Leaderboard

Well I sent my prize and joy, 1935 raised edge proof crown over to France to be graded, and I'm really happy with the grade, PR65 Deep Cameo: http://www.pcgs.com/cert/83612621 I was maybe expecting 63, 64 at a push, but amazed with 65 Also had my 1804 BOE graded at AU50 which I'm pleased with also: http://www.pcgs.com/cert/83612623 Just wanted to share

I have just brought my second hammered coin, this Charles I shilling from Lloyd Bennett. (My first hammered was a Charles I Halfcrown from LCA). Size Approx. 30 -31.50 mm. Weight 5.91g. Group E, type 4.1 var., Sharp F5/1, mm. anchor to the right. Ex:- Alan Morris (bgt.Mark Senior.2/99). Lloyd graded it as better than VF/VF. It's now in the post and I look forward to receiving it tomorrow. I like it a lot because of its well struck portrait. There are no weak areas and grade is decent too. I would have preferred the flan to be rounder but the shape is good enough for me. I am obviously still very inexperienced with hammered as this is only my second example. Any comments, advice, opinions most welcome and appreciated. Right now a decent hammered coin tend to get me a lot more excited than a milled coin of comparable price!

Not British but a nice lamination flaw on this Swedish 2 öre:

I have read the 'c' in pence is slightly different and the waves to the right are more straight. I'm not sure of anything else.

Although I can no longer see the CGS population report, as I have not paid a fee, I believe the 1855 variety with the 3 dots has been documented by them as their variety PE.V1.1855.03, and described along the lines of “a raised dot giving the appearance of a 3rd colon dot after FID”. I attach a close up picture of one of my own pieces for reference. Unlike some dots which we see on Victorian pennies which are clearly unintentional, and result from flaws or specks of dirt getting into the strike, I think that the top dot near the rim on this 1855 is most likely an intentional repair to the weaker ‘clogged’ half-dot seen immediately below.….but a repair done rather badly. This would not be unreasonable as several other examples of repaired / re-struck colon dots are seen in this series. I prefer to think of features which are created by a person, either intentionally or unintentionally to be regarded as true varieties rather than random dots which are not man made. I realise that this will no convince those with an 1897 dot or 1875 canon ball penny!

Some coppers i have not posted before that are quite scarce. 1841 Bramah 2a flaw to 4 1843 No colon 1855 Extra colon after FID.

A true brockage surely is where the coin stays in the die and one side is therefore struck twice as both an obverse and reverse. That's slightly different from a double obverse/reverse.