jelida

Show us clearer pics when it arrives. Definitely worth a punt at that price. Jerry

Somewhere between 2 and 3 grand I suspect, but could go higher on the day. It’s very difficult to predict for these serious rarities as it depends on the bidding of two people who have a gap to fill and really want it. Jerry

Well done, another nice spot. In general misplaced repairs with the correct letter/digit are not as heavily collected as those where the wrong letter/digit has been used, but do still carry a significant premium. Gary is a member of this forum, and is a very experienced bronze and copper collector 😉. Jerry

The lack of H was the first thing I spotted! And with the gap between R and I of BRITT this looks a genuine one! Stunning purchase, GF details for me, probably previously cleaned but still one of the better ones. Bosh ! Jerry

And welcome to the forum. It is good to question any anomalies you may spot as true new varieties are still out there - at least three genuinely significant new Victorian pennies have first been described here over the last decade or so. Don’t be afraid to keep posting and show any interesting acquisitions. Jerry

Buy the coin if it ticks boxes in your collection, but not just because of the doubling which is so common as to be normal especially in the earlier years of this coinage. Jerry

Hello Jackie, I’m afraid I have to disagree with AI, this doesn’t appear to be a deliberate design and I doubt that it is a coin. As a detectorist, as well as obsessive collector, I have over the years found similar items, some are welding spatter and others the result of molten metal spill. A couple look like silver and are certainly white metal. The pitted surface is the side that landed on the ground, the other is the result of solidification, possibly with some crystallisation . My thoughts anyway. Welcome to the forum, don’t be afraid to post your queries. Jerry

Good spot, and an absolute bargain penny. The half is probably Rhuddlan too, the reverse reads OND.ON for SIMOND.ON.RVLA. Found a nice cut half of SIMOND detecting years ago. Jerry

That’s nice, if others have been recognised that likely increases the desirability. I still doubt that it is a deliberate design modification though, given that the planning for the bronze currency was already well advanced. Jerry

The 1859 is interesting, not a deliberate ‘ribbon’ I suspect, perhaps a die flaw or foreign body impact or result of die clash but if more than a ‘one off’ could become collectable though probably not at a massive premium. The 1858 small date is scarce rather than rare, unless combined with large rose reverse which yours is not. Maybe a small premium over large date but value is low I think due to poor condition. Jerry

Definitely different coins. A complaint is certainly in order, and negative feedback. I would point out to the vendor that the coin is still legally yours, and that it has unique features that make it identifiable in the future. However sadly legal action , even should the opportunity arise, would likely be prohibitively expensive. No harm in publicising the vendor if you don’t get redress. Jerry

Sounds good, but we still need photos! Jerry

Lovely! I have one in similar condition, the Copthorne example and now yours are the only other ones I have seen. Jerry

Under ‘Professional ways to store collections’. Strangely there are also two ‘British coin type set’ threads. Jerry

Pure Acetone is your friend here, just bathe the coin for a few minutes and dab gently with good quality cotton wool, or brush with a very soft brush while still immersed. Practice on lesser coins first, and beware that acetone is highly flammable and volatile. Available on EBay and most chemists. Jerry

No, it’s definitely CIVI TAS, the AS is very clear and there are four characters beginning with C in the CIVI quarter. Always worth looking out for spelling and positional errors though, I’ve got a Henry III penny of Hereford reading HENRICS , also a known variety. Jerry

Yes, both are pennies given the weights. For a complete coin, weight is usually a good starting point. You really need to use the information and guidance available to you and become your own ‘expert’ rather than relying on others who clearly don’t care what they tell you. Jerry

The second coin reads ‘CIVI TAS LON DON’ not ‘ LONDONIENSIS’ and judging by its size is probably a halfpenny not a farthing. Have you bought a suitable scales yet? Jerry

I suspect so, and while close I don’t think it’s an actual die match with H’s. Potentially a very rare coin, especially as the one illustrated is the best Dave Greenhalgh could find! Jerry

Hi Stu, here is the pic. Very similar crown. Jerry

That very distinctive ‘stalked’ central fleur looks pretty much identical to the illustration of the ‘Edward III Pre Treaty Series E York Episcopal’ Penny on page 70 of ‘The Galata Guide to Mediaeval Pennies Part 1’ though I cannot see a quatrefoil after ‘ANGLIE’ on H’s specimen. It is an interesting coin, and I think Dave Greenhalgh is the man to give an opinion here, if anyone is a contact. Jerry

I think you are there or thereabouts. There is definitely an inner circle both sides, and a CIVITAS LONDON reverse. The obverse Iegend is probably EDWARDVS REX but there is too little face/crown detail to be much more specific - certainly North class 10 or later, and likely Edward II. The North classification has been substantially re-written and subdivided in the Withers (Galata) publications which are highly recommended. Jerry

I agree, it’s either die wear or very possibly the power of the strike, a reduced impact affecting the metal flow into the recesses of the die. Other detail such as the rocks and the lines on Britannia’s shield also seems reduced. I really don’t know who’s given her the finger though. Jerry

Hello Jaybob, if you type the description from the slab into a ‘search engine’ - one called ‘Google’ is good- and press ‘search’, you may be able to answer your question yourself and you will find that the sense of achievement is far greater than asking someone else to do it for you. Otherwise, the answer is ‘yes’. Jerry

Well the mintmark (above the ‘C’ of CIVITAS ) looks as though it might be a cross pattee, or at least the leg of an expanding cross. This would rule out Richard III, but it could still be Edward IV, Henry V etc- though I haven’t looked into further detail. Jerry