1/2 gulden 1929 the Netherlands extra line? [Resolvido]

The article
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces6549.html

in the year distribution for 1929 shows:
1929 9,500,000
1929 Pearls touch the edge
1929 Pearls away from edge

There are questions about it.

1. What is about the first line? Which type is it?
2. There are many pearls on both sides of the coin. Can the catalog be more precise? Which pearls and on which sides?

I don't know about the edge type. I only know these 2 types:
pearls not right under pearl right under G

Gr. Michael

The right under G type is the most rare. In my Dutch catalog I can't find other types then these 2. So if there are more I like to know:)

Hi,

thanks for the documentation, but don't you mean OVER G and not under G? The pearls are clearly over the G!

Ole

What do you mean with over? The pearls in the hair of Wilhelmina are under/below the lettering.

Hi again,

I think this is a correct documentation of that coin and its varieties?

I'll submit as a change request, OK?

Ole

Yes, thank you!

Sorry, I see what you mean... that's because the heads on the two coins are more or less inclined, but it all comes to the same, doesn't it?

Ole

Yes it does! These are the only 2 types and your translation is correct.

Here is the documentation with the beads and the pearls.....



All happy now?
Ole

Yes:)

I think the guy asking the question in the first message, would have been able to answer his question with a bit serious reseach on the web????

Just my opinion about this topic:

It's so easy to critizise and be negative, but much more difficult to be constructive and positive, for some people it seems even impossible to be anything but in opposition to everything.

Ole

Alexander, thanks for the comments. I passed them to the referee and he shall take action.

Thanks guys for the documentation.

FYI:

Citação: "Sjoelund"​
​
​All happy now?
​Ole

​Hi Ole, don't forget to change the title of your documentation, it still says "Netherlands: 1 cent 1966...."

Hi,

thanks, it's done

I'll make the change request now.
Ole

It seems that the second question is solved. Though it is obvious, for the variety is published everywhere. But the solution is slightly not correct.

The suggested picture created 2 terms: beads and pearls. But the year distribution as well as the picture itself still confuse them. More over, though the mutual position of letters and beads differ, the quantity of beads over letters are still the same (!) - that is why the image reflects desire of its creator, which in this case is far from reality.

No solution is given to the first question - the main reason for this topic. Lack of suggestions means, most probably, that it is still obvious that the first line in year distribution is extra. It is worth to read the topic attentively, then the constructive suggestion it gives become clear.

Results:

1. instead of
1929 9,500,000
1929 Pearls touch the edge
1929 Pearls away from edge

should be

1929 9,500,000 Beads on Obv. touch the edge
1929 Beads on Obv. away from edge Mintage incl.

2. The image should be changed, while it happened, it is highly recommended to delete it.

Citação: "cyprusalexander"that is why the image reflects desire of its creator, which in this case is far from reality.
​
​​Results:
​
​1. instead of
​1929 9,500,000
​1929 Pearls touch the edge
​1929 Pearls away from edge
​
​should be
​
​1929 9,500,000 Beads on Obv. touch the edge
​1929 Beads on Obv. away from edge Mintage incl.
​
​2. The image should be changed, while it happened, it is highly recommended to delete it.​

​1. Forget the beads and the edge, the main issue about the variety for this 1929 coin is the placement of the pearls of the tiara, like it is described in Krause and in the Dutch catalogue:





So in stead of 3 year lines it should be 2 year lines:

1929 9,500,000 3 pearls of diadem under GI
1929 3 pearls of diadem under G

And talking about the beads:



I can't see the difference in distance between the beads and the rim, but on Michael's pictures I can clearly see the difference in space between the beads and the lettering. It also looks as if the beads on the right picture are bigger but in my opinion that's optical illusion because of the difference in lighting on the picture.
The difference of the placement of the pearls on the diadem is because of the use of another stamp (the same happened with the Netherlands 10 cents 1948 (not yet in our catalogue)). So it's plausible the difference in distance between beads and lettering always comes with the corresponding difference of the pearls of the diadem, so we only have two varieties and not four.

2. Alexander, we appreciate your effort to improve our catalogue, but I have to agree with Ole. Your comments are often negative and even insulting sometimes. Is it so difficult to be positive, constructive and objective?

Essor Prof
I agree with your comments above. I found the documentation slightly confusing, while krause comments are straight forward and easily helped me spot the difference.

I re msged the referee now to merge 2 lines into 1 and keep total 2 instead of 3 lines. this shall solve Alexander's reported issue.

Citação: "Essor Prof"​​1. Forget the beads and the edge, the main issue about the variety for this 1929 coin is the placement of the pearls of the tiara, like it is described in Krause and in the Dutch catalogue<...>

​It is theoretical question. In most cases the difference between dies is not just one detail, the changes touch the whole surface of the side. That is why a variety could be attributed correctly by any of many different parts of a side of a coin. In this particular case the distance between beads and legend is as visible as the position of pearls and is a detail which helps to attribute the variety ( one of 2 known).
The only reason, why the beads are considered in this topic, is that this feature (you may name it as extra attribute) was discovered by someone and by the right of the first was published in this catalog and as the result, all attempts are made to maintain the discovery. The only thing what is required is to use the same terms, instead of pearls beads and most probably,

instead of
1929 9,500,000
1929 Pearls touch the edge
1929 Pearls away from edge

should be

1929 9,500,000 Beads on Obv. far from legend
1929 Beads on Obv. close to legend. Mintage incl.

Still I'm not very sure about this correction. For the solution was made already, let us wait the results.

After the solving the main task - the extra line, any one can make the text clear, add images etc. just by modification requests.
Formally, only deleting of the line is possible in this catalog through a topic in forum. Usually it takes some time.

Just msged the referee, once again. hopefully he will respond now

I just got my referee rights for the Netherlands.
I have looked into it and I will use the below varieties.

1. 1929 - 3 pearls under diadem under GI
2. 1929 - 3 pearls under diadem under G.

This is also the way it is described in different catalogs.

Problem:
There are 3 lines registered and all are used. I will contact Jarcek about this and discuss the options.

Gr. Michael

Hi Michael,
that's great! I'm sure Netherlands East Indies would be in good hands, and our work there together would be built on. Good for the Netherlands too.

I will msg you now with answers to your questions + some other issues

Solved, thanks to our new referee Michaelw90

I'm new to this forum, and am curious about this coin I recently picked up. It seems to have the pearls primarily under the “G."  I'm curious what others think.  I'm trying to insert the photos here.  what do you think?

 

best

MA-PDX.