Leaderboard

1863 Slender 3 F44 Well I just can't believe my luck on this one, I never thought I'd ever manage to get my hands on one of these 🤩

This was a recent pickup in a USA auction, I like the condition of the piece, it being much better than most farthings of that era - but I enjoy the additional cuds on Charles II's nose and Britannia's right arm from the die breaking down. Also it appears as though the numeral 1 in 1675 was repunched - almost appears to have been repunched over a numeral 5!

Found another quite good condition coin from the hoard..... albeit 2 pence Maundy, George IIII, 1822, 😕 not sure I can cope with all of these good condition coins after a life time of manky worn out ones.... 😕

This one, on an F16, has always intrigued me. Ghosting of Victoria's face can be seen (as it often does) above Britannia's left knee, but there is also something strange going on with the border teeth. The series of pictures at the bottom show an overlay picture of border teeth, from the same coin, which I have made gradually transparent from 0% to 100% as go from left to right hand side. This shows that the marks through Britannia's knees are clearly from border teeth. I bought this coin at Heritage in 2013 (MS63 Slabbed), and it took me a long time to find another F16 like this, to prove that it must have occurred during the minting process.......rather than the coin being hit with something post-minting. I will show the pictures of that other coin immediately below, as this picture uses up my 500Kb allowance!!

This is just about the most extreme example I have come across !!! An 1862 penny Note the half circle on Victoria's back , its the shield from the reverse side . The extra ribbons are created from the folds in Britannia's. dress

Calm down everyone, nobody is accusing anyone of dishonesty or lying, or any any other form of undesirable attribute. It is a friendly forum, though I do seem to offend occasionally - not intentionally, but we are who we are and I might be a bit set in my ways to change. As Coinery wrote, it was intended as tongue in cheek, as a perusal of my similar previous posts with a similar emoticon would lead you to infer. All questions are valid, but with multiple questions on the doubling of characters already asked on this forum and replied to ad nauseum, I assumed that with over 160 posts, some of a similar nature, you had already explored that search option and done some background reading. A quick search of "doubled OR repunched characters" brings up over 600 posts, so lots of wheels have been reinvented over time. Apologies for any offence caused - it wasn't intentional. I am genuinely harmless, but rushed off my feet of late due to a fortnight in hospital with sepsis causing HMRC filing grief. And on another apologetic note. I give notice of apologies to Coinery for acquiring the Anchor over Key marked Elizabeth I halfpenny in the recent Noonans sale with the penny anchor punch. I think it might be big enough to fit a 2d, but haven't had time to explore yet. It also has lots of underlying detail from the previous state of the portcullis punch employed, so could be more useful than normal. I will send pics when I have time and probably drop in during the next few weeks if you are around as I have just had a change of tenant in Yeovil, so have to do some repairs. I assume it was on your list of things to acquire.

The double plume 1887 crown represents about 5% of the population. It is recorded and mentioned in a paper submitted to BNS blog but not yet published. Several of them were in The Thorburn Collection sold by Sovereign Rarities 23rd. Sep. 2025. notably lot 81

No way you’re new to this, your language and approach is not elementary, it’s very weird! I know it’s not helpful or constructive to say this but I am really struggling, I can’t pitch you at all.

It looks to me as if there was nearly a brockage, as the raised detail of the teeth is the incuse detail on the die. If a coin is not properly expelled between strikes, it will act as the die and leave an incuse detailed impression, because a die has the inverted relief, ie incuse is raised an vice versa, so to have raised 'incuse detail', it had to be a wrong-un, because the die would not have changed its relief and would strike normally, albeit off-centre. With several examples known, the detail must have been from a trapped coin.

Well, 1900 was currency. There was no 1901 crown. My understanding is that, much like in the US, people just didn't want to carry around the weight of the 25 g. coins. Here the casinos are the main reason they were in production as long as they were and were a big influence on the introduction of the Eisenhower dollar in 1971. Using the crown as the basis of a commemorative denomination was probably the best thing that happened to the coin. Of course, I don't tend to think they're too heavy ... Or too bulky... But then most things are paid for by me with the funny plastic card rather than from a bag of silver coins ...

Honest answer - absolutely not.

I can only real talk about my observations on copper or bronze pennies, as that is my major interest . I find that over stamped letters/ numbers are extremely common on coins up to about 1863 though some can still be seen through to the 20th century . The last I think being 1945. The ones that are of interest to me and I would guess a lot of collectors are the ones that are dramatically out of place or triple struck . Some examples below Triple struck Y quite sort after , note the G and D overstruck but of little interest Here's Y over Y dramatically out of place 8 over 8 And just look at this one !!

