coins or were some struck on new planchetts?
Italy 20 Centesimi 1918
I have had this one since the 1960's and looked it over with a magnifier. I can not find any underlying markings of an old coin. It is, however, pretty worn.
Thanks! The story on these coins, which I'm sure most already know, is due to heavy shortages of metals as a result of WWI, the Italian government was forced to reuse 20 centesimi minted in 1894 and 1895 as planchets for their 1918 and 1919 coinage. As a result, you end up with new coins showing signs of their former mintage. While the mintages for the years were quite high, not many of them came out with such clear images of their former selves like this guy.
What I've never understood is why this was necessary?
I mean, as your coin so dramatically demonstrates with that awesome positioning of the "20" on the overlapping strikes, we're talking about the same denomination and same sized planchet. So why overstrike them at all? Why not just circulate the earlier type coins as they were? They weren't revalued or demonetized somehow, were they?
Anyway, that's just a rhetorical question, really. I'm glad they created the overstrikes to make things more interesting for us a century later.
That's a great question, one that didn't even occur to me. But off the top of my head and without doing any research on the subject, perhaps there was a regime change or some other kind of shake up in the wake of WWI (remember, Italy changed sides at some point during the war) that made the idea of releasing the older coins unpalatable? Otherwise, it does seem like a terrible waste of time and effort just to make new coins out of old ones...
Interestingly, NGC labels these coins as "mint error" (seems an abuse of terms to me). And the current owner has what seems an awfully high opinion of it, too!
Interestingly, NGC labels these coins as "mint error" (seems an abuse of terms to me). And the current owner has what seems an awfully high opinion of it, too!
They want even more for it through eBay, of course.
As I mentioned in my November posting, it's almost as though they made a misprint and shifted the decimal point in the price one place too far to the right.
Cool. I love over-struck coins and have never heard of this one. I am shame faced to admit that after reading this I ran straight off to eBay and bought a 1918 and 1919 20c with strong undertypes to go in my overstruck coin album.
Successful trades with Syracusian, DeiGratia, LordM, WWW, theboz11, CCC2010, Hyperion, ajaan, wybrit, Dennis88 and many others.
Cool. I love over-struck coins and have never heard of this one. I am shame faced to admit that after reading this I ran straight off to eBay and bought a 1918 and 1919 20c with strong undertypes to go in my overstruck coin album.
No shame there!
I had a few lying around and just discovered another with visible undertype in a new bulk lot, but nothing so dramatic (or high grade) as the coin in the OP.
I just looked at my example under magnification. The obverse shows traces of the lettering on the former obverse but the reverse has no traces of the old design.
Here's the first of my impulse purchases of this type. The undertype on the obverse is very strong, not so much on the reverse. It appears to be struck on an 1894KB coin.
Successful trades with Syracusian, DeiGratia, LordM, WWW, theboz11, CCC2010, Hyperion, ajaan, wybrit, Dennis88 and many others.
Comments
Neat. Great pictures, too.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
Thanks! The story on these coins, which I'm sure most already know, is due to heavy shortages of metals as a result of WWI, the Italian government was forced to reuse 20 centesimi minted in 1894 and 1895 as planchets for their 1918 and 1919 coinage. As a result, you end up with new coins showing signs of their former mintage. While the mintages for the years were quite high, not many of them came out with such clear images of their former selves like this guy.
What I've never understood is why this was necessary?
I mean, as your coin so dramatically demonstrates with that awesome positioning of the "20" on the overlapping strikes, we're talking about the same denomination and same sized planchet. So why overstrike them at all? Why not just circulate the earlier type coins as they were? They weren't revalued or demonetized somehow, were they?
Anyway, that's just a rhetorical question, really. I'm glad they created the overstrikes to make things more interesting for us a century later.
Were all of these coins struck on old coins or were some struck on new planchetts?
Italy 20 Centesimi 1918
I have had this one since the 1960's and looked it over with a magnifier.
I can not find any underlying markings of an old coin.
It is, however, pretty worn.
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
Thanks! The story on these coins, which I'm sure most already know, is due to heavy shortages of metals as a result of WWI, the Italian government was forced to reuse 20 centesimi minted in 1894 and 1895 as planchets for their 1918 and 1919 coinage. As a result, you end up with new coins showing signs of their former mintage. While the mintages for the years were quite high, not many of them came out with such clear images of their former selves like this guy.
What I've never understood is why this was necessary?
I mean, as your coin so dramatically demonstrates with that awesome positioning of the "20" on the overlapping strikes, we're talking about the same denomination and same sized planchet. So why overstrike them at all? Why not just circulate the earlier type coins as they were? They weren't revalued or demonetized somehow, were they?
Anyway, that's just a rhetorical question, really. I'm glad they created the overstrikes to make things more interesting for us a century later.
That's a great question, one that didn't even occur to me. But off the top of my head and without doing any research on the subject, perhaps there was a regime change or some other kind of shake up in the wake of WWI (remember, Italy changed sides at some point during the war) that made the idea of releasing the older coins unpalatable? Otherwise, it does seem like a terrible waste of time and effort just to make new coins out of old ones...
http://northernbazaar.com/products/error-double-denomination-vittorio-emanuele-iii-mint-error-20-centesimi-1918-r-ms63-ngc-struck-over-20-centesimi-of-1894
http://northernbazaar.com/prod...r-20-centesimi-of-1894
Interestingly, NGC labels these coins as "mint error" (seems an abuse of terms to me). And the current owner has what seems an awfully high opinion of it, too!
http://northernbazaar.com/products/error-double-denomination-vittorio-emanuele-iii-mint-error-20-centesimi-1918-r-ms63-ngc-struck-over-20-centesimi-of-1894
I commented on the same coin back last November.
They want even more for it through eBay, of course.
As I mentioned in my November posting, it's almost as though they made a misprint and shifted the decimal point in the price one place too far to the right.
and the price is just fishing for a sucker
https://photos.app.goo.gl/a6kwqbXrBhxnawsk6
Cool. I love over-struck coins and have never heard of this one. I am shame faced to admit that after reading this I ran straight off to eBay and bought a 1918 and 1919 20c with strong undertypes to go in my overstruck coin album.
No shame there!
I had a few lying around and just discovered another with visible undertype in a new bulk lot, but nothing so dramatic (or high grade) as the coin in the OP.
(Image from coinquest.com)