|
|
The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com |
|
|
Coinpublications.com
Predecimal.com
jelida
-
Content Count
1,723 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
96
Everything posted by jelida
-
why in obverse 6 does the flaw in the last colon FD: persist from 1861 to 1874
jelida replied to DrLarry's topic in Free for all
My point about rim width variation is that it may be determined by the collar in which the coin is struck rather than the die, and the collar inner diameter may vary fractionally due to wear. Where the breadth of the die varies- ie maximum diameter across the coin teeth - varietal status might be more justified. I do not believe a particular die should be considered to have two varieties merely because for part of its life it was used in a slack collar. Teeth alignment issues may be isolated, in that a letter or number on one die was entered slightly differently to another die, or more general due to a different number of border teeth, changes in font or legend spacing for example. I would be more likely to call the latter a variety than the former; we have to be realistic, in the early years one might declare almost as many varieties as there are dies on date alignment alone. Jerry -
why in obverse 6 does the flaw in the last colon FD: persist from 1861 to 1874
jelida replied to DrLarry's topic in Free for all
I am inclined to think that most of these changes are more in the execution than the design, in that relief is probably a factor of strike depth, whether in preparation of the working dies or the striking of the coins themselves, this is very variable especially on obverse 2. The rim edge is not technically part of the design, and might be influenced by variations in collar size or wear. The subtle relationships between bust/teeth etc are certainly the work of man, when making up a new hub from the individual portrait and letter punches, from which to strike a master die, I suppose dramatic variations from the norm might merit sub-variety status, Jerry -
why in obverse 6 does the flaw in the last colon FD: persist from 1861 to 1874
jelida replied to DrLarry's topic in Free for all
Is that the only difference in tooth alignment? Count the teeth. Jerry -
why in obverse 6 does the flaw in the last colon FD: persist from 1861 to 1874
jelida replied to DrLarry's topic in Free for all
I suspect that one of the ‘C’ punches in use had a little raised spike at its edge giving this mark on any dies prepared or reinforced using it. I doubt it was deliberate. I am sure the tooth flaw on Obverse 6 was present on the master die, from fairly early in its life preparing working dies. I suspect that in the later ‘60’s a fresh master or masters was produced to the original Obverse 6 design (whether from large scale cast or hub I have no idea) but this effectively removed the flaw from working dies from this master. Looking for other subtle changes in these ‘no flaw’ Obverse 6’s might be fruitful. Jerry -
Several more copies of this available on Abe books. Jerry
-
I agree. This coin looks like it has been in the ground, thick patina missing in some areas and raised due to underlying corrosion elsewhere. Jerry
-
The cannonball is rather higher on the wide date 1875 ‘cannonball’ non-variety 😜, but it does look similar otherwise, perhaps there was a piracy issue in 1875. Jerry
-
https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/the-stamp-and-coin-shop-online-limited Jerry
-
Yup, I would say F 17. The flaw on the last colon seems to appear on the latest 1861’s. Jerry
-
Quite true, unusual die pairings should certainly count, and are of course an act, deliberate or mistaken, of man (or woman). Jerry
-
I’d agree too. Mis-strikes may be of interest to some (not me), but to be a true variety it has to be a physical alteration of the die, whether a deliberate or erroneous action of a human. Failings of the manufacturing process alone , and even die wear and tear (ONF pennies, dot coins etc ) may merit comment in the catalogues but in my opinion not varietal status. The only reason Freeman listed the ‘97 dot penny is that it was initially thought to be a deliberate die identification mark. Jerry
-
Wow, well done guys, I would say that’s pretty conclusive. And they have been around for over a decade. They will be in a lot of collections. Who knows how many other coins are faked equally well, so far it seems to mostly be silver because of the difficulty reproducing copper patina, I’m sticking to my pennies, at least there don’t seem to be convincing copies of these. Jerry
-
An 1860 B over R would be very interesting. Jerry
-
The apparently thinner underlying letters and curly bases are often seen, perhaps as the result of partial die fill prior to repair, or a policy of ‘closing in’ or filling broadened or damaged letters on the die prior to re-punching them; I don’t think there is any evidence that different ‘thin’ letter punches were ever used on the bronze series. Also if the repair punch was not held vertically and the strike was shallow, the letter indentation on the die need not be full width. Jerry
