|
|
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
DrLarry
-
Content Count
1,764 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
43
Everything posted by DrLarry
-
I did initially contact the Royal mint but they did not reply. I contacted then Birmingham University, the British Museum and Cambridge. The former replied saying they had record on the subject the latter again did not bother themselves with a response. I am sure they perceived it as trivia .
-
yes I think I can make a suggestion and I admit this LCW by the foot fascinates me simply because I have never had a chance to study one, but would love to. In the toothed reverse of 1860 in which there is a rounded lighthouse there is an area below the drapes which has something removed. In the 1861 penny with the rounded lighthouse this area has a previous lettering removed then overstamped with the L C W however there is a suggestion of evidence that something is beneath it. This area near to the foot of Britannia is a difficult one there has been a change in the depth of the exergue this we know because it is recorded initially the area had the date using roman numerals in relief any signature that would have been along the previous line would have had to removed I think. The moving of the signature is a fascinating and intriguing part of this study for me. There are some tantalising areas of the reverse where the signature would fit nicely and there is almost always something removed leaving the exact same scars. I have been looking at these for some time now but cannot as yet find the examples which help me validate this. Time will tell I am sure but I think it has something to do with the remodelling of the area to create the foot removing the full name WYON leaving the W and removal of Lawrence C .....something that Keeping the W and using the W of Wyon. In the same way the LCW on the other side is an afterthought it seems at times on some of the reverses with some shifts in the lettering I believe (on this I may be wrong) .
-
I agree with you you seem to be correcting yourself in that statement I assume. The decision to connect the F14 with Jesus was I think your own invention. Which drew a response referring to the biblical reference that Jesus did not float on water he walked on water. I am always happy to hear of stories of a biblical nature in this case the analogy and subsequent references to the Gospel did nothing but to illustrate the biblical "truth" that Jesus walked upon the water he did not levitate. I assume in doing this as a personification of a deity that he harnessed the ability to utilise the surface tension between the two mediums, air and water liquid and gas. There are many insects with this ability creating a meniscus at the point of connection. As far as the miracle works and I am happy to accept that as a scientist I do not have to dismiss everything I do not understand he would simply have to make himself enlightened enough to achieve this. I am a rare scientist I allow quite happily the boundary between religion and science to live in harmony. Scientists are not a replacement for theologists we will look back and a myriad of things in our future which to our eyes are miraculous and think how silly we were not to consider x or y. I love a good vicar and know a good number as friends.
-
so in the copper we are dealing with something that is much smaller further away and yet still manages to apply all the skills that Kutcher has that are no less than Wyon has you can see that in his wonderful medals which if you have not looked at are stunning. artistic licence yes of course any engraver would know that if you are trying model something far away and you want to show certain things , sails rigging and most importantly from the argument that is being suggested here the embodiment of national pride the union jack and the British ensign you do have to use artistic licence. The meaning of which is not to do it badly but to emphasise something to the viewer you wish them to be aware of using some device. Here the flag at the stern is 10 times the size is should be but you are trying to show a british ship sailing towards Britannia the fact that the flag is the same size a a mainsail is a simple but effective device ...artistic licence. all other details are accurate except the thickness of the rigging (artistic licence ) but even so the overall effect is a good one because the eyes on viewing the ship sees thin rigging because it is confused. I would happily set sail in any one of these safe in the security of them showing all the essential attributes of a stable solid craft...he even develops the perspective through the portholes with a thin line to show us the other side of the ship.
