secret santa

I wasn't aware that Gouby had produced specialised editions for monarchs following Victoria.

A "must have" publication for penny collectors.

Sadly, I think you're absolutely right. I imagine most penny collectors became interested during their school years in the sixties and are now in their twilight years (me included) and it seems that the interest in copper and bronze will fade away with them. I shall probably sell my collection next year and am resigned to losing money on many if not most of the coins.

Interestingly, I bought a heavy 1967 penny (13.43 gm) at London Coins auction in September 2013 along with a couple of decimal errors for £95. Mint Errors (3) Penny 1967 struck on a thick flan and weighing 13.43 grammes EF, Decimal Two Pence 1978 uniface Obverse only NEF, Decimal Penny 1976 VF with raised unusual collar.

I wonder why Freeman included the 1897 dot in "The Bronze Coinage of Great Britain" but not the ONE ' - maybe because the latter looks like an extraneous piece of metal whereas he postulates that the perfectly round dot on the 1897 might be some kind of identification mark. Either way those two example are much easier to describe concisely, just as you have done, than the other spurious dot types which can appear anywhere on the coin.

In my humble opinion, varieties are created by the design process, i.e. the decision to strike a coin from a selected pair of obverse and reverse designs. Any anomalies created by the minting (or striking) process are exactly that - anomalies, collectibility of which is in the eye of the beholder. The confusion was probably started by Freeman's decision to grant a variety number to the 1897 Dot penny. As I say, just my opinion. And the debate will probably go on forever. On my websites, I refer to variations to a particular "variety", such as variation in the date spacing, as a "sub-variety" whereas Gouby assigns specific identifiers. You pays your money......................

Things like this can be collectible without being a "variety". If we start calling them varieties, it invites anyone with a hammer and chisel to start creating their own varieties.

Your picture is too blurred for comment but here are my own pictures from my website: Single exergue with waves almost touching the line and double exergue with waves clear of the line.

I see the replicas are re-appearing. This one purports to be a proof: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/206353463647?itmmeta=01KVAT58VF6ZRR0WDV2XM92C2E&hash=item300b9ff95f:g:u3EAAeSwkcBqMm2A&itmprp=enc%3AAQALAAAAwGfYFPkwiKCW4ZNSs2u11xDqKzVvcjzhpKWp0V99B8G8QpHw2n7Lx%2BwMDY0sBLDshtsY09foJNFJkQ2F4hgcBp5AYrMW7vo0ghUHfYd7fuPbD%2Bk8PcONFzXtYKy6kLqfhzMB4rPI3yPgEzHJx4je7BqCjuYBeonpYqWSugzalgJloB1ah9SKPxvQGfJxOxR9el6FtTeHofq8pRtrGMGLiMNoUvwYYN1fccJsxd1VuLvFI2D%2FhIlsUoq2M2vK69fjlQ%3D%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR4aOldraZw

Nice one, Terry but why the different backgrounds to the photos ? If anyone else had put these pictures up on Ebay, I'd have smelt a rat !

Some lovely rare pennies sold at Sovereign Rarities this morning. Most of them have been on the market before with some increasing in price and some decreasing. The wonderful 1882 F112 BU sold for £12,250 which was cheaper than it realised in the Spink Gerald Jackson sale (June 2014 for £15,150)

What became of dear old Stanley U ?

On my varieties website, I picture a 1927 reverse which I postulate is a "special" proof reverse but it looks uncannily like the missing waves reverse that you picture above, with features like the longer teeth etc.

I can believe that more than one trial die was produced while they were considering the final design of the 1927 reverse and it's possible that several coins were struck from the new dies with strict instructions that they never leave the Mint - but they did !

Exciting news ! Terry Eagleton has just pointed out to me that a 1926 penny was sold at London Coin auction in 2025 described as a F195 Modified Effigy but is, in fact, only the second ever "recorded" instance of the rare Gouby D+d Mule, i.e a coin with the Modified Effigy obverse but the true 1927 reverse. Obviously it was not recorded by LCA, but it is indeed the second known example. The first example was discovered by Michael Freeman and bought by me. If anyone on the Forum bought this coin. I would love to know more. Auction 190, lot 2174.