-
These are all typical die repairs, I like the N over N! I think the letter punches were often held at a slight angle, perhaps aiding alignment, and only part of the letter is entered, other times the whole letter is clearly reinforced. They are really only true varieties if the wrong letter or number was used, or the wrong orientation, or perhaps if the repair is particularly botched, like the F10 ‘triple F’. Jerry
-
I have to say it looks good to me too, if it is fake then this represents a serious improvement and very worrying, but at this stage I would not write it off, I would not say the evidence presented is irrefutable. Jerry
-
1879 Penny metal above lighthouse
jelida replied to DrLarry's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
Auction 152 lot 2434 has the pics. Jerry -
1879 Penny metal above lighthouse
jelida replied to DrLarry's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
I too too have one of these, mine came from LCA a couple of years ago http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=152&searchlot=2434&searchtype=2 Jerry -
New 1861 penny variety? F33 N over inverted N in ONE
jelida posted a topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
I think this coin is a valid new variety and would welcome members thoughts. I have already discussed it with a couple of others, who are in agreement. I bought the coin on Ebay a couple of months ago from Larry Gurney of the 'Mad About Art' charity. Larry frequently investigates coins under high magnification and had noted that the N had been 're-cut wrong' with 'the serif incorrectly cut on the lower limb'. He started the coin at £45, which is what I bought it for a week later as the only bidder. Larry spotted this coin several years ago, and has had at least two of these, and the final photo is from Larry, with permission, showing a close-up of the 'N' of that second coin. The coin is an 1861 Freeman 33 6+G with the 'N' of ONE on the reverse having a serif at the right base of the right upright, and a diagonal which is broadened and somewhat wedge-shaped. My interpretation is that this is an ' N' in ONE over inverted 'N ', i.e. the 'N' has been erroneously repaired by holding the 'N' punch upside down, I suppose really quite an understandable error. I think also that the repair strike was not quite vertical, leading to the extra serif being slightly above the base of the letter, and meaning that the new diagonal did not align perfectly with the existing 'N' diagonal causing the wedging of the diagonal on the end result. I am sure there will be more out there, but I have spent a lot of time searching the net over the last couple of months and not found any others. Jerry -
New 1861 penny variety? F33 N over inverted N in ONE
jelida replied to jelida's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
Hello Larry, it’s good to see you on the forum. This is the place to demonstrate any other interesting repairs, overstrikes etc you may have spotted. Don’t be afraid to list, people may be forthright in their opinions on occasion but are always keen to help and we can generally reach a consensus. Several of the top penny people in the country contribute to this forum. Jerry -
1860 penny. Beaded borders.
jelida replied to Zo Arms's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Hi Bob, from the new pic it is definitely not an * obverse, the eye line is horizontal, and the bust is clear of the normal thickness beaded border. It is definitely F6. Jerry -
1860 penny. Beaded borders.
jelida replied to Zo Arms's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Hi Bob, I did ponder over this one when it was first listed, and decided that it was probably an F6. One of the problems I found was that the obverse photo is slanted, making the border rim appear quite thick towards the viewer, but it appears thinner away from the viewer; a 1* or 1** obverse should have an evenly thick rim. It may be slightly off-struck. The angle of the eyes is difficult to judge because of the slanting photo. The bust does not appear to touch the beaded border, and the linear circle is well defined. I am not convinced by the size of shamrock, but either way the other obverse 1* identifiers would have to be present. I will stick with F6, 1+B but if you can take a truly vertical obverse photo that would clarify the issue. Jerry -
New 1861 penny variety? F33 N over inverted N in ONE
jelida replied to jelida's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
I had an email from Michael Gouby today, most importantly his eye surgery seems to have been a success, and he is making a good recovery. He also confirms that he considers the ( F33) N over inverted N to be a genuine new variety, which is a nice confirmation. Jerry -
I would be interested Pete, if available. Jerry
-
Looks fine to me, can’t blame the coin for the blurry photo. Jerry