-
I am afraid that whilst I respect peoples religious beliefs I have no desire to use them as part of a debate or discussion on a topic based on an interpretation of empirical evidence, whilst the interpretation may not be 100% and I have acknowledged that I do expect to have a discussion which has relevance to the topic and which once again ( and it is a little boring to have to say so, is not a matter of whether I have confidence in it or not I am seeking opinion that is considered and erudite and which at least attempts to look at the question rather than deferring to these somewhat meaningless petty ridicules. If you have looked at the question laid out in the hypothesis and sought to at least examine your own examples then it will be easier to have a meaningful and productive discussion. It is afterall a place for exchange hence I presume why the word Forum was part of the descriptive purpose in the name. and also can it really be true that you just accept that the freeman 14 just floats above the water without looking for at least some explanation of why it does so? I cannot believe learned people would do that without at the very least asking why. OK you may not get the answer but there are if you put all these anomalies together just one or 12 too many of these strange occurrences. The issue is not in the interpretation (which of course you can rubbish) the issue is if you look at your coins and search for a pattern of lines and crosses and other features do you also find them in the same place as I do. If you have investigated then you have all the right in the world to critique a theory. Jumping on the coattails using silly and unconstructive ancient Judeo Christian mythologies shows a disrespect for that belief system and does nothing to aid with the discussion.
-
I am not getting on to the of biblical mythology you said "like the F14 the ship floats above the horizon" I agree it does but walking on water is not floating in mid air above the water as in freeman 14
-
A cursory look even at the nasty little images in Peck is enough to assure you that they are well presented , even more so when you image them under the microscope with digital photography, in fact the detailing considering the size is well done and artisitcally and structurally sound.
-
I would disagree with entirely having spent many a month looking at the representation of the tiny ship on the 1797's whihc show in wonderful detail some excellent scale, proportion and perspective.
-
I think you old fellas are willing to accept a substandard piece of art rather than question it. Never mind photorealism and in truth we are much more likely to find realism as the staple of art in 1860 than we are at the present time. I would say these days we are more willing to acknowledge the moment captured in a post impressionistic era than they were in 1860. This is just a fundamental aspect of conservatism in art to reproduce with clear detail. I would draw your attention to the art work of the late 18th C in coins and medals . It seems you are more pre-occupied with accepting what you know already than to seek answers for serious artistic flaws.
-
no not at all It simply re-enforces the alterations that have been made that penny in particular gives some very interesting results. I dont think Jesus was ever said to have floated as far as I am aware perhaps you are thinking of Derren Brown. Like the ship does below the level of the sea following the scar lines it sits on top of the water as did Jesus I think ...well if one is inclined to think that way I think the comment is in all other ways just a little predictable and will I am sure be repeated until the status quo is re-established and we can all eat jam and scones and have tea with the dormouse and the Hatter. Of course if we decide that the return of the good old days of mindless sheep is the way forward then of course that will be right of all.
-
Wyon had devoted his whole time since the previous July to the preparation of the designs. He also explained that one of the designs had had to be 'reprinted' three times through circumstances over which Wyon had had little control, an oblique and strangely untechnical reference to Wyon's difficulties.29 A fresh pattern penny was promised by Wyon for the beginning of March, and he welcomed a suggestion from Graham to diminish the exergue.1 " It was presumably this penny, still considered imperfect by Wyon, which Graham forwarded to Gladstone on 8 March, his haste being explained by a problem with the inscription. By confining the royal style and titles to the obverse, Wyon had left himself no room for F.D., you see in the design I am about to propose the portrait drops down before the F D which requires there to be shortening of the legend to BRITT now the interesting thing here is that the punches (presumably for the lettering) must have included some of the much smaller lettering that you can see very often on the 1860 to 62 half pennies and the pennies. The common nature of the B over R was in truth one of the main reasons I started this whole thing for it to have occurred so often is not totally remarkable the absent minded craftsmen pick up aN R instead of a B the issue however is that the lettering is often a completely different size and a completely different style. The originals often lighter and with curly bases some as much as 30 to 40% smaller on the half penny. On many of the LCW's (on which there is also a lot of evidence for the removal of a full signature by the way) half penny the H the N's and the F are often smaller and rotated , If the design was changed I am suggesting then that in order to balance the reduction in the design one must balance it with increased size of letters. Now yes I know that the issues with the legend are aside form the design changes I am suggesting but perhaps in the chaos a set of dies using a previous design initially submitted for working dies had to be altered as an emergency issue. It may be that I Have selected out my own working collection because I see the features over and over again, but I find this unlikely. I am trying my hardest to use the ockam's razor and parsimony to search for the easiest and most simple explanation.