Does seem a bit excessive. Many of them have the same 43.173. or 43.172 IP address range. I'll see what I can do.

That's the man. Splash out on literature. Spend 3 beers worth on a book instead of 1. As an aside and not referencing you as a subject, it never ceases to amaze me how many people consider spending as much as a lunchtime beer with a snack on literature is viewed as excessive and wasted money, when what they spend on coins has several zeros added to the same amount. It seems weird to me that people frequently won't buy the required tools to give them the knowledge required to increase their collection value, which is what they are trying to achieve. Bizarre. Not everything is on the internet, and that which is, is becoming increasingly untrustworthy. Everybody needs to tread more carefully than they used to with AI. A potentially useful tool that you can be guarantee to be abused.

I like this one 😂🤣

Not quite sure what you're saying? The Mint stopped using 92.5% silver from 1920 as the price of silver during WW1 had risen to the point where it exceeded the face value of the coins being struck. Yes, it came down again a few years later, but the Mint were never going to reverse their decision. The same thing happened after WW2 when silver was abandoned altogether but this time it never came down to make using it for coins cost-effective. I'd treat YouTube videos with a large pinch of salt!

Those prove my point about it being easier to see on more worn examples - the ear on those is far better preserved than you'd expect looking at the obverse as a whole.

Sorry for the delay, it’s been a mad few days! Blimey, Rob, really sorry to hear you’ve been in with sepsis, that’s miserable. That’s a lovely halfpenny you have there, and at an excellent price, especially when the example I quote sold for £375. I did see it, but had my eye on something else. I know it’s nothing of the class of yours, but I picked up an anchor halfpenny not so long ago…plus very limiting resources are always going to force some difficult decisions. Yours is the same die as the Comber, Wilkinson & Lockett example and, what’s interesting, is what initially appears to be a double-strike of the portcullis, is actually the bottom half of it being re-entered, it’s identical on each coin. What’s also interesting, is that the oddities beneath your portcullis are less prominent on the Comber example, excepting a few dots here and there, most notably in the bottom 2 squares of the vertical righthand row. Equally the horizontal bar running under the anchor on yours, which possibly hinted at a key (if that’s what’s being referred to), is also not present on the other example. I wonder if some of what’s being seen on yours is the die becoming progressively damaged? Re your trip South, if I’m not on nights it would be great to catch up…there’s a lovely riverside Greene King pub, 1 minute off junction 13, if that suits you?

I think it has always been accepted that the Double Florin was a further step in the attempt to decimalise the currency, so it seems even more crazy that they started re-issuing Crowns at the same time as the DF. I suspect we will never know the reasoning.

Yeah, my bad - though the 1900 mintage was twice as high as the previous two years; theory: after Victoria died, they decided to use up the 1900 dies and carried on minting with them in 1901. That would indicate that if she hadn't died, there would have been currency crowns in 1901 and maybe 1902 if she'd gone on that long?

I'd agree - the reverse is no better than GF, but the obverse (under the tarnish) looks better; it's not easy to tell but I'd say AVF?

I accept the apology thanks. Maybe I was quick to get carried away. I know doubled or repunched characters are not of much interest I have learnt that. But some insignificant types or differences on coins have have been assigned freeman or gouby numbers and classed as more than insignificant although widely considered not real varieties. I dont have the all the book's and as far as I can see If one of the main specialist has written about a specific difference on a coin then it becomes something of interest. FYI i did exhaust searching for any written information about the coin in question. I'm quite happy doing my own research but if I can't find the a definitive awnser then I may ask the question. I started the question with I doubt it. I was just looking for confirmation of my own deduction thats all.

With all due respect to Rob, I too have noticed that he’s coming over as being a little less tolerant than usual…I think this could be, in part, on account of the gulf between his knowledge and the cerebral challenges he getting on this forum nowadays, if ever, to be fair! Top tip, though…as infirm, elderly, decrepit, grey, miserable and grumpy as he may be…he’ll be worth much more to your numismatic journey onside 😉

Dont know if anyone can help please? I am unable to reply to messages and cant log out ? When i try to log out it says something like " Account suspended " although obviously i am in it now and have been for a few days. Hopefully makes sense and anyone who has sent me a message i am not ignoring you and just unable to reply 👍.

I had not heard this determining key before. Thank you.

Clearly not fully au fait when it comes to numismatic knowledge. Why point out a heart shaped pinprick hole, probably due to a bubble in the flan or a rust spot on the die, when there's a bleedin' obvious die flaw covering the first W on the truncation (or is it a naval cannon mint mark?). I think we should be told. Maybe somebody would like to suggest the mint mark to her and sit back to see what transpires.

