Leaderboard

Since finding this place I've very much appreciated the wisdom and knowledge on display here. I'm hoping that in due course that I might be able to contribute some of my own! I started collecting in the last years of pre-decimal coinage, and with my dad put together a collection which gave us a lot of pleasure. I like to think that most of the good ones I found when I slipped behind the scenes at the Post Office where my mum used to work a couple of days a week; truthfully most of them probably came via my dad's Civil Service colleagues and friends! But I do vividly remember finding my 1950 threepence, completing the date run - not at all easy towards the end. We moved on to stamps, which was also fun but I never loved them in quite the same way. Following the demonization of our historic coinage our collection spent almost 50 years hidden away, but when I officially retired (kind of) I began to think about reinvigorating it. There were some easy quick wins, such as filling date sequences we hadn't really been committed to (or perhaps were raided by me when my pocket money was proving inadequate 😧). Our pre-1920 silver collection was particularly threadbare, and I was lucky to acquire examples of many of the types while the silver price was still reasonably sensible. But for me nothing in the coin world beats rummaging through boxes and bowls of coins. Although sometimes it's quickly clear that I'm not going to find much, I'm often surprised at some of the coins that dealers are ready to throw into their bargain bins. Enhancing the collection has also proved to be a fine way of remembering my dad (d.1997) in a very meaningful way. The collection definitely remains "ours".

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.

Thanks for all the kind words. @Paddy I've never actually bought a bulk lot of coins, and I'm thinking it's something I need to experience! Doing your hunting at someone's shop you don't risk being saddled with stuff you don't want, but perhaps I'm playing things a bit too safe. @Peckris 2 I have a comparable tale from much earlier this year. I was at one of my local antiques centres where I'd been rummaging the lower grade pennies for a while, finding very little. I moved on to some of the other offerings and gathered together a nice little group. Before I left I thought I'd dip my hand in the pennies one more time, and out came a 1951. You can't beat that moment of disbelief!

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 !!

Phew, thank goodness you don’t, this fella may have been a little too much for you!

I remember switching from bags of pennies and halfpennies from banks to looking through brass 3ds. There was a 1949 in the first bag I looked through!

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.... 😕

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 😉

When I started working in 1974 I could afford to buy a few pennies from one of the mail order coin dealers. In those days you did not get a nice colour photograph of the coin you wished to buy, but rather just a brief description on a typed list. I bought this penny for a few pounds. I was a little disappointed when it arrived because of the black spots on an otherwise good looking coin. I was, and still am puzzled as to what caused these marks. The uniform pattern looks like marks left from a pierced metal tray

https://headsntails14.wordpress.com/ Ah. I got the name wrong, didn't I !

Hello and welcome. Ive been here only a short while but learnt loads, its a great place to be 👍

Welcome @Avocet! I too like nothing better than sorting through a big box full of old coins, both British and foreign, finding the few gems and identifying them in the appropriate books. Sadly these days the bulk lots in the auctions go for quite a lot of money, so more difficult to get them at an affordable price. Good luck with your future hunting.

I told my wife this looked great and she suggested I was losing it....

I have to say I was very happy with the result of the earliest sale in LC. Found in a lot of pennies covered in soil bought locally. I paid £10 including flower pot on the grounds I wasn't going to clean all of them up for him just to find bugger all. I overpaid for the soil though. :)

Several of the his claimed discoveries (e.g. the 1875H and VIGTORIA pennies) have turned out to be not what he thought, so maybe it's just newbie enthusiasm.

In another post he mentions he’s a beginner, 12 weeks into the hobby. Fair play that he’s navigating all the auction archives, retrieving past sales, in-touch with all the literature, and holding his own in the variety conversations, all in such a short window. You simply have to take your hat off to him/her, that’s very, very impressive!

I had thought the same - one great rarity would be very lucky, two would be incredible, more than two seems ... odd?

