Leaderboard

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.

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

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 !!

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 😉

It wasn't totally abandoned - there was a DF pattern done in early George V so they must have toyed with introducing them again.

Not only did the Double Florin prove unpopular at the time, it still seems unpopular now. Whereas a Victoria crown in reasonable condition will make much more than melt, a similar double florin can still be picked up at scrap or even less here in the UK. Anyone looking to make a long term investment in silver would do well to keep an eye out for cheap DFs at the moment.

A lot of bar workers wouldn't. That's why they stopped using them as were frequently passed off as a crown at a financial loss to the barmaid through deductions in her wages. A sort of play on an anecdote I experienced on more than one occasion whereby an old landlady in a pub in Oldham which did a particularly nice pint of Oldham bitter, had a terrible habit of giving you £4.02 change for a pound note after you had bought 7 pints which cost 14p a pint at the time. This is 50 years ago and she is long dead, but everyone remembered her for her reputation, even in a conversation with a local I had a couple years ago! I wish I could remember the name of it, but is probably long demolished - or a fast food outlet.

I had a chat the other day about these things..... payment on phones and plastic cards....by 2030 all coins are obsolete....black market etc still use coins... old silver / gold coins come into own and put back into service...could this be why I started hoarding 30 odd years ago? 🤔 always good to have a plan B,....C,D,E...etc etc etc....

Agreed, though there are exceptions like the New York 1960 crown which - though not a proof - has "shiny" fields and commands a premium over the normal ones. And don't get me started on 'mirror' fields! I remember bidding for and winning a complete 1887 Unc silver currency set at Warwick which more than one dealer there dismissed as cleaned. As the mirroring was in the fields but not on the raised elements of the design and legend, it obviously hadn't been cleaned. Oh well, my gain...

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.

If that was my question I would have given that answer a haha, but I guess not everyone shares my sense of humour.

another cupboard sort out found these coin holders hiding, looking at my tags I bought theses in 2023, put away and forgotten about..........., I bought these from a local fair and was included with 3 silver vesta cases, thought id show these as they are coin related, Ive always thought that they were sovereign holders both hallmarked for 1911, 👍

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 .

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

Since I have been accused/suspected of being dishonest and or a liar here my back is up. I'm just passionate about my new interest. Sorry if that's intolerable.

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

Your call, m’friend! Though I could argue that, in the context of this post alone, Rob’s comment appeared very much tongue-in-cheek to me? That’s how I interpreted the bandit emoticon at least?

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

Only if it was struck on a rectangular blank, like yours.

earlier profile 72

earlier profile 71

earlier profile 70

and a 74 for 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.