Ansei Kosuge or Meiwa Kameido Sen? Japan Mother Coin Question. [solved]

Hello everyone! I’ve attached pictures below of a coin in my collection I have that I’d like some information on. I know it to be a Japanese mother coin for an iron issue, but I am unsure whether it would be a Meiwa Kameido or Ansei Kosuge issue. Hartill’s book doesn’t give too much info on the distinction, and I wish I had had more time to take measurements.

I appreciate any assistance anyone can provide!

Thank you,

Harrison

If you are deciding between H4.203 and H4.217, from the hook on the 永 and from the shape of the 通 head, I would think the rubbing image of 4.217 is much closer to your coin.

fairfield

If you are deciding between H4.203 and H4.217, from the hook on the 永 and from the shape of the 通 head, I would think the rubbing image of 4.217 is much closer to your coin.

Dear fairfield,

Thank you for your input - that is a good point. I didn't pay close attention to the Ei, and I appreciate your perceptiveness. 

I know that Hartill's book isn't exhaustive with varieties, but I imagine that Kosuge mother coins are much more common anyway. He mentions different reverse dimensions - I wonder if he is, in part, referring to rim size? The reverse rim on this mother coin is rather broad.

I think it would normally refer to the distance measured across the reverse face, starting and ending at the inside edge of the rim.  But if you check the Hartill rubbing images, you will see the two are nearly the same in this regard.  Hmmm.

On the other hand, the inner rim, i.e. the square (in the Tenpo Tsuho sen we call this the kaku), is wider and taller on 4.203.  It must be this.

I also looked at the images in the JNDA catalog, Hartill gives us the numbers (at least for the 2009 edition, but only the page number needs to be adjusted).  There they show only the obverse face.  The four sides of the obverse inner rim on JNDA 133.61 (dated there Meiwa 2) are much thinner than JNDA 133.72 (dated there Ansei 6).  The difference is more pronounced than you see in Hartill.  To be clear, now I speak not of the size of the inner square, but the width of the four lines that make the square.  I hope you follow me.

fairfield

I think it would normally refer to the distance measured across the reverse face, starting and ending at the inside edge of the rim.  But if you check the Hartill rubbing images, you will see the two are nearly the same in this regard.  Hmmm.

 

On the other hand, the inner rim, i.e. the square (in the Tenpo Tsuho sen we call this the kaku), is wider and taller on 4.203.  It must be this.

 

I also looked at the images in the JNDA catalog, Hartill gives us the numbers (at least for the 2009 edition, but only the page number needs to be adjusted).  There they show only the obverse face.  The four sides of the obverse inner rim on JNDA 133.61 (dated there Meiwa 2) are much thinner than JNDA 133.72 (dated there Ansei 6).  The difference is more pronounced than you see in Hartill.  To be clear, now I speak not of the size of the inner square, but the width of the four lines that make the square.  I hope you follow me.

I think I understand what you're getting at. I've briefly heard of “kaku” in respect to Tenpo varieties, and I know it can be very measurement-intensive (though I certainly haven't gone deep into them); it's very interesting that that quality has made it out into discerning 1 mon varieties. 

I very much appreciate you referencing the JNDA catalog - I will have to pick one up sooner or later. Hartill's rubbings really don't give much in the way of distinction, save for the dot on Ei you noticed. Thank you again very much for your help! 

You can also look for these.

"History and Guide to the Copper Cash Coinage of Japan," Robert M. Jones, Morris Publishing (2007)

Jones evidently did a single print run of 200 copies, all have now been sold by the author but they can show up on the resale market.  His rubbing images are traced back to an earlier work by Yoshinori Ogawa, it is a different path than Hartill.

“Catalog of the Japanese Coin Collection (pre-Meiji) at the British Museum,” Edited by Sakuraki et al., The British Museum (2010)

This has actual images.  There are public domain pdf copies but the resolution is low, you will probably find you want an original printed copy. 

To be fair, at least to my eye, others may be a better judge, Jones did not have one of your proposed coins; and, Sakuraki et al. had only copper alloy issues for the casting sites and time periods you first proposed.  But the more resources you have the better, right?