Leaderboard

Benedetto Pistrucci, arguably the most famous coin engraver, was born in 1783 and died 1855. He was 56 years old at the time of the first photographic portrait. Only two years before his death he was photographed by Arthur R Hamilton. This is, to my knowledge, the only time he was photographed - and could reasonably be the first photograph of a British coin engraver! Most of the images you will find are later (1870-90) reproductions of the original photograph - identified by the black/gray card they are mounted on. I am fortunate enough to be the owner of the original photograph from 1853, signed by the photographer - to my knowledge it is the only one made from the negative and thus the true original piece!

Henry v 1413-22 Quarter Noble Spink 1757Var. 1.71g Obverse: HENRIC REX ANGL FRANC within treasure of arches, stops of various shapes. Trefoil to left and mullet to right. Reverse: EXCVLTABTUR IN GLORIA (“He shall be exalted in glory”). Cross with lions in angles: lis in centre. Mullet to the right was to distinguish the kings new mint master Lewis John. Henry v’s first mint master. Appointed to the role on 14th April 1413. The trefoil was used as a periodic privy mark to identify a specific minting window die variation or administrative shift within the tower mint. The Annulets (small circles) placed around the arches served the exact same high-utility purpose as the ones next to the central shield or to top. They acted as a subtle internal code to identify the exact sub-series, die variation, and specific mint run. The “1757 Var” Designation: in British numismatics “1757” refers to the ID in the Spink standard catalogue of British coins. The “Var” (variety) means it features a distinct die error or sub type -specifically, a spelling variation, in the reverse Latin legend that reads EXCVLTABTVR instead of the standard EXALTABITVR, (“He shall be exalted in glory”).

You need to stop this sort of thing right now !

I can only suggest that when a brockage happens, the press is full of unwanted metal which in these cases shattered one of the flans with the remnant causing what is seen. The offending item did not bind to the full flan and fell off. It doesn't look concocted in either case, as the incuse legends are approximately correct for orientation, albeit displaced significantly in the first one.

Hello, I am in the midst of writing a relatively large article on the 1887 Jubilee Coinage - estimated to be about 600pgs in total. In the process of such research, I spent about a week at the Royal Mint studying about ~200 tools relevant to the coinage and a similiar number of coins. Unfortunately, it seems that the Mint did not retain the original plaster models designed by Boehm. It often had seemed to be suggested that the relevant item(s) had been destroyed - a fact that I could not bear to hear! Hopefully, continuing the research into plaster models, with some vague hope of finding something, I did come across a 2010 Baldwin's sale, auction 68, which sure enough had a plaster model of the Jubilee Head! Well, I contacted Steve Hill of Sovereign Rarities, who worked at Baldwin's who confirmed that the piece sold to a bidder in Australia, and was since resold in auction 100 of Noble Numismatics (an Australian based auction house) after failing to sell in auction 99. I am now trying to contact the owner of such a piece, though I am having difficultly identifying who may own it. Should anyone have an idea of who may own it, it would be greatly appreciated for this to be shared with me. To my knowledge, it is likely an Australian collector, perhaps someone with a focus on the Jubilee coinage. Similiarly, if anyone has any high quality images of the copper electrotype described in BNJ 1984 by Graham Dyer, please would you be able to share it with me! Kind regards, -Ashley

He would have said something like "I remember the old mismatics under Obama - they were rubbish, fake."

Thank you very much Stuart, very kind. That coin is pretty rare to see on the market too, in any decent condition, yours are the best that I have seen. And certainly I will share the files here as well as with PAS, and anyone with a use for them. New examples have slowed but still occasionally come out of the woodwork. I am also creating sheets for early and late Medieval English, and Scottish medieval coins. I will be sharing those too. All a work in progress, perhaps another month or so .. With kind regards David

Silver is always going to be better than gold for toning, due to the latter's relative resistance to chemical reaction. Toned gold is usually due to the copper mixed to produce the correct fineness. As you will be aware, left to its own devices and in a fairly clean environment, it will mostly turn black from silver oxide. Establish what the chemicals responsible for the colour scheme were and you probably have a good indicator of London's atmospheric constituents since Victorian time, though the toning stripe that looks like Britannia let one go, is probably from the fabrics found in a mint set. Though as always, a lot depends on the angle of the shot relative to light source. 15 or 20 years ago, I posted a picture taken one sunny day when I had a tray of Soho patterns on the desk, and the various colours reflected onto the ceiling enabled me to individually identify all the pieces using colour alone. There was a mixture of copper, bronzed, gilt and silver, but all were distinctively coloured. I think I lost the image a few years ago when photobucket went dysfunctional, so will have to wait for the sun to make another appearance unless someone can locate it on the forum. Having said all that, the one below is an oil painting in most lights and from most angles. Apologies to those who have already seen it.

