1949threepence

Hi Ian - if it were purely the angle of the camera then it would not be as obvious to the naked eye as it is. If you like, I could send it to you for closer examination, to see what you think. Let me know. ETA: under magnification there is definitely some grime, but I'm not convinced that would distort the impression to such an extent.

Unfortunately not, and although I can find the item in e bay, it won't let me enlarge the thumbnail. In hand the difference is quite definite.

Here are the two 1841 colon after REG obverses I have. To me there are clear differences between the 1 and 8 when comparing the two.

By the way, how times change.....

Hi Ian, Was just about to start this when I realised the battery on my tablet had run right down. Now on charge. I'll do tomorrow. Just looked again and, unless I'm seeing things, there is a palpable difference between the 1 an 8 date spacings on the two coins. Maybe an optical illusion.

That's actually a very very fair question. Besides coins, another one of my interests is the weather and the number/location of weather recording stations does seem slightly biased to this observer. Many decades ago (and over a century ago in fact), one of the recording stations which time and again came up with top readings, was Raunds in Northamptonshire. There is still a legit weather station there, and it still registers interesting readings (see link), but you NEVER ever hear that name mentioned for readings or records. Raunds is a perfectly reasonable semi rural South Midlands weather station, typical of many which day in and day out do a great job. But not a single word do you ever hear of them. I mentioned Raunds as it has been famous in the past. But there are others scattered over that area and the Home Counties, such as Rugby, Milton Keynes, High Wycombe, Banbury, Meriden, Buckingham and Oxford - all of which are locations which can reasonably said to represent England as a whole, and are in non biased locations. But again, you never hear mention of them (occasionally Cambridge crops up, such as for the previous record high in 2019) There are also numerous officially recognised recording stations in the North of England, which again you rarely hear about. Although with that said, we did hear of one on Monday night - Emley Moor, which recorded the highest ever minimum temperature of 25.9. That was surprising given the Northerly location. It's quite high ground as well, and that may have caused a bias. The old ITV tv transmitter at Emley Moor was brought down in March 1969 by a thick coating of rime (layer of ice caused by persistent freezing fog), which caused its weight to increase massively on the side facing East. But back to your original point, yes, I think there might well be a logical case for excluding airports, especially Heathrow and Gatwick as their readings could well be biased upwards given their urban locations and concrete bases. All weather stations use Stevenson screen thermometers, but what they're sited on, and their proximity to other influences, may well make a difference. There was bias in the old days as well. Many earlier records were set in Camden Square, London, which was an urban location later considered too biased to be meaningful. Yet they use Heathrow? link to Camden Square info Photo of Camden Square as it was when used as a weather station:-

Good luck with that one.

My earlier colon after REG has the die crack through the 8 as well as the other flaws you refer to above. The 1 and 8 of date also look closer together.

Interesting that in this heat, even if you have the boiler on for just 15 minutes, the water is still hot 12 hours later. Incredibly, even the saucepan I boiled some potatoes in earlier, was still hot 6 hours later. Obey your thirst folks.

I've just looked at mine through a strong loupe, and there is absolutely no sign of any such hairline. Nor, interestingly, is there any trace of an upward die crack through the 8 of the date, as there is on some. There is, however, slight evidence, barely visible to the naked eye, of the common die clash mark, which shows up between the bottom of the Queen's pony tail and her neck. Often this is very visible and easily seen.

Forget "superb toning, let's have "excellent cabinet friction"

Very fair comment.

The other (very obvious) point is that any friction from sliding about will occur on one side only, typically the obverse, as the date side will be upwards.

Yes, I've often wondered if it's auctioneer's/dealer's hype for actual circulatory wear acquired prior to collection status. In most cases it probably is. Even if genuinely believed, they're only making a subjective guess. There's no way they can possibly know for sure.

I too have read the same thing and that it primarily affected silver dated 1920 - so just one year. The first year when the silver composition fell to 50%. Although there appears to be no confirmation - purely speculative as you say.

No hesitation in posting this 1841 colon after REG. Superb coin, a/UNC with lustre, and a great strike.

Thanks for the advance info, Ian.

Yes, I think there has to be a lot of truth in that. i'd also agree that the period 1858 to 1863 is worth a book in itself. Incidentally, high time we had a new book on pre 1860 copper, including the top quality pics that are easily available today. Can't quite understand why we've had several on post 1860 bronze, but none the other way. Maybe it's a period which never quite captured the numismatic imagination.

Plus some very rare coins are literally an impossibility (up to known current specimens) to get above fine, let alone high grade. Such as the F90 and F169.

Bruce, you might find this information from Michael Gouby, quite useful. In it, he discusses the 1858's at some length, including the variety accepted in some quarters as an 1858/3. However, he does not believe it to be so. Speaking personally, as we definitely don't know what it is, I don't think we can rule out that it might be an 1858/3.

100% agreed.