|
|
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
1,794 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
107
Everything posted by jelida
-
1873/2 Penny has it been recorded?
jelida replied to zookeeperz's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
Well, that clarifies my point about the upper half of the 3. I can see that a ‘spike’ appears to rise from the almost worn away lower curve, but I suspect this is an artefact due to the surrounding dents and the angle looks wrong for a 2 diagonal anyway. I don’t think photos can clarify this on such a worn coin, if you remain adamant I can only suggest getting an ‘in the hand’ expert opinion. Jerry -
1873/2 Penny has it been recorded?
jelida replied to zookeeperz's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
Why do you think it is 3 over 2 Richard? By comparison with my specimens, there seems to be a dent in the back of the upper half of the 3 giving the appearance of a detached spike , but the spike represents the back of the bulbous curve on an undamaged coin, which is why the upper curve of the 3 looks much narrower than normal on yours. Try superimposing the images if you can. This is a very worn, battered coin and I am truly surprised you can express a confidence of one in a thousand! (‘99.9% certain’). I’m dubious, sorry, as I would love to see clear-cut new varieties. Jerry -
Is the bottom falling out of the Penny market ?
jelida replied to secret santa's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
I wonder what the sales of the updated Freeman book have been, every serious penny collector will surely have bought one, and Gouby’s Specialist Edition too. Chris P, can you help? That is not to say every collector can afford four figure sums, but it would give an idea of the collector base. Jerry -
Richard, the difference is so much more marked in your first two pictures, which are also closer in grade, what I think we need are close-ups of the first 1911 that you show. The subsequent pictures are certainly less dramatically different, particularly given the wear. I would go for a genuine difference on the first pics, but am less convinced by the second pair. Do you have that first 1911 to photo? Jerry
-
Interesting....do you have access to the coins? If so, could you take close-up photos of the two hands under identical lighting, Jerry
-
Penny Acquisition of the week
jelida replied to Paulus's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
I was pleased to spot this as a 'buy it now' on Ebay, so I bought it then! Purchased on the first, it arrived today! I had been tracking it through Ebays 'Global Shipping' system, finally I can sleep at night. F24, with the missing top leaf. Cost me £150 all in, £40 of it postage via 'Global Shipping', what a p-i-t-a. But I wasn't going to argue, under the circumstances. One for your 'Rarest Pennies' page, Richard. Jerry -
At a glance it looks like a Venetian soldino or ‘galley halfpenny’, widely circulated in the UK in the C16/17. Jerry
-
Is the bottom falling out of the Penny market ?
jelida replied to secret santa's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
I think the market is more polarised, people simply don't want to live with such a poor coin in their collection but had it been in fine or better it would have soared. And it was bought well over the odds previously. And LCA does seem to be the place to sell pennies, for some reason. Jerry -
Unusual? 1862 Penny -- Is this really a reverse G?
jelida replied to Generic Lad's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
I’m afraid this is a modern Chinese replica, there are increasing numbers of various dates appearing on EBay, not all correctly described despite the fact they have only been around a couple of years and the vendors must in most cases know their origin. Jerry -
I Have A 1863 One Penny Coin, Victorian. How much is it worth?
jelida replied to scirbbles's topic in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Yes and no. 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
As I pointed out above, a worn collar will constrain the coin less and allow a fractionally greater rim size. At no point was a strike ‘outside the collar’, mentioned. Perhaps you mean ‘without a collar’ , when the struck coin (not blank) may well be broader and thinner, with an ill-defined rim. The only other way that rim size can vary is if the design on the die excluding the rim is smaller, allowing a larger rim on a standard size coin. I really thought I had made my logic clear above, if the size of the design on the die can be shown to be smaller (narrower teeth, reduced size of lettering, spacing, portrait could all influence this) then a wider rim could occur within a normal size collar. If the design on the die is normal, then a broader rim could only occur if there was less constraint from the collar, for example if it was worn, which will have occurred over time. 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
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