Just thought I'd share this image of a pattern five shilling piece in gold from 1853 which I handled in the RMM. Keep in mind, contemporary records show that there was discussion in parliament around this time that the half sovereign should be abolished for being too small a denomination to be made of gold, and of course the Royal Mint decided to make a smaller gold coin in response!

I may have jumped the gun, labelling this an imitation sterling! I’ve since discovered there’s actually a known class 9a coin with an ANL error and pellet on the breast, which is footnoted as extremely rare. I’d need to get a look at it in-hand…I’d be hoping that the S is top-tilted (it currently looks like it could be a mix of serifs)! We’ll see

Never a dull moment on here. Always some drama 😆

I understand how a full brockage happens, but not how a mis-shaped partial occurs. Can someone enlighten me please?

I always like to see them, and have got better at Identifying them, but I have resisted collecting them. That is one huge rabbit hole to go down!

Because they know no better and want to believe what they see. Unfortunately, knowledge requires some input from the prospective purchaser in the form of reading up the subject before buying. To me and you it is simple, but that's because we are interested in the subject matter. For the uninitiated just randomly looking for things that appeal visually, it's not a great step to hit the buy button. Sad but true. Ebay can't police the content sufficiently to make a difference, so once again, it relies on the moral compass of the seller. There should be a useful statistic in there somewhere for a number for Mr. Average's honesty coefficient, not to mention the gullibility coefficient of the typical buyer.

Often when Una and the Lion's are mentioned, you first imagine gold! For me, it will always be this gorgeous silver pattern piece I had the chance to photograph. Stunning rainbow toning, never seen anything like it.

Hi all, I’m hoping to get some opinions on an 1873 Queen Victoria shilling with die number 32 that I recently found metal detecting in Victoria, Australia. The coin was recovered about 4 inches deep in soil in bushland on the outskirts of Bendigo. It weighs approximately 5.57 g and has a normal-looking milled edge. I’ve attached photos of the obverse, reverse, die number and edge. What has made me particularly interested is that I have been unable to find die 32 listed among the known genuine 1873 shillings in the published and collector die-number lists I’ve checked. The sequence seems to include 30, 31, then 34, 35, with 32 absent. However, Gary Oddie’s BNS paper on Victorian shilling counterfeits specifically records 1873 die 32 among the known contemporary counterfeits. That raises an interesting question: was the counterfeit copied from a genuine Royal Mint die-32 shilling, or was 32 only present on a counterfeit die? The coin appears struck rather than obviously cast, and at approximately 5.57 g it is close to the normal weight for a genuine shilling. The edge milling also looks regular, with no obvious casting seam, although I appreciate none of this is enough to establish authenticity. I’d be very interested to know: Has anyone here seen or recorded a genuine 1873 die 32? Does anyone have a photograph or record of the 1873/32 contemporary counterfeit referred to by Gary Oddie? Do the die number, date position, wreath and other reverse details on this coin look consistent with normal Royal Mint production? If it proves genuine, could this potentially be the first recorded surviving example of 1873 reverse die 32? Any thoughts or references would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, David Victoria, Australia

Yes, the Galata Guide has a 9a2 with the ANL error. I'm not 100% sure that is a pellet on the breast though, rather than just a slightly outsized pellet in the beading. The S on the reverse is badly worn, but the one on the obverse does look top-tilted to me. My opinion is that it's a 9a2 rather than an imitation sterling, but I have to admit that I'm not an expert on either series. Surprisingly (to me) though I've just counted 45 long cross in my collection. Only one sterling though.

It has a bit but its only a minuscule hole i think. It's looking promising for that rare one though Fingers crossed 🤞 Stu.

DrLarry has voluntarily left the forum, only his last comment above remains visible. Absence of Uniformity, it's not the first time you've rubbed someone up the wrong way. 👀 ___________________________________________________________ < line drawn under it.

