https://en.ucoin.net/coin/haiti-2-centimes-1846/?tid=74108
Haiti coin page missing variety [solved]
44 posts • viewed 319 times
This message aims at: requesting the modification of a coin in the catalogue
Status: DoneUpvotes: 1
Downvotes: 0
» Quick access to the last post
I just acquired a new coin form Haiti that does not appear in the catalog. It’s a 2 centimes from 1846 km27. The page for this coin lists two varieties, wide leave with a straight cap and thin leaves with a cap draped to the right. But my coin is thin leaves with a cap draped to the left. I found another example of the coin I have on another site. The page on numista says that’s the coin is verified, so either this variety is missing or I have misidentified it. Could this coin be reviewed and the page updated if needed?
https://en.ucoin.net/coin/haiti-2-centimes-1846/?tid=74108
https://en.ucoin.net/coin/haiti-2-centimes-1846/?tid=74108
Posted:
#
Sorry for the delay in providing details. Been busy.
@bjherbison
The coin is 1 inch (25.4 mm) across and weighs 5.18 grams.
@Sjoelund
I have attached some new photos that should be clearer the the originals.
@bjherbison
The coin is 1 inch (25.4 mm) across and weighs 5.18 grams.
@Sjoelund
I have attached some new photos that should be clearer the the originals.
Posted:
#
Your images are not good, since the camera angle renders the images oval....
Just to show you what might have been the outcome if your images had been circular:
Next time please make an effort image wise
Just to show you what might have been the outcome if your images had been circular:
Next time please make an effort image wise
Posted:
#
It looks like this now, do you want me to do the CR here https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces38031.html?
Posted:
#
It looks like this now, do you want me to do the CR here https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces38031.html?
Posted:
#
Edited:
Edited:
Oh man,
so we ended up with 3 variants.....
and all that before the superbowl
May the best team win 
I'll have to think how to bring them together in one graphic!
so we ended up with 3 variants.....
and all that before the superbowl
May the best team win I'll have to think how to bring them together in one graphic!
Posted:
#
Hello,
I've decided NOT to try to bring the two togeteher, because this about two variants in km27.1 (I had overseen that again Numista had joined two original km#).
And This I will let be to show the differences between km27. and km27.2
Comments?
I've decided NOT to try to bring the two togeteher, because this about two variants in km27.1 (I had overseen that again Numista had joined two original km#).
And This I will let be to show the differences between km27. and km27.2
Comments?
Posted:
#
OP's coin really looks like a km26:
I've redone the two graphics, please give me your comments. If I had been SCWC I would have made a km26.1 (the km26 of now), a km26.2 (the km27.1 of today) and the km26.3 (the km27.2 of this afternoon). Since I'm only me, we just leave them as is, hoping my graphics are clear?
I've redone the two graphics, please give me your comments. If I had been SCWC I would have made a km26.1 (the km26 of now), a km26.2 (the km27.1 of today) and the km26.3 (the km27.2 of this afternoon). Since I'm only me, we just leave them as is, hoping my graphics are clear?
Posted:
#
Edited:
Edited:
This is what NGC considers a KM# 26. It matches the OP's coin and contradicts the picture on the Numista km26 page. Maybe the picture on the Numista page is really km27.2? It matches the coin on ebay listed as a km27.2.
Posted:
#
According to SCWC this would correspond to km26 and km27.1, on the other hand the km27.2 is not "corresponding" 100%, but since it's so different from the 2 others it's got my vote for the km27.2 ALLTHOUGH I think I would have paired them off as 3 distinct km#. If not i would have grouped them differently. The km27.2 as km26 since so different from the two others! The the km27 group would be the km27.1 as is and the former km26 as km27.2.
Posted:
#
It might be useful to look at the two series for 1846.
Centime: KM# 24 and # 25
2 Centimes: KM# 26 and # 27
6 Centimes: KM# 28
6 1/4 Centimes: KM# 29
The numbers imply 2 sets: KM# 24, # 26, and # 28 and #25, #27, #29.
Kahnt/Schön have two explicit sets: 1, 2, 6 1/4 centimes for Loius Pierrot, 1845-1846 and 1, 2, 6 centimes for Jean Baptiste Riche, 1846-1847. But the picture they use for the Loius Pierrot 1 Centime seem to me like it would fit better as a Jean Baptiste Riche after comparing the 6 1/4 and 6 images (dot and star around the date).
Centime: KM# 24 and # 25
2 Centimes: KM# 26 and # 27
6 Centimes: KM# 28
6 1/4 Centimes: KM# 29
The numbers imply 2 sets: KM# 24, # 26, and # 28 and #25, #27, #29.
