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!

You need to stop this sort of thing right now !

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

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.

Never a dull moment on here. Always some drama 😆

Nothing super special about this piece, but I like how my camera caught it. Some good details for a circulation coin no doubt. Unfortunate small scratch on the beard, but barely noticeable admist the texture. This was my first good quality Edward VII that I bought, since then I've gotten a lovely 1904 Sovereign and a gorgeous 1902 matte proof shilling (alongside the long-set case, which I will complete in due course)

I 100% understand your point, though I have to say the fine ‘lines’ on the right-hand example look very different, and very suspect to me. Commendable that you’re embracing numismatics at this level, especially for someone of your age. Excellent stuff 🙏

Perhaps, but even the non-shiny one features the same/similiar hairlines across the fields - which could very well be a property of die polishing or even a treatment of the blanks before striking. I also would expect that polishing would cause damage to the design, creating weakness to fine features rather than just removing the matte texture, yet the design is fully intact and very sharp. I am trying to get my friend, who has a PhD in material sciences, to have a look to see if he can determine if this is a production or post production property, so fingers crossed he can find some time to do so.

If the coin to the right is the shiny version you speak of, you can’t rule out polishing or cleaning of some description? Your photos highlights hairlines running in multiple directions, seems odd for a museum coin, which was presumably taken into its collection straight from the press?

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

I was just taking a look at this man’s Public Works on the drop-down on Wikipedia…this man was prolific, what a sculptor he was! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Edgar_Boehm

Very unfortunate. It would be fascinating to put the face to the name. Joseph Edgar Boehm, however, was photographed quite a lot at least! And by the looks of it he may have been a model at heart 😂

It's a shame photography just missed William Wyon - died 1851.

Stunning! I LOVE that! 🙌

Well, if you can find it on Amazon, I would highly recommend it! It’s looked at impartially, investigating both its positives AND downsides, with some unexpected discoveries/findings!

I don't know who the merchant W&P was, but here's another one: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/135147031137?_trksid=p4375194.c102726.m162918 I found another one, but then couldn't find it again two minutes later...

Today I found this George IV Shilling 1826 has W&P stamped on it, I have the understanding this was done by company's as a way of advertisement its tidy job so I will be keeping it.👍

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.....

Thanks @Paddy I did see that forum when looking around yesterday after I posted already and thought the same. I'll re post later on and try my luck on there. Appreciate the quick reply :-)

I have messaged the seller - we will see how honest they are. I suspect the "Customer Service Person" at Ebay was an AI bot!

A WRL copy. Highlighted the stamp and circled it. Reported it and was told the listing is fine a customer service person has approved it. Maybe a few more reports will assist in getting it pulled. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/880004309094 Stu

In this example the letters, especially the W & A, and also the obverse legend is wrong for starters! Maybe a Class 5-style pellet on chest, not sure? I don’t have the coin in-hand, yet, but would probably be looking to sell it anyway. Can anyone share some insight into it? I know very little about the continental imitations themselves?

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.

Sorry I cant help, However..... interesting find....I will be waiting for the others to chip in with assistance 👍

Your copper penny is in fact NOT COPPER its made of an alloy called bronze

Definitely some date-widths (or differing tooth numbers on the entire obverse itself) going on there…clear differences imho! One caveat, however, my knowledge is seriously lacking in this area! Narrow-date top, wide-date bottom? Or is that too hopeful, too exciting?

So, between your coin and the others like Richard's, Paddy's, and the 49 others I looked at I didn't notice a difference in the lighthouse. Instead, the main difference was the fingers on the trident. The list of similarities I shared in my last post are identifying features between your coin and the single coin I found (1 of 50). These two appear to be the same, showing the same finger configuration and arrangement. The list of die markers possibly confirms that these two coins are from the same die. However, I don't know why the fingers look different on these two coins compared to all the rest. Could it be explained by something as simple as die wear or deterioration causing the deformed fingers seen on the majority? I don't know enough to say for sure. Hopefully, a member with more knowledge can offer some insights into the cause of this feature. Either way, I'm pleased you are happy with it!

This image shows the single coin I found out of 50 coins studied next to Citizen H coin. To further show they are the same I have circled the die characteristics seen on both coins; - Break in the linear circle just above the 1st N of Penny. - The aparent line in the exergue to the left of the 1. - The Kink in the linear circle to the left of the lighthouse and undersized teeth. - And the small die cracks shown on the teeth by Britannia's foot, between the two coins these defects are not exactly the same on both. And ofcourse the fingers on the trident.

Its hard to be sure from the images but is there a larger gap between the right hand prong of the trident and the linear circle on the 1/50 coin and Citizen H coin?

Mine matches the left hand version and @secret santa's, so I guess is the normal one:

On my own 1887 penny, her left hand index finger is also hideously deformed !

Crikey, that escalated. I'm used to seeing that kind of stuff on football forums, but never expected to see it on a coin forum. Nor hope to again.

@Citizen H when I was looking at your coin I noticed this: (The right image is your coin) There appears to be a difference in the arrangement of the fingers.

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).

Might just be the pictures but another difference could be the 9 in the top image looks closer to being closed and the other 9 looks more open.

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!

Get a room, you two...

I Nearly scrapped this one for being a ex mount ...on the reverse some rather nice initials have been sympathetically added circa 1887

Just butthurt you got called out and exposed for talking rubbish about looking at 1000 coins 🤣 It's fascinating to see you preach about the obligation to welcome new collectors in one breath, and then hurl insult because someone simply offered findings of 40 coins looked at 4 examples found.

You seem to be a somewhat stupid man or women and seem limited in your understanding of the rules of statistical analysis. It's not my job to teach you even the basics of modelling estimated numbers and I have little or no desire to so. You illustrated perfectly what is fundamentally a failure of this forum. Although I'm assuming you are new to It's values you may be an accomplished collector. But you need to consider a broader purpose which is to encourage and enhance the enjoyment of a past time common to those here. Unless the environment is welcoming and fulfilling one the joy of predecimal collecting for new visitors ir retuning ones will die. To me it matters not how you choose to approach your membership but being an ignorant stupid person only you have to live with. Your methodology is as flawed as your personality.