Great. A few weeks ago another that I sent to the USA was returned to me, no reason given. So I'm now a bit nervous sending to the USA. I've emailed you a PDF of the Irish book.

Good pictures, nice coin. It will tone well on a sunny windowsill , turned from time to time . Jerry

The light striations in the obverse fields indicate it might well have been wiped or cleaned in the past. As for polishing - is the mirror finish only in the fields but not the raised design (difficult to tell from those pictures)? If yes, then not polished, but if shiny all over then it most likely has been.

Hi Jerry, I was trying to show the mirror type reflection with the first picture. Also, it's definitely the genuine article 28.24 grams, specific gravity is bang on and sounds/rings like all my others. Cheers, Nigel

I wonder if it may be Father Andrew Alexander's collection? I made contact with my old school. Father Andrew's collection was passed to his brother on his death. I asked if they could pass on my contact details to the brother, but I have heard nothing since.

I suspect it may be related to the Irish obsidional currency , this article may give you a lead. https://oldcurrencyexchange.com/2015/09/03/obrien-rare-coin-review-confederate-catholic-rebel-money-coinage-of-1642-44/ Jerry

The coin was purchased prior to posting here.. To save you being party to any of it il refrain from posting questions about my coins here.

The repatriation has more to do with Trump's sticky fingers than any "gold standard" since there is nowhere near enough gold in the world to run the modern economies. Xi is far more interested in getting the Yaun turned into the standard currency rather than the dollar, especially for buying oil.

The recessed ear is a three-dimensional phenomenon, but most photographs are taken from directly above. With a coin in the hand I'm sure we all look from a variety of angles without thinking about it. With the images above I purposely used an angle to help accentuate the contours. It might be interesting to look at a similar view of a near uncirculated coin. Not to be found in my collection sadly!

If you think of the ear as an ellipse, the feature I find most readily identifiable is a crease running along the line of the shortest axis. Well-worn examples of a 1915 and a 1916 to illustrate: Both of these pass the broken tooth test. Note that the tip of the ear remains distinct despite the considerable wear.

Better than EF for me, contact marks aren’t so much of an issue as scratches and other damage from circulation. You can always be caught out by photos, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was graded MS 62ish. Price at auction is so unpredictable, you could offer it at a fixed price of somewhere midway between EF and BU in the catalogue but be prepared to wait, or nearer EF price for a quicker sale. Jerry

My most extreme die clash .Apologies, not a penny (1696 Halfpenny) .

Good practice for me. I dug out my copy of The Standard Guide and looked at it and you pictures. I think that I'd call it (UK system) GF or just shy of (US) VF. The obverse shows a flattened ear but you can still see the front and rear edge of the bald spot. The reverse seems a bit more worn - the rein is disappearing on the neck but the sword is still quite clear. Lots of the high points having been hit. Anyone else think I'm off my rocker? (Or should I grab one of my 1935 crowns and get on one? 🤣)

Personally it looks more like an S punch given the visible serifs on the top loop and half the number of serifs on the bottom loop, with the line joining the ends an afterthought. In Errorland, all options are on the table until proven wrong with a concrete explanation. Plenty of small S punches (including broken pieces used for reinforcing characters would be available from when DEFENSOR, GVLIELMVS or GEORGIVS were in daily use, or alternatively from DECVS on the collars. If you have a micrometer, you could measure the height of the 'S' and compare with the collar on a YH crown. It would have to predate the gothic characters used on the florins and crowns. Probably this could be corroborated by examining the RM museum's supply of remaining punches from the time before the date on the coin. If anyone has a copy of Hocking to hand, maybe they could advise if any are listed? I have had a few 1861 halfpennies with rev. G that have the same offset and a quick perusal of the farthing images suggests the same phenomenon could exist here too. The curves in the groundline base will be of the same size as the diameter of the punch shaft from which the reduced size letter was ground out and formed, the force applied for entering the character being sufficient to ground it on the blank's field.

Cool. I always thought that it would be cool to be out and about town with a full one of these But also a full one of these My understanding is that each spring load holds 5 of each denomination so 5 3d, 5 6d, 5 1/-, 5 2/-, 5 2/6, 5 half sovereigns & 5 sovereigns would give quite the jolly time on the town in an era (say 1900) where a pint of stout was 3d Oh, no, I don't own these but if it were back in the day, I would!

It was probably a badly formed planchet .

Whatever. Rob be onside or dont couldnt give a monkey's.

Rather than missing waves, I'd say that it's the exergual line that's (partially) missing, probably damaged post-mintage.

there are a few where a small ish premium can be gained the 1850 farthing 5 over much lower 5 comes to mind

earlier profile 72

and a 74 for comparison