Kahnt/Schön have two explicit sets: 1, 2, 6 1/4 centimes for Loius Pierrot, 1845-1846 and 1, 2, 6 centimes for Jean Baptiste Riche, 1846-1847. But the picture they use for the Loius Pierrot 1 Centime seem to me like it would fit better as a Jean Baptiste Riche after comparing the 6 1/4 and 6 images (dot and star around the date).
Posted:
#
Quote: "rsirian1"Ah...
Quote: "Sjoelund"Police = type set?Maybe in French?
Posted:
#
Quote: "bjherbison"It might be useful to look at the two series for 1846.Good point and I don't think we can trust the Numista pages for the other 2 set either.
Centime: KM# 24 and # 25
2 Centimes: KM# 26 and # 27
6 Centimes: KM# 28
6 1/4 Centimes: KM# 29
The numbers imply 2 sets: KM# 24, # 26, and # 28 and #25, #27, #29.
Kahnt/Schön have two explicit sets: 1, 2, 6 1/4 centimes for Loius Pierrot, 1845-1846 and 1, 2, 6 centimes for Jean Baptiste Riche, 1846-1847. But the picture they use for the Loius Pierrot 1 Centime seem to me like it would fit better as a Jean Baptiste Riche after comparing the 6 1/4 and 6 images (dot and star around the date).
Posted:
#
It was as usual a badly executed copy / paste from SCWC, which has been as right as it can be since before numista was born. As usual I'll go for SCWC every time (also for the country names!!!)
If this graphic will be used in the km26 and the km27.n, then we obviously can forget these two?
If this graphic will be used in the km26 and the km27.n, then we obviously can forget these two?
Posted:
#
Yep, it corresponds to SCWC and the last graphic. Thanks for the idea.
Here the scwc with the 1 centime coins:
Who wants to set up the descriptions correctly in numista? Not I said Ole, I'll deliver the graphic!
Here the scwc with the 1 centime coins:
Who wants to set up the descriptions correctly in numista? Not I said Ole, I'll deliver the graphic!
Posted:
#
Quote: "rsirian1"Yes, only the top graphic is needed. For the km27.2, the only thing that is "According to SCWC" is the diameter since there's no pictures in SCWC.Use look at the image from the 1 centime coin, km25.2, and you'll be
Also, what happened to the bottom year in the top 2?
.Bottom year just covered by the macro images...
Posted:
#
Edited:
Edited:
The hats in SCWC for km24 and km25.1/25.2 match exactly with what we determined were the correct coins for km26 and km27.1/27.2.
So to recap changes I'll request:
1. Replace pictures on km26 with these from Heritage Auctions:
2. Add the pictures currently on km26 to km27 in the comments section as km27.2,
3. Change diameter on km27 to 24mm with comment that diameter for km27.1 ranges from 24.0 to 24.6mm.
4. Add comment to km27: weight of km27.1 is 4.8 to 5.6g and km27.2 is 5.0 to 5.1g.
Anything else?
So to recap changes I'll request:
1. Replace pictures on km26 with these from Heritage Auctions:
2. Add the pictures currently on km26 to km27 in the comments section as km27.2,
3. Change diameter on km27 to 24mm with comment that diameter for km27.1 ranges from 24.0 to 24.6mm.
4. Add comment to km27: weight of km27.1 is 4.8 to 5.6g and km27.2 is 5.0 to 5.1g.
Anything else?
Posted:
#
Edited:
Edited:
Quote: "Sjoelund"yeah, please straighten the left image, we don't want anyone to become seasickHaha. I did! Here's the original:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elCBktkITPc
and mine with vertical parallel lines. Which way should I rotate?
Edit: and a 90° horizontal line too:
Maybe you're right...or maybe the 2 is just high?
Posted:
#
Better? Or worse?
Posted:
#
Edited:
Edited:
top 0.25 degree to the left I would reckon
Edit, no it's perfect!
Edit, no it's perfect!
Posted:
#
Quote: "Sjoelund"top 0.25 degree to the left I would reckonI thought so, too.
Edit, no it's perfect!
Posted:
#
Quote: "Jarcek"In what phase this is? Was CR sent?I think I volunteered to make the CR. It's on my to-do list, but it slipped through the cracks. Will do it soon.
Status changed to Started
(Jarcek, 18 Apr 2022, 14:25)
Status changed to Done
(Jarcek, 18 Apr 2022, 21:25)
Used time zone is UTC+2:00.
Current time is 09:44.