You’ve finally got some scales 😃 Taking your weight, and using the criterion from the North article below, I’d say yours is an early issue (1280-1284?) Dublin farthing - Open Es & Cs and the clear wedge-tailed R of Rex. Whilst the reverse legend is weak, it does appear to me that there are both a D and an I starting in each quarter, making it Dublin (CIVI TAS DVBL INIE). I believe the only other mint for these farthings is Waterford (CIVI TAS VATE RFOR), so you can probably rule that out in this case…I’ll let you to decide what letters you see, it’ll be so much easier for you to confirm in-hand. https://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital BNJ/pdfs/1997_BNJ_67_4.pdf

Definitely just post mint damage as Chris says. I think someone back in the late 1800s actually suspected it might have been a forgery (it's not, but many were at the time) and has cut or chopped the flan to test. The metal displacement can be seen along the entire length of the cut on the top side of it (so chopped at an angle upwards from SW to NE) and subsequent circulation wear has smoothed it out a bit including blending it into the beads, and separating off the bottom serif of the I to make a big blob. Not a mint fault, I'm afraid. You're actually not far wrong when you say hit with an axe! More likely a chisel.

It's not actually a denarius as you'd think but a drachm. Here's a similar one...https://en.numista.com/235578 The legends are the giveaway with it.

I am very well acquainted with him! In fact, I worked with Sovereign Rarities on his auction last year, and have since remained in close contact with him! He did almost purchase the plaster model in 2010, but alas decided against it!

I think I can see the remains of "IMP TRAIAN ..." on the obverse, so Trajan? Reverse legend seems to have some Greek letters, so possibly Roman provincial.

https://ebay.io/m/Bvd8Q6 😬

Spot on. It could in theory be a class 1a2, 1a5, 1b1, 1b2 or 1c, but 1a2 is immediately ruled out because there is no square C or E and 1a5 because there is no stop after LVND. The others rely on observing a stop between S and R on the obverse (present on 1b1 and 1b2, but omitted on 1c). The round C and the R are clear enough, but is the gap between the two letters big enough for a stop? I'm not sure. In the end it doesn't really matter, because the coin is pretty much toast, but I enjoy getting as far as possible with these hopeless cases.

MS is MS, MS 60 is an un-circulated coin. Higher grades are more subjective with MS61 and higher attention is paid to strike, bag knocks, luster. toning etc. Wear and poor strike being very difficult to distinguish when it is slight. Also attention should be paid to the condition of the milling of the coin edge The whole point of TPG is consistency for valuation and comparing coins. The subject coin from the photo shows slight wear on the higher points and more correctly graded AU 55 - 58 or EF IMO. Personally I prefer the Sheldon as it gets rid of the abt. nearly + etc that are much more subjective. However it must be applied accurately to be of use. Having said that the book The Standard Guide to Grading British Coins is a good guide

My thoughts on the German forgery is that I reckon they had bigger fish to fry in 1945, than to bother themselves with bronze pennies

The visible lettering is too crude and close to the rim IMO. It looks more like an abused attempt at a cast copy to me. Any attempts at acid cleaning will thin the letters and reduce dimensions on all 3 axes if there is total immersion. The weight of a cast would obviously depend on the amount of metal poured into the mould, so I think not relevant in this instance.

I absolutely LOVE this one, and you only get to see the reverse, too…maybe they’re just being kind! Kind of Knight-like in shape, quite the piece of art https://ebay.io/m/Mck7Te

In the case of written text, I suspect it may have been underneath a piece of blotting paper or at least something as adsorbant as bog-roll. That was the only way I could rationalise my 1773 halfpenny on a spread flan with Basing House plus some indecipherables written in the hand of H Webb. The above could equally be due to someone making a poster. Anything written or pressed onto newsprint with excess ink is likely to pass through quite easily given the paper quality.

Interesting and educational read, here, on the counterfeiting of these shillings by Gary Oddie, just in case anyone’s interested! https://britnumsoc.blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/188-cft-commonwealth-oddie.pdf

Well spotted Mr G. Maybe my kids weren't so silly to suggest I sign up for the Biobank Alzheimers Accelerator Project after all. TBH, I'm not sure it needs to happen quicker anyway, but hey-ho. I had completely forgotten about that, but claim mitigating circumstances as I had just driven to the other end of the country through the night to look after the grandkids in Plymouth due to a family bereavement on the other side and not bothered going to bed afterwards. Hopefully get some sleep tonight when I can switch off.

