I have always wondered why commemorative coins that have two dates (like the year of death of the person that is being commemorated and the issuing year of the coin) are described for having no date at all? For example, the coin below is struck to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Karl Marx' year of death. Karl Marx died in 1883 and his death was commemorated 100 years later, in 1983. 1983 was also the year this coin was struck and since '1983' literally appears on the coin then why is this coin still described for having no date? It's just so confusing...
Yes, I think you're right. They have the "no date" when the minting date is not actually written on the coin. Like the Canadian centenary. They have the dates 1867-1967 written on them, but the date by itself is not on the coin. So in the coin sheets it's written as "No date (1967)"
Quote: "neilithic"Yes, I think you're right. They have the "no date" when the minting date is not actually written on the coin. Like the Canadian centenary. They have the dates 1867-1967 written on them, but the date by itself is not on the coin. So in the coin sheets it's written as "No date (1967)"
But I still don't know why that would make any sense. Since it's known that the coin is minted in 1967 and the year 1967 is also visible on the coin, so why would that make it a ND coin?
"For by telling them of many things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much, while for the most part they know nothing"
-Plato
Quote: "neilithic"They could have been minted in 1968 to celebrate the centenary in the previous year.
To me, two dates shows what's being commemorated, not the actual coin date.
I agree... Since I collect commemorative coins this pops up a lot. The coin has a year it was minted so we might as well list it . I can think of no real drawback to that