-
The JOy of looking at coins under the microscope. Since starting out on this funny pathway into collecting I must admit that I am over the moon with the results. Besides my strange pattern which is difficult to explain I have moved from section to section and seem some extraordinary things. All of these add up to evidence of radical changes in the design of the half penny and the penny both on the reverse and the portrait. these observations are down to a particular method I use to uncover the underlying scars of parts of the design that has been removed by someone after the original design has been "stripped down" to its bare essentials. I know I am hard to follow and most of will never follow me, but it brings me the greatest joy to have for my purposes discovered the alternative ship that crosses into the leg of Britannia and into the field close to the boat. I can now say I am 80% sure that I have the evidence to prove that a much larger ship with several sails each with a large cross in the centre and the back of a flat ship with the head of the Hind pointing its way to verification that the ship is the golden hind. I know it has been speculated on in the past, but I now know its identity. The ship rises up far into the field twice the height of the present ship and it it perfectly proportional equally balanced and has a powerful national pride in its rendering. There are several crows nests in the field. The lettering on the half penny has been completely changed and there is enough evidence for me to be able to state that the lettering was originally almost half the size of the present lettering. It no longer bothers me to explain these things to the forum because I have evidence that I am convinced by and ,as much as you may not think so, I am not easily convinced with my various theories but I am growing bold enough to tell you things as I find them. Once again before criticising I would urge you to look with extreme care at this area to the left of the ship and into Britannias Leg. This leg was not originally modelled in this position and the suture line between whatever is the left of the extension of the discovered ship can be seen in this area. Many years ago I came up with a theory 3 years in fact, but was uncomfortable releasing the information for fear of ridicule and derision. Now thankfully I am past that stage of low confidence and I will accept the original vision I had. The difficulty has not been the method it has taken me so long because the design has gone through a staged set of alterations which have covered some of the original design. For example the portrait extension on the right side which acts as an explanation to the unrealistic cut off of the queens portrait. All the evidence now points to the continuation of the HONI SO IT into the field and this garter insignia encloses the garter star which is centred on the lowest colon. The portrait finishes between the F and the D. This nasty piece of engraving HONI SO is one of my hit list areas and initially the garter has the buckle and the buckle holes and the insignia of the order. I think now I am almost sure about how the portrait was originally but it is so radically different form the extant one I want to get all my evidence prepared over the summer. Penny buffs are not going to like it very much but be excited that there is a true work of art hidden under the present one. Again I am confident of at least three changes to the die and again cannot yet answer how the hell the evidence is there how it is preserved and who? why? it was changed. The half penny shows the standing Britannia, looking 3/4 turned towards us alongside her is a lion looking out to the right, in perspective sits a large ship who's sails and masts rise up much higher into the field and they are the Golden Hind. How? why? it was removed I have not a clue, why we dont have any examples of it again I haven't a clue. Why there are scars there which point the way to its existence ? again I do not know! But looking at the quality of the artwork after spending years with it I would say it was a most beautiful and perfectly modelled reverse. It has little resemblance to the extant one , although the cut down ship with all its myriad of flaws and artistic failures is sadly the depressingly amature thing we have ended up with. It is my belief that this alternative reverse was the original design which has been butchered by either someone frustrated at the need to destroy a masterpiece in favour of a cartoon, or as I think more likely the original design has been remodelled by a craftsman not an artist. I will begin to give you the photographic evidence over the next few weeks I wanted however to share this joy with the forum. But I wanted to say what a joy this has brought me and I truly and dearly love forensic numismatics. And I dont really mind if you think me mad because I am confident that these findings will be verified either by me or more effectively by the collective search for the key elements which exist in the early bronze coins from 1860 to 1863.