Welcome @David WSGG. I can't see anything wrong with your coin, so I would say is genuine. Die numbers are a bit of enigma. The lists that have been generated are not from the RM and merely represent those that have been identified by various collectors. As has been discussed on here before, the lists are not expected to be exhaustive, new ones are occasionally being found. There are not many ardent collectors or collators of die numbers, so a new discovery does not create as much excitement as a new variety of, say, a penny. I believe the list you have referred to is this: https://www.coins-of-the-uk.co.uk/dieno.html which does indeed miss out the 32 for 1873. Tony Clayton, who runs this page, would probably be the most interested in your discovery, but I can't seem to find an email address for him on his pages. Maybe someone else on here knows it? Ah - just found an email: tony@tonyclayton.org.uk

He's was certainly talented! Especially given his short life time too!

Not seen it. Thankfully our TV has been on the blink, losing signal sync recently and giving us both the opportunity to not bother filling our minds with garbage. Maybe a repair tomorrow.....

Many thanks for your thoughts, Coys, much appreciated! You may be absolutely right on all counts…it would be easy to see how just the slightest flattening of that bead/pellet could convince anyone that it is indeed a pellet! The jury is out for me at the moment. The little fishtail serifs on the reverse S do suggest to me that we’d be looking at a mule if the obverse S is top-tilted? There are a few different possibilities in the SCBI 39, and the coin should be in-hand shortly to verify. It was a throwaway coin in a small bulk lot, so the pictures are not great.

I'd say EF myself. "I can imagine loads are around in VGC being kept as a "Ooooooooooh this will be worth loads in years to come!?!" so not expecting a huge value on it...." There were certainly collectors back then, but tended to collect hammered and early milled. Even by 1926 (the date of Spink's Milled Coinage) coins of Edward VII and later were considered too modern to be of interest, and 1887 collectors or even members of the public would have put them aside purely as mementoes, no thought they would be worth anything in years to come. In that condition I'd rate it about £40+ if the colour is good (not what the photo shows).

I'm no expert on halfpennies - I created the site in lockdown for something to do and would never suggest that it's an exhaustive source of info on halfpennies. I will add something about these colons once the position is clear.

Awesome find, 👍😀

ah...! 🤔 it was a surf of the Google Trajan brought up "Reverse: COS V P P SPQR OPTIMO PRINC. Arabia shelf on the left, carrying branch and cinnamon sticks, at your camel feet" it didn't make much sense to me but hey, who am I to over think these things 🤷🏻‍♂️, Stuart and Paddy have been of great help to me as always, incorrectly its been referred to as a Denarius almost everywhere, Numista (many thanks Stuart) has been a great help, they have it as a Uncertain Arabian Roman city... Script in Greek....as recognised by Paddy, from the year 112. it seem to be quite high as a rarity and Silver, Its very useful to learn these things and write all this down so I can put this away and rediscover without fear of thinking what the Heck is that?? Greatly indebted to you all, so once again many thanks 🙏🏻

a bit of looking around armed with the Trajan name....Ive found it turns out to be a Trajan Denarius, 110 A.D. on the reverse Arabia Shelf waving a branch and carrying cinnamon sticks, Camel to the left. still looking around but 110 A.D. wow! 😲 many thanks all for the imput i'd never been able to found this out with out the help 🙏🏻👍

As you say, this is a short-cross London penny of Henry II…minted by PIERES ON LVND

Certainly looks like transfer of newsprint to me.

I know the mint was closed for relocation and reworking of the dies to improve quality in 1650, but there were coins minted for other denominations…were there definitely no shillings? I’m 99% certain this is a 6 that’s drifted off flan, but thought I’d ask, just in case someone had heard of a random die that may have been used as part of a trial?

I'm pretty confident these are both modern replicas. Yours, Stuart, looks like someone 'aged' it to try and pass it off as genuine (vs just contemporary).

I think even a couple of the brass threepences came out very washed out, almost greyscale like, but everything was colour and the content is the same for this new colour p/b version.

Get a room, you two...

It screams fake at you. A mint mark in the shape of a pomegranate would be a good start. It is found after MARIA on the obverse, and if present on the reverse is after VERITAS.