You seem to be talking about this coin on two threads , it really only needs one. How about photos so it can be verified and included on the database, which will make it more attractive. It really is quite hard to believe that you have found all these great rarities in only a couple of weeks when hundreds of highly knowledgeable collectors are looking out for them - you haven’t just bought someones collection? Are you a collector or a dealer? Most of us on this forum know a fair bit about each other (including in many cases our actual names) as members of quite a small community. At the moment you are just a moniker. Jerry

Here you go @Coinery! Sorry for the delay.

I wouldnt lose any sleep over it as NOT one 👍.

Not if use of the alternate letter was intentional, as I explain above it’s just part of day to day maintenance of a die. And also difficult to prove it’s not just partial die fill of the lower limb of the ‘E’ . But it’s a grey area in that some collectors enthuse about mis-strikes and die flaws, incidental dots and dashes and the like. To my mind a true variety is a deliberate planned change in the design on the die, the flan (weight, metal composition, polishing ) or a significant accidental change through the act of man. Obvious date width differences might just creep in in the later years when die to die differences were rarer. And not all variations even if rare attract a premium, desirability to collectors plays a major part along with whether published or acknowledged by an accepted expert in the field (Freeman, Gouby, Sessions et al). Jerry

Although the mintage of Maundy coins is not high, they do mostly survive in good condition as they are not circulating coins. In addition, Maundy coins are minted every year. I don't think Maundy "odds" (i.e. not in complete sets) are considered to be rare.

It's not the thinness - it's the recessed area as you say. On the left coin you can clearly see a hollow surrounding the ear which is absent on the Unc example.

I thought the ganga dynasty started with bob marley in Jamaca

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.

I completely agree about the common coin in uncommonly good condition being something to relish. The 1873 shilling I sold to Geoff Cope when he was desperate to find something to buy close to the end is one in question. I bought it from Andrew Wayne's sale at London Coins 110, lot 1046, 1873 shilling where I paid just over 200 for it. However, all good things come to an end, and with a date run of 3rd young head shillings still in the collection all in similar grade and toning due to being a bit too nice to sell, a decision had to be made when I needed funds for something else, so it went in the trays for about 3 years. Couldn't sell it for love nor money because everyone thought it wasn't worth book price, which I was asking. Sold it to Geoff for book price (about 500 at the time) who said 'Ooh, that's nice. I'll have that one' and lo and behold, a few years later sold for CHF 5500, or about 10 or 11 times what he paid as a top pop 66. So at least two other people appreciated the quality and it was worth at least most of that at today's prices. The colours on it were genuinely superb and the best of the bunch, but I made the decision to get rid of all bar and keep the higher graded and near perfect 1874. Reminds me of Non's 1843.

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.

This similar low grade example sold on ebay a few days ago for over £70

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

??

I believe the legend of your coin is 10cf rather than ab, though there are the occasional exceptions. Your coin is missing a lot of information at key points, but the crown, whilst double-struck, is very much in the 10cf5 camp for me, with the left arrowhead ornament leaning left, and the left fleur in its broken configuration. See Blunt’s crown 5 examples here (one with the broken left fleur), with yours (next post) for direct comparison.

It is probably confusing for the uninitiated, but the genuine 1775s have what looks like coarser hair strands than the 70-74 coins. End assumption? Looks different, so must be wrong. To clarify - the late coins have a virtually straight line from forehead to tip of nose, but the earlier ones have a distinct kink in the road.

Very poignant and caught me out for some reason. I’m 60 next year and been reflecting a lot upon the last 40, so maybe something to do with that?

Probably be worth more if it was a forgery. I have never come across any W&M copper forgeries. Come to think of it I haven't seen any Wm III copper ones either (though I have got one in lead from what looks like genuine dies). There were so many made at that time (£700 tons of copper coin made 1694-1701) that there was not the shortage of the mid- to late-18th century that triggered that huge production of copper forgeries.