-
Gladstone replied that the 'cause of delay was to be found in that most delicate part of the operation - namely, the execution of the design by the artist'. In this part of the operation he confessed himself unwilling to interfere, for fear that pressure to accelerate the process might result in an unsatisfactory design.25 The statement caused astonishment to the Mechanics' Magazine, which had fondly supposed, so it claimed, that large quantities of the new coins had already been struck. It found it hard to imagine how even the most lethargic of artists could take so long over 'so small a work as the designs for three coins'. How much better, it argued, to have had the public competition for which it had urged six months before.2 This was in Feb 1860
-
yes ...if I held my breath whilst waiting on me being able to select out the photos which show all this I would have expired some time ago. But I will deal with one section of the changes at a time and I promise to try explain better I just get a little excited sometime...hard to imagine I am sure if you watched this slow progression towards my own scaffold built by me for me ....but I am sure there will be a collective kick away with the box ...LOL errrggghhhh !!!
-
yes I know I have gone over and over and over the same thing toi make sense of this thing. The only thing I can even stab in the dark at is some of the chaos. I wish I knew I agree it is a massive problem. Do we know all there is to know about the process? I dont think we have too many accounts of process, technique, metal mixes, die production especially when things are no longer in house. The engraving of the master dies are done by who? The reduction seems also to have had two "homes" because Wyon had one in his workshop at his home. Is it possible that in this transitional politics that work done was done externally and then delivered. Afterall Wyon also had a furnace and kiln for hardening the dies. So he would have made the master dies ? How many would he have made considering the number of changes that were made. Who then is responsible for the changes in the dies once they are delivered to the mint? there were no longer any employed designers or engravers at an senior level. There is a article by Sainthill written in the mid century last in the BNJ but apart from this what other sources do we have discussing the issues in 1860 to 62 Whether Sainthill's intervention made any difference is not clear, it may posibly be significant that it was almost immediately afterwards, on 19 November, that Wyon called on Graham to hear the news that Gladstone 'wished to have my Britannia on the bronze coinage'.11 On the other hand, Wyon is known to have been at work on designs of Britannia as early as August, and the retention of Britannia was evidently still contemplated by Graham in September." At that time the Mechanics' Magazine, while acknowledging that 'a strong determination is manifested in one quarter to keep Britannia', was reporting rumours of great differences of opinion on the subject within the government.15 Unfortunately, Wyon's diary makes no mention of the controversy, and indeed it contains no explicit reference to the bronze coinage until the entry of 19 November. To what extent, therefore, the Mechanics' Magazine was right to hint later that the retention of Britannia was imposed on a reluctant artist cannot be substantiated.16 What does seem certain is that Wyon did not find the designing of the new coins an easy task,see and that there was good reason for Graham to fear that it was the preparation of designs which would provide the chief obstacle to the rapid introduction of the bronze coins. He wrote to Gladstone on 10 September that Wyon had not yet succeeded in producing a Britannia which could be recommended, and he lamented that a design in high relief was not possible: 'with the restrictions under which the Mint Artist works it is I extremely difficult to hit off anything highly beautiful and effective. Modern coining has indeed more of a character of manufacture than a fine art'.17 This was perhaps an unduly pessimistic view of the artistic constraints of the minting process, but Graham was undoubtedly on sure ground about the likely cause of delay. The pace looks to have quickened after Wyon's meeting with Graham on 19 November. Besides talking about Britannia, they must also have discussed the obverse and Wyon apparently received instructions to prepare a further portrait of the queen. On 21 November he commenced a model 'with lengthened bust', and his diary records that he worked on this bust on each of the following three days.18 By 29 November he was able to take it to Graham along with some sketches,19 and on 1 December Graham forwarded to Gladstone three models and a sketch by Wyon for submission to the queen. These included the obverse model just completed showing head and bust; an alternative obverse model which Wyon had taken from a marble bust by Baron Marochetti2 " in the queen's collection; a model of Britannia 'in an erect attitude'; and finally a sketch to show 'the intended disposition of the figures on the coin'. Graham's undertaking to engrave the approved designs and to submit proof pieces from the dies suggests that no patterns of any of these designs had so far been struck.21 The queen cannot have been entirely satisfied. A few days later, on 7 December, Wyon
-
you can get it going cheap at the moment I waited around for a couple of years it wasn't even available in the interlibrary loan system even from the BL. Ironically there was a copy of this book and a book on coin counterfeiting in Durham Prison but that was not allowed to come out .....Then I saw it advertised on the british museum or Seaby coins (spink) website along with the really wonderful book on the SOHO mints for £10 each. A good reduction from £40 . It is rather tedious though so I am not sure why the poor prisoners of Durham Jail would want it other than to smuggle something, or help with sleep.
