jelida

How rare is this coin? I picked one up at the Midland Coin Fair recently, only about fine but only a couple of quid. But I know of one in near EF which might be available for a premium over the 'normal' 1880 price. How much of a premium do you penny guys think would be merited? I know Gouby only knew of one at the time of his 2009 publication, but how many of you guys have one? Jerry

Liquid, it can easily be diluted in water and gives even coverage. Jerry

Patination is a chemical process, whereby a minute layer of surface metal is converted into insoluble compounds, oxides, chlorides, carbonates, sulphides etc dependent upon the environment to which the coin is exposed. Normally this will be a slow, multifactorial process under influence of sweat, water, oils,salts, air pollutants eg sulphides, carbonic acid and I am sure a multitude of other chemicals, and variety of temperatures. The main difference with artificial patination is that the variety of active chemicals is reduced, but the process can be speeded up by increased chemical concentrations and temperature. Liver of Sulphur may certainly be one toning chemical available, there will be others. I have only used it on a couple of coins, pics attached. The chemicals do seem to reduce the gloss of a polished coin, as does prolonged boiling in rainwater. The polished coin needs washing, and de-greasing first (acetone, petrol) to encourage even toning. I tried using the L of S solution hot initially, but the tone was too dark too quickly (see the 1863 penny), but later experimented with a weaker, cooler solution and more prolonged exposure (see the 1874, unfortunately didnt take a 'before' pic. Neither is perfect, but with more practice a satisfactory tone should be possible, certainly both look better than they did. I would hasten to add that this is a 'last resort' measure for coins otherwise beyond redemption! Jerry

A quick, simple way is 'liver of sulphur', a sulphur based patinating solution available in small volumes on the 'bay. Practice on cheap coins, and at different temperatures, use it diluted for a slow, controllable effect. Jerry

I was the under bidder, didnt think I could justify more because of the poor condition. Jerry

I am not sure about the bust line, Richard, it as quite often weakly struck on obverse 2, and I have seen others the same as mine; in fact yours seems unusually well struck (refer Goubys discussion on the putative Gouby DE obverse, and his obv 2 illustrations). The same issue may of course apply to the tuft of hair, though not to any re-engraving. Off now for 3 hrs of badminton, then the pub. Got to get my mind off pennies! Jerry

Hi Terry, its the bulge of hair on the back of the neck to the left and slightly below the knot of the bow. Perhaps start with the last image, of a die modified from F15 (obverse 4), an obverse die designated 'Gouby G' by Michael Gouby, and in which the 'tuft' of hair is not present. Then look at the preceding 3 images, normal F10's, where the tuft is prominent. Then look at ours, the first two images, where I feel the 'tuft' is much reduced, and I feel there has also been re-engraving just above and to the right of the knot. It is difficult however to compare images of differing resolutions, lighting, die wear etc, and so I am anxious to hear what others think. It seems to me that the differing number of teeth, along with design changes, however subtle, would be pretty definitive criteria for declaring this a truly new obverse die, and all kudos to you for noticing it. Jerry First pic is 145 teeth, second a normal 143 tooth.

Hi all, Any more opinions regarding the 145 tooth F10? Has MG expressed a view, Richard? I have scoured the net and not found any more. I still think there has been work in the hair around the nape of the neck. I am attaching images to try and demonstrate this. The first is my 145 tooth F10, then Terry's. Then 143 tooth F10's from Heritage, R Ingrams and LCA. And finally a F15 'Gouby G' revision (138 tooth) without the 'tuft' of hair at the nape for comparison. Your thoughts welcomed. Jerry

In fact this coin was my only really decent Obverse 2, so for fine detail on 'normal' type 2 obverses I am relying on net pictures. There may be an issue of die wear on the examples I am looking at, but is there perhaps a difference in the detail in the hair to the lower left of the bun, and in the 'tuft' of hair on the nape of the neck to the left of the ribbon knot? Apart from the strange colon dots, I cant see any other possibilities. Does anybody have a really crisp Obv 2 die picture? Jerry

I am not aware that mine came via London Coin Auctions, I bought it at the Midland Coin Fair, mostly because of the dramatic die repairs on some letters. It does appear to have the same die pairing as yours, Terry. Does the die flaw through Victoria's hair match yours? Interesting to note the prevalence you have noted. Have you communicated with Michael Gouby? Jerry

This is my F10, 145 tooth obverse. I think Terry has found something really interesting here, and I agree a great first post! Jerry

I meant reverse d variants, not obverse 2, and of course there's no reason for them to be associated, counting teeth clearly affected my reason, hopefully temporarily! The tally of obverse 2's is now three at 143 and one at 145 teeth, recounted to check. I think I feel sick..... Jerry

Hmmm, just counted 145 teeth on one of mine which has the colon dots the same as yours, and 143 on a different Obverse 2 penny. And 138 teeth on an obverse 3. Gouby does state that obv 2 has 143, and obv 3 has 138, so that tallies; Do other members have 145 tooth obverse 2's? I wonder whether they tie in with a particular one of the previously described four obv 2 variants? Paul Holland doesnt seem to have counted the teeth when describing these variants in his BNJ article. Eyes a bit befuddled by dot counting now,will try again later. Jerry

This is terrible news, Peter, terrible. I am so sorry for you and your family. Stay strong and share your feelings. With our fondest wishes, Jerry & Libby.

Does look like a F21, with the colon after G of DG pointing to a gap, well done, a rare coin with significant value even in that condition. I think the 4 plus G is correct also. Jerry

Deffo a dot. Keep it. Jerry

Certainly the stalagtites and solid flows would suggest lime bearing water, thus alkaline; from my MD experience bronze seems to survive better in alkaline environments, but would still patinate over time. Where I have found Roman coins, shiny and uncorroded as on the day they were dropped, is in the anoxic mud of the Severn Estuary, so a significant sedimentation process might help. Jerry

no PC on this forum, please......... Jerry

That is a stunning collection! I think I've only got 3 pennies you would want! Not sure if thats a smile or a frown ( cant find the blessed emoticons on my eyepad today). Jerry

Yes, I bid over £1300 for the 1860 penny, and two others rated it higher, despite its faults. But I still have plenty of less esoteric pennies to spend my money on. Did a forum member win it? Jerry

Well, it might be the photos, but I cant see the gap between the R and the I of BRITT, so apparently not. Jerry

I think its the norm, the others on the net seem the same, but the 6 (not the one) definitely seems larger than the rest. Jerry

That was my first impression too, though I've just checked mine and it is the same, 6 and possibly 1 both look larger. Is this the norm? Need to look at more. Jerry

This vendor has already sold one Scarborough Siege piece for £100 according to his feedback, the buyer is really pleased as he has had it assessed and it is real! Bo***cks! Jerry

And yet I would say that the pic on the left is the more 'correct', though I would lighten it a touch; it has a more even balance, without the glare and 'white out' of some of the highlights of the pic on the right. It is the left pic that would be chosen for a catalogue. Jerry