George III crown, M over N

[Q.E.D. 0]

Hi guys,

it looks like M over N in BRITANNIARUM. I could not find it in ESC or Davies. Have you seen this variety before?

Thank you.

[Rob 3,152]

Hi guys,

it looks like M over N in BRITANNIARUM. I could not find it in ESC or Davies. Have you seen this variety before?

Thank you.

Is it not just a flaw? There is no sign of the left leg of an N which ought to be there because the N is considerably narrower than the M.

[Q.E.D. 0]

I think the gap in M and N is similar but I guess you are right about flaw, the middle in N is much thicker than here. Thank you.

[Cerbera100 0]

Not to criticise Rob, but three things...

- Is there not a small fleck at the top-left of the right-hand upright which could be the end of a serif?

- At the bottom-left of the left upright there is (possibly!) a similar fleck?!

- And also on the LHS, where the upright and downstroke meet, is this not supposed to be a finer point as on the right? The line of the bottom edge of this also changes direction, which I do not believe is supposed to happen!

Would of course need verifying with hand and eye-glass, but might be worth getting someone to have a proper look at it!

Q.E.D., apologies for using your image, but felt it might aid my comments!

[Rob 3,152]

Not to criticise Rob, but three things...

- Is there not a small fleck at the top-left of the right-hand upright which could be the end of a serif?

- At the bottom-left of the left upright there is (possibly!) a similar fleck?!

- And also on the LHS, where the upright and downstroke meet, is this not supposed to be a finer point as on the right? The line of the bottom edge of this also changes direction, which I do not believe is supposed to happen!

Would of course need verifying with hand and eye-glass, but might be worth getting someone to have a proper look at it!

Q.E.D., apologies for using your image, but felt it might aid my comments!

You could be right, but there is so much recutting of letters on these dies (particularly at the end of the series which 1820 is) that it is difficult to be conclusive. The N is about 15% narrower than the M on three examples I have just examined and so the right leg of N would be at the edge of the left side of the M's right vertical. More interesting is that one of my three appears to have a composite M with the left leg showing as a discrete thin I. One of the coins also has a badly double cut N in the garter legend which is extremely variable in the thickness of the angled bar and resembles the underlying N in question, though is clearly not from the same punch as the letter is smaller on the reverse. It could therefore be an underlying N but one which is defective, hence the shape. The images of the M and N in the legend of three coins shows quite a bit of variation in the shape. Of the above 3 points only the first one is specific to an N, but if the letter is composite as on the bottom M in the attached then the verticals would be made with I's which should have 4 serifs.

Basically we need a glass on it.

[Q.E.D. 0]

Thank you for input, Cerbera100. Here is a better picture. If it's M over N then N must be really defective.