1933 deep/shallow hairline correction

Hello, 

I believe there is an error in the explanation describing the rare/common version of the 1933 coin (2 ½ Guilder). The deep hairline is the common one for that year but its stated as the less common one. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, thank you! 

The frequencies seem to back up that deep hair lines is the common one.  The graphic doesn't match the data in the year lines.  Maybe this post needs to be revisited.  https://en.numista.com/forum/topic87980.html  @Sjoelund 

I don't mind to change it, but I would like to hear what the Dutch catalog says?

@smvdbrink 

The SCWC says this, which corresponds to my documentation:

Yes for 1932 and 1938.  Numista's frequencies for those years is consistent with SCWC and the graphics.

The question is about 1933.  SCWC doesn't recognize shallow hair lines for that year and the Numista frequency for deep hair lines is 10 times that of shallow hair lines indicating deep is the common one.

I made my documentation from Cobra's pdf documentation, I sent it to you by mail, which is pointing to PCGS as a source, 

My search with “netherlands 2 1/2 gulden 1933 types” which gave me this: 

https://coinvarieties.com/index.php/Netherlands_1933_2-1/2_gulden

and that's not extremely clear?

So maybe there's only the deep hair in 1933?

Haven't gotten the email yet.

When I look at PCGS I see this:

1932 Deep and normal and 1938 Deep and “not deep” but just one line for 1933.

Also, the 1933 graphics uses all the same obverse pictures as on the 1938 graphic. Only the reverse dated picture is different. Makes me think the 1933 only had one variety. Would be nice to know what  Schön and the Dutch reference says. Notice how the year line reference for 1933 shallow hairlines is blank?

I saw that as well, and thought maybe 1933 should have been 1938?

I don't know what he meant. The pdf arrived in mail and he meant 1933 since he showed the 1933 dated obverse?  Maybe at this point revise the graphic and change the common one to the deep hairline with a comment that shallow hair line may not exist?

Dear all,

According to Schulman (in Dutch see here: Wilhelmina - 2½ Gulden of Rijksdaalder 1933 – LSch.673 (788) - Laurens Schulman.nl)

The 1933 version is always with deep hairlines

(Bijzonderheid:

Deze rijksdaalder van 1933 heeft altijd de grovere uitvoering van het haar.)

Thank you so much. Just the answer I would like to see….

Have a good day

Ole

I finally got the chance to look at Cobra's documentation.  All three, 1932, 1933 and 1938 use the exact same pictures of the reverses. Only the obverse pictures are different.  My assumption is he saw the  “deep hair lines” comment for those three years an erroneously assumed all three also had  “shallow hairlines.”   The “deep hair lines” year line comments for all three years were added to Numista in 2011:

so I think Cobra was just assuming Numista was accurate when he created his documentation in 2019.

 All that, with our lack of finding anything substantiating both varieties for 1933 (other than the Numista coin page and the ~27 members who claim to have a shallow variety) leads me to to the conclusion that the 1933 shallow hair line variety should be deleted.

I strongly agree, do you look after that, please?

Sjoelund

I strongly agree, do you look after that, please?

I could submit a CR to delete the graphic for 1933. I cannot do anything about the rest.

Maybe the OP will post a request on the coin catalog forum?

I could do that, are there instructions anywhere? Admittably I have not done that before

Thank you!

I'll do this one. You can do the next one you find.

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic170220.html