-
I understand where you may see this as utter madness Mike I would agree with you in all ways. However , I think we have to acknowledge one thing this is a new era one in which we have at our disposal in the average collectors room a machine that is sophisticated enough to process and view things which have not maybe ever been seen. The fact that the Bronze series is my focus may simply be an anomaly created by the horrendous difficulties the change of metal imposed. I am not saying that there are no other "potential" alterations in other coins. Part of this may be related to the complex interpersonal relationships between artist, craftsmen and governance at this stage. I dont look for conspiracy to provide answers but it is clear that there were problems. The excitement I feel is the fact that perhaps ....just perhaps we might be able to approach things differently and who knows what we may discover. Sorry if that upsets the accepted situation and approaches to coins but if the same thing occurs in the same places over and over and over again then perhaps they represent evidence for a paradigm shift. AS I have said coins are pieces of art mass produced I am not sure if what I am seeing are the result of a die alteration, re using of coinage with an alternative design, or even if it possible for a pre-existing design if altered to come through. I assume it is something to do with microfissures in the coin or the die or both that lead to the disclosure of this underlying image.
-
whatever the process is , at the moment it makes little sense to me, I am just presenting a summation of the theory and construction
-
not designed to conceal I am suggesting that a sophisticated piece of art has been stripped down. Whether this is a result of the rapid attempt to scale up production the chaos of the early dies breaking, and trying to reconcile the somewhat hazy meaning of the known fact that : He had to alter the design significantly because the relief was too high and it led to failure when scaled up. I do not have the answers as to why this all exists but the evidence of a series of underlying images exist in the form of scaring. I am assuming these are the result of technical issues and why they should continue in the 61 and 62 I also do not know. You also have to bare in mind that the diary may not also be all the answer. He was strongly encouraged if not reluctantly forced to begin to keep a diary by May his wife, and the scant nature of the diary does not give much away and does not also match some of the other facts. He was on the verge of serious illness when he insisted or someone insisted on him to be allowed to go on the holiday he had planned in the August having get special permission from the manager of the mint to be allowed to go. Yet this situation is only mildly alluded to in the diary , which in many respects deals very little with emotions , even after the death of his child. I would hate to revert to the fallback of don't shoot the messenger but I have painstakingly pieced the evidence it takes me about 3 hours to do each coin then I have to go through and process the pictures and then interpret. So yes I am saying there is something a lot more sophisticated but I am not saying that there is any attempt to cover up I am saying that somehow dies were altered again and again until they fulfilled the of the demanding technical and political and material problems.
-
yes well in the diary of L C Wyon there is a reference to the image of a standing Britannia he prepared as an initial sketch, the only reference to it is the fact that this drawing (which no longer exists) went to New Zealand with a family member sometime later. It says in the book by Attwood that this was just a preliminary sketch and was dismissed in the early stages. I have tried to wrestle with the alternative conclusion now for so long that he was a terrible artist. There are so many awful errors in both the portrait and the reverse. There are scars galore which in the majority of uncirculated coins in the collections of most numismatists under the lustre. I know because I sacrificed one of my full lustre 1861's to see what was beneath. Again and again coin after coin the same scars appear in the exact same places. BUT I believe he was a great artist BUT his work has been butchered. I believe that what is clear is that when coins were prepared for circulation I am not sure if they are concerned to "rub out" their mistakes which are often represented by small crosses which cover sections that have been removed. This seems to have been the policy. Of course it is quite clever because the moment a coin begins to circulate it will get crossed and scratched. But these crosses follow a defined underlying pattern and there incurse lines all over the place that are not random but represent elements of the designs that have been removed. From the three years of work I think it is clear that there appears to be a disregard for covering up removals and as a result organic acids and fat seep into the coin preserving some of these lines and the subsequent crossing out. I assume they do this to disguise or even to mark areas to be passed to the technicians to grind down and or remove sections. We never see the standing britannia until 1902 on the florin and as you say the Una and Lion done by W Wyon would have been one of the key part of LC Wyons apprenticeship and I am sure there must be many other sketches or designs that were lost in the fires, we will never know. Or perhaps they exist some other place in some collection as yet I do not know. As I have said this is no mystery why this has not been examined before we never had powerful digital photography and also one other great sources of evidence is those coins that have been chemically altered in the ground. But like all the other collectors what is a serious problem is the lack of physical evidence in any other pattern or design. Why or why if there was an original design is there not one example of it? it confounds me, but I am certain there is a story behind this. I have 1000's of images which I pick up pieces of information from and interpret the images.
