I wanted to dwell on this 1882 Obverse / Reverse pairing, and get some more views. Just to recap:-
Gouby has the pairing as 1882Ha (P + p), plus overdate types 1882Ka (P + p) and 1882Kb (P + p)
Freeman has the same die pairing as F111 (11 + M), but goes on to say in his footnote 23 that
“All specimens of no. 111 believed to be 2/1. Only small sections of the ‘1’ are visible , as it seems to have been partially erased from the die”
I have just spent a bit of time checking my previous sales of this die pairing, and find that I have owned 3 examples of Gouby type 1882Kb (P +p).
Below are high-definition pictures of the overdates on 2 of these 3 coins, which I believe is an exact match with the small picture bottom right on Page 78 of MG’s book:-
The red arrow shows an extra bit of the underneath 1 which I think can sometimes be seen on better examples. Whilst I do not have a high-definition picture of the 3rd piece which I have owned (now sold) I can still see that the bit I have highlighted in yellow (on the Alderley piece) can be seen on all 3 coins, and I feel this is a distinctive / fairly obvious feature of this type.
I can also see from my past sales that I have sold many more examples of 1882 (11 + M) which have no evidence of an underlying numeral 1. Bearing in mind that the overdate is, in my opinion, fairly easy to see I am very surprised that Freeman believed there were no examples that did not have the overdate. If he had a number of 1882’s in his sample, with this die pairing, then surely some would not have had the overdate.
Gouby, on the other hand, has 1882Ha as Rare and 1882Ka/b as Extremely Rare, which I think reflects my own observations.
My second thought on this type is regarding 1882Ka; a full date picture can again be found on Page 78 of Gouby’s book.
Whilst Gouby does not show a full date picture of his type 1882Kb I can see by examining my own pieces that the position of the numerals (and H) on my examples of 1882Kb seem to be in identical locations to the example of his 1882Ka. I also notice that the 1882Ka on Page 78 has all numerals (and H) doubled, and that there is additionally some ‘flawing’ between the base of the numeral 2 and the outer curve. This has left me thinking that Ka and Kb may both have been struck from the same die, but that Ka is just struck later after the die has become ‘flawed’, and that this flawing perhaps gives a false impression of a different (second) 2/1 amended die.
I have looked at Richard’s ‘englishpennies’ website but see that he does not distinguish between Ka and Kb types. I am wondering if a member a) actually owns the Ka piece pictured in Gouby’s book or b) thinks they may have an example of this Ka variety.
Apologies to any member who does not own Gouby’s book for reference!