the 1909 florin

[Nevol]

Is that a great whopping finger print on the bottom half it?

If it is, not much care taken back then.

[fred lever]

The thought did pass my mind that it may be David Gee's fingerprint, but NO I should NOT start off myths!!!!!!!!!
I just deleted the next para I just wrote that you wont see, as I don't like litigation......................
Suffice to say I wonder if the image is one of the original master types or a "later pressing"?
Not knowing much about the type I would not know the difference.
Anybody know?
Fred.

[Mister T]

It's an image from the Royal Mint Museum so I assume David Gee never got his hands on this one (I don't recall all the details but I don't think he visited England) and I would also assume this is a genuine electrotype (no edge milling evident; also I don't remember if there was more than one electrotype produced).

[nealeffendi]

Is that a great whopping finger print on the bottom half it?

If it is, not much care taken back then.

That isn't a fingerprint but a representation of waves in the Great Southern Bight, :to_pick_ones_nose_eat: Amazing the number of proof coins and other rarities in museum collections with similar stupid custodians not taking care and mistreating the items.

[Mister T]

And a picture of the obverse: https://twitter.com/RoyalMintMuseum/status/970642859341774848
Very nice.

[fred lever]

Nice pictures MT.
I did a quick re-read of the best independent reference about the 1909 Florin.
Reference "Heads I win" (Watson,Thomas,Bennet).
Pages 71-86 chapter 'the die king'
Pages 108-110 re the London mint.

The indications from the London Mint is there were 2 electrotypes made, one for the RAM Canberra, one for the Museum Applied Arts and Sciences. (David Gee applied for a 3rd electrotype representing himself as a Museum, but was refused!)

How the actual Gee double sided coin (or coins) was made is covered in the 'die king' chapter.
Suffice to say ignorance and greed by so called experts in the coin business and downright criminal activities by high up people in the government, as outlined in the book and subsequent jury trials allowed all this to happen.

By my counting there were:
3 x electrotypes, 1 at the RAM, 1 at the museum and 1 created by Gee since he could not obtain one from the London Mint.
1 x uniface striking from a ?die? at the London mint.
At least 1 striking by Gee, the Adler coin, with concocted reverse and obverse dies.
Possibly more strikings but unknown, as in the prosecution it was only necessary to discuss the Adler coin.

So somewhere in the world there should still exist the 3 electrotypes, the one uniface trial strike and the Adler coin.
I presumed MrT's images from the London Mint is of the 1 electrotype but hang on this should be uniface?
So i'm a bit unsure as to what item that really is.
Fred.

[Mister T]

Surely the Royal Mint would have hung onto one for themselves? Were the electrotypes for the RAM and the Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences copied from an original?

I think the book says that no coins were struck so their images must be of an electrotype.

Looking at the images the surface has a slight roughness which makes me think it's not a die-struck coin (if it was surely it would be of higher quality).

[fred lever]

Had a quick look at the book again, page 75 mentions the two electrotypes made, one for the Aussie RAM and one for the Arts museum so the intention was that Australia only got electrotypes to look at and for posterity. The design was scrapped and ordinary florins with the reverse COA minted for 1910. There is no information on what order the electrotypes were made in just the fact that they existed. Also the "DIES" and a UNIFACE trial piece were lodged in the British museum and that should have been that with the 1909 'map of Australia' .
That's pretty much what everybody has said in this thread.
 
Then Mr Gee got into the act and by magic swapped his cruder concocted electrotype  with the good electrotype from the Arts Museum. That means that for a time the Gee electrotype was in the Museum collection and the Museum electrotype was in Gee's pocket. That gave him a good enough model to produce a coin. How he did it was explained well enough for the purposes of the trial in the book but left a can of worms open when you think about it. He certainly produced the Adler coin that was handled by so many experts and declared genuine.
I would expect the Gee electrotype would be in the trial exhibits in a cupboard somewhere and the Museum electrotype back in the collection.

Thinking about the images in this thread, they  would be just what MrT says, photos of the British Museum electrotype displaying both sides. Only the 1 coin trial piece struck from the dies was uniface, a common practice.
Fred.

[Mister T]

Yeah I had a quick skim through Heads I Win and now I'm not so sure.
So the British Museum has a uniface strike of what must be the reverse. This would have been supplied by the Royal Mint.
Two electrotypes were sent to Australia and were made from the uniface strike - not exactly sure what they look like.

The book suggests that no coins were struck and I've read that elsewhere but the book doesn't seem to detail what the Royal Mint themselves actually had - judging from the photos the Royal Mint Museum posted a single example or two uniface examples may have actually been struck.

Also, more confusingly in general, in one of the 1964 Australian Coin Reviews similar images were posted (reverse and crowned obverse - source unstated and unknown) and yet in the early 1970s everyone had forgotten and believed that an uncrowned portrait was used.

[purplepennyhunter]

The IAG auction has some David Gee counterfeits.

Auction Cat Page 67

[Mister T]

Hm, lot 638 seems surprisingly low quality.

Also, unrelated but there's a polymer test note in there (lot 403) that I hadn't seen before - GW 11 539 260 with Charles Darwin.

[Mister T]

And, the Royal Mint Museum have said in that thread that it is a pattern coin.
So the statement that none were struck is incorrect.

[Billenben]

Nice pictures MT.
I did a quick re-read of the best independent reference about the 1909 Florin.
Reference "Heads I win" (Watson,Thomas,Bennet).
Pages 71-86 chapter 'the die king'
Pages 108-110 re the London mint.

The indications from the London Mint is there were 2 electrotypes made, one for the RAM Canberra, one for the Museum Applied Arts and Sciences. (David Gee applied for a 3rd electrotype representing himself as a Museum, but was refused!)

How the actual Gee double sided coin (or coins) was made is covered in the 'die king' chapter.
Suffice to say ignorance and greed by so called experts in the coin business and downright criminal activities by high up people in the government, as outlined in the book and subsequent jury trials allowed all this to happen.

By my counting there were:
3 x electrotypes, 1 at the RAM, 1 at the museum and 1 created by Gee since he could not obtain one from the London Mint.
1 x uniface striking from a ?die? at the London mint.
At least 1 striking by Gee, the Adler coin, with concocted reverse and obverse dies.
Possibly more strikings but unknown, as in the prosecution it was only necessary to discuss the Adler coin.

So somewhere in the world there should still exist the 3 electrotypes, the one uniface trial strike and the Adler coin.
I presumed MrT's images from the London Mint is of the 1 electrotype but hang on this should be uniface?
So i'm a bit unsure as to what item that really is.
Fred.

The Book, which does contain errors, is not a catalogue or an encyclopedia, claims on page 74 that Gee had two of them. On one the map of Australia was merely an outline; on the other mountains were shown in relief.
I own that copper florin listed in the IAG catalogue, picked it up as part of a 3 coin 1909 florin set. Two silver (one of them piedfort) and the copper. The copper is not a great copy and according to the following site Gee reworked his original die as it wasn't very good. The copper seems to be from that unacceptable die. The obverse is rather ordinary as well. The two silvers have the same ordinary obverse (crowned King) but the reverse is a point for point match with the alleged Gee uniface which can be found here https://www.coincommunity.com/go/link.asp?target=http://cpmarchives.classiccmp.org/cpm/mirrors/www.triton.vg/F09.html


The book talks about two examples both with uncrowned King but the florins i picked up seem to be early Gee efforts. Not of the quality of his Adler coin.
[attachment=4062]
Not all Gee's are his best work.

[Basilstate]

:welcome:

To the Oz. Forum,i follow your Threads on CC with interest.