Coin/medal rotation variations [επιλυμένο]

In two different coins in catalogue take different aproaches for roation variations:

N#3057 informs variations in comments section

while

N#3055 informs variations in mintange section

I suggest to take one of these as protocolary.

Already exist:

Variable: when the coin alignment varies between specimens. For coins that have known alignments per years or mints, specify the alignment in the comment of each date line:

For the 5 pesos coin you linked the year line comments would have had to include all of this:

SA# 143.1.1, CG# 168.1.A, coin rotation,
SA# 143.1.2, CG# 168.1.B, medal rotation (normal issue),
SA# 143.1.3, CG# 168.1.C, 90º or 270º rotation,
SA# 143.1.4, CG# 168.1.D, other rotation.

which is too much for year line comments so it makes sense to take exception to the guidelines.

It is quite heavy for yearlines. But it makes me wonder what “other orientations” actually is - is that error coin?

Poking@adanieluy 

rsirian1

Already exist:

 

Variable: when the coin alignment varies between specimens. For coins that have known alignments per years or mints, specify the alignment in the comment of each date line:

 

For the 5 pesos coin you linked the year line comments would have had to include all of this:

SA# 143.1.1, CG# 168.1.A, coin rotation,
SA# 143.1.2, CG# 168.1.B, medal rotation (normal issue),
SA# 143.1.3, CG# 168.1.C, 90º or 270º rotation,
SA# 143.1.4, CG# 168.1.D, other rotation.

which is too much for year line comments so it makes sense to take exception to the guidelines.

But 50 centésimos has the same amount of info for 2002 and has it added in mintage section, not in comment section like 50 pesos.

mrcsp

 

 

But 50 centésimos has the same amount of info for 2002 and has it added in mintage section, not in comment section like 50 pesos.

Yest that's true. Adding 3 additional year lines is also an option.

Jarcek

It is quite heavy for yearlines. But it makes me wonder what “other orientations” actually is - is that error coin?

 

Poking@adanieluy 

This data about the classification given by Uruguayan catalogs authors. Since several different rotations were found, in amounts that indicate they are not errors, but  different orientations given at the mint, so they classify in 4 different groups.

The code has 3 parts: Coin, variety and rotation. 

SA is ##.#.#; CG is ###.#.X (# means number, X means letter)

First number is the coin, different for each design and  also for different years.

Second number is the variation (in the same design and year),

And third part (number or letter) is the rotation group; 1 or A for coin rotation; 2 or B for medal orientation, 3 or C for 90° or 270° orientation, and 4 or D for the rest of them. Since very small rotations have been found, the 3 first groups “accept” +/- 5° rotation, and 4th. is for all the orientations not included on the 3 first groups.

Different rotations were usual on Uruguayan minted coins (at Uruguay only were minted from 1840 to 1855), but also on foreign mints. There is a collector who has 320 different orientation coins from 5 Pesos 2003 (Santiago mint); I have found myself about 15 different of them, while looking for them on circulating coins from 2015 to 2020.

So it is “error of negligence”, that resulted in something very common. Ok :)

On old Uruguayan coins, it is explained as precision of machinery was low, hand-made dies, workshop was from a jeweler and medal artist, not a coin maker, so dies would press different on the sides, and rotating was a way to make them last longer.

With regards to new big mints (Buenos Aires mint), I don't know why it happened, as said it is very common on 5 Pesos 2003, but not on other coins. Maybe workers were playful when minted this issue?

The fact is that some of those rotation are fairly usual, and appreciated by collectors, so were included on local catalogs.

Ok, so it is not an error in our catalogue. If you (original requestor) feel that it should be included on yearlines, feel free to add it there.