-
the trident is not in the same pattern as the extant one on the half penny its prongs are spaced so that the in form it more similar to the trident on the 1806/7 or the other SOHO coppers. The last prong of the trident on the right side finishes between the 1st and 2nd fork of the extant trident but above the top of the latter.
-
I free-fall into dangerous territory here. You may ask "does it matter" or "who gives a rats arse" to which I would answer : if nothing else it makes us wonder ...why? There are many "penny people" on this forum and you all love this coin (as do I) but after about a year of this blind love affair ,as you know, I began to look with great care at the design. So I ask the forum why is it that Britannias hand is in an impossible pose and why is this obvious artistic flaw reproduced year after year. You see I cannot just be a blind collector, I cannot just see a bit of bling on a coin and go....wow! I would ask then you all to carry out a piece of experimental examination and feed back to me...please. But you have to do the experiment before you shout me down. sit in the exact same position that Britannia is in an get yourself a shield and a trident...no just a broom will do (if you have not yet fully converted to the dyson) I am a little old fashioned. now this is critical you must drop the left shoulder and angle the arm exactly as she has it. Take up your broom (not a call to revolt or to take up arms) now curl your fingers exactly as on the coin around your broom handle making sure to have the shaft cross the inside of the arm push it forward all the fingers must be evenly curling and I think the thumbs goes ...well it depends usually around the back. Now in your seated position twist back and take the weight on your shield...(I am sure you can be inventive) So can the hand ever be in this position can the fingers ever be in this position? Is it anatomically possible? If not why model it this way? What does it tell us about the attitude of the RM if anything? why did LCW allow it ? do it? if none of this matters to you that is also an important piece of the research game because if the public dont notice why bother to change it. This is todays challenge and even having done Yoga for many years; I can happily fold my leg behind my head and twist in to some ungodly positions, be careful not to strain yourself. Many thanks for your help ahead of it arriving. Have a good day Larry
-
I admit that the reason why this trident thing is important because I believe based on the observations I have made that some of the working dies used for example to strike the 61 and 62 half pennies show evidence that the arm has been moved. Now before you jump on me like a pack of wolves I have to say that I do not understand why there should be evidence in the coins, but this is the logical conclusion. The coins show often traces of a second trident to the left of the one we see now. Its ends sometimes are even higher than the inner circle. Close to the extant hand to the left is a mound a slight rise in the topography of the coin almost looking like a "rusty patch" and in it I have found the fingers of the hand. This would fit the sitting Britannia much better as it draws the trident closer. However I have another even more wild suggestion to make again based on observation. Further to the left are almost always a series of scars invariably in the same place and with the exact positioning in order to interpret them as the helmet of the Britannia. The position of the fingers in this "rusty mound" suggests an association with a standing britannia. The key to this is not only understanding the scars but also the topography of the coin. It would require a 3D scan to verify if these rises in the coin fit a pattern which conforms to the explanation I have. Once again I know you think me bonkers but I have tried over and over to dismiss the evidence but the best fit I have for what there is in the coins themselves is the above explanation. Don't please ask me why we have no evidence and don't ask me why we have no patterns or written evidence to suggest that a standing Britannia was ever used before the 1902 florin. Because I have not got a clue. I am just applying empirical reasoning to observations.
-
1873/2 Penny has it been recorded?
DrLarry replied to zookeeperz's topic in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
this one works nicely too
