Martinminerva

The shield rim IS indeed slightly recessed, like the original 1860 rev C that it appears to be based on. As specimens wear of course, that becomes a flatter part of the coin, so not a reliable definer. Much better is the lighthouse itself, plus the fact that the PE of PENNY are much closer to the linear circle than on the normal 1873 reverse.

Found it! http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/3664-coin-aquisition-of-the-week/?page=502&tab=comments#comment-141727 And here's a screenshot of it :

Probably because the original post is 13 years old now!! I remember seeing on the forum a while ago that Bernie had found a lustrous A.Unc specimen of the 8+C# and posted pictures of that, but in another thread that I haven't been able to track down yet, but I'll keep looking...

The one I have listed on eBay is definitely obverse 8. Compare it with my (much better!) obverse 7 one above... Especially the position of the top leaves in relation to the colon after G of D:G: and the bottom of the truncation - obverse 7 above has truncation right up to linear circle, whereas obverse 8 on the eBay specimen has a distinct gap between bust and linear circle.

I have just listed on eBay a pretty grotty but identifiable example of this 1873 8+C# die pairing halfpenny if anyone wants to fill a gap... https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/284372897001 Wonder exactly how many are now known? Still think it's pretty rare though! cheers!

Have LCA stopped sending out printed catalogues?? I never received one for the March auction and have yet to do so this time too. I much prefer browsing through a proper catalogue than squinting at one on a device... Needless to say, if they have stopped sending catalogues to customers of many years on their mailing list. they haven't deigned to tell me!

In this day and age, who says it's a she...😏

Oh god, that makes me feel even worse now... I hang my head in shame...

And thanks for your understanding too, Jerry. Yes, I have certainly learnt today!

Oh, I must be then. I thought it was you who arranged for my user name to be changed when people were assuming I was a person called Martin Platt. I am not he !!

So sorry again...

Thanks for your understanding, Mike. Indeed, I have seen many, many other heads ups over the years on here that no-one has ever been reprimanded for which is why I didn't give it a second thought. I believe @secret santa might have clearance to remove things? Many years ago he kindly changed my user name for me...

I am most terribly sorry! I did not know that convention. Unfortunately, it won't let me remove the post now. If any member has moderator status or authorisation, indeed please remove it. Mea culpa - and I won't ever do it again. 😩

I am pretty certain this really is one though: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1911-King-George-V-Bronze-Penny/193915563743?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160727114228%26meid%3D0b4ae74e5165491189eda494b13bd6f6%26pid%3D100290%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D193915563743%26itm%3D193915563743%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2060778&_trksid=p2060778.c100290.m3507 And in very nice condition too, though appears to have been rather badly cleaned? Others have spotted it I guess by the bids already in, and wouldn't be at all surprised to see it go well into three figures...

It is the DIE, not the individual struck coins that are altered/repaired/corrected before more coins are struck from them! No-one could possibly go about changing each and every coin of the tens of thousands struck by each die! Besides, any alteration to a coin would be incuse, not in relief. But dies are mirror images of course so an incuse detail on a die becomes a relief detail on a struck coin. Just like potato prints or play dough prints when we were kids!

The other so called vip lots in this sale are: 229 - crown, which I am prepared to accept as a vip, lot 231 - halfcrown, really don't think so as I say above, and lot 236 - farthing, which I have my doubts about too.

I'm not convinced that this is a vip set - doesn't look good enough. I also think two other so called 1953 vip proofs in the same sale are not. One, a 1953 halfcrown, is the standard, common 2+A pairing; I though all the vip proofs of this denomination were the super-rare 1+A pair. The only one that looks genuinely vip is the slabbed crown. If you search the dnw auction catalogue for March 2021 for vip proof, these will come up, and see what other members think... Do you agree?

Can someone post a picture of it, please? I fancy a laugh!

Absolutely agree! Very few narrow date 79s in truly high grade, and likewise for open 3 1863s. I'd go further and even add 1864... All over the place in lower grade, but how many unc with lustre? In the old Cope and Rayner English Milled Coins, they had rarity estimates for different grades; maybe that should be the case amongst us penny-ists? But then of course we're talking about whether rarity is total extant or just nice ones! And that's always likely to be a moot point. I just try to get the best I can at the time and slowly improve grade if and when the chance comes along.

Absolutely, Mike, in the case of my 4 plus 3. In fact, in lower grade they are easy to spot as the sea wears flatter and obviously crosses the linear circle. Also, the date spacing is intermediate between the narrow and wide date versions of the common, later reverses for 1875.

Agreed - especially in lower grade. I have 4 ranging from good fine down to fair. And I have sold 3 other worse ones on eBay over the years... But I do agree that they are rare in high grade. Maybe that's more realistic for the 25 ish number if you only count EF and above! Don't really think they merit a page, Richard, or else you'd be listing loads of other varieties like open 3 1863s, narrow date 1879s etc which I suspect are a similar number both in lower and then higher grade...

Even back in 1927 in the auction?? Or indeed even when it was done (presumably) in Victorian times? Not a lot of money has been made with it if Seaby sold it for £20 back in 1992 and I paid £25 in 2021 !! Must have taken many hours to produce, so a good deal below the minimum wage! Anyway, a nice curio...

Close up of date... A real bit of craftsmanship, but why?!

Hi, all. I bought it, indeed as a curiosity. The seller had a "best offer" button on the listing, so I put in an offer and he accepted! I can confirm it has indeed been modified from an 1859 specimen. There is no w.w. and under extreme magnification one can see where material has been moved from the centre of the 9 to plug the "gap" at about 8 o'clock in the original digit so it looks like a continuous curve. But, my word, it has been done skilfully! I bought it as I remembered seeing one before (presumably Gary's above) and wondered how many others might be out there. I will try to take close-ups of the date later and post. The seller also told me that he bought it from Seaby's when they closed down and said it had been in old man Seaby's (would that be Peter Seaby??) personal collection as a curio. Wonder if he bought it from the auction Bramah mentioned? No way of knowing that, I guess... So, not a unique rarity - never thought it was - but a brilliantly executed alteration. Wonder why anyone would take the time and effort to do it, though?

And I think this would perhaps qualify as an alternative ONF penny - nearly even PFNNY too!! Certainly many letters are weak or deficient. A good diagnostic I suspect of this fourth die. Any other specimens out there?