2 For attribution

[just.me 23]

Hi Dave, personally I would put the missing WW down to a blocked die or a bad strike.

[azda 979]

Or the fact that the bust is obviously lower and that there's nö WW. There is no evidence of WW being there at all, i cannot see your theory just.me

[just.me 23]

I disagree the bust is lower. The bust line is not struck up properly on your coin and has blurred the area where the WW is.

like Nick said ' On your

example, the

bottom edge of

Victoria's dress is

not very well

defined and there is

almost no

discernible gap

between the dress

and the arc and

trefoil border. My

guess is that the

WW has become

obscured by the

encroaching dress

line.'

On your latest close up pic, there does look like there is a trace of the left side of the w, looking like a v, very shallow, situated to the left side of the 2nd trefoil after the 9.

[azda 979]

Ok so back to Nicks pic, you can See a Full Cross in the crown and mine? We can all see things when we stare long enough At it, i mentioned i had a ticket with the coin that states die 8, again thats anyones guess, but you seem sure its die 39, yet rob had it down for 9 or 19

Nicks davies 762 is totally different to my picture hence the reason i don't see your theory, you said all those d 762s were die 39, yet thats die 3

Edited July 25, 2011 by azda

[just.me 23]

they are from different dies (3 & 39). The crosses are in the same place, just better defined on one than the other.

Die numbers are unique to a specific die, there may be alterations to enhance the specific die if needed e.g. re cutting letters etc to give very minor microvarieties, but there wouldnt be 2x 1877 florins with completely different obverses both with die 39s.

The only example I know about in the thousand odd die number florins that has had a double die number is 1873 die 188, which had a wide and narrow spaced 188.

[Rob 3,152]

Ok so back to Nicks pic, you can See a Full Cross in the crown and mine? We can all see things when we stare long enough At it, i mentioned i had a ticket with the coin that states die 8, again thats anyones guess, but you seem sure its die 39, yet rob had it down for 9 or 19

Nicks davies 762 is totally different to my picture hence the reason i don't see your theory, you said all those d 762s were die 39, yet thats die 3

The 9 or 19 was based on the original picture. The blown up one looks like a 39 to me too.

Do we have a good image of a high grade die 39 anywhere? If we could see the WW on one coin, it would establish the exact position of the WW and make the argument a lot more clear cut.

[azda 979]

they are from different dies (3 & 39). The crosses are in the same place, just better defined on one than the other.

Die numbers are unique to a specific die, there may be alterations to enhance the specific die if needed e.g. re cutting letters etc to give very minor microvarieties, but there wouldnt be 2x 1877 florins with completely different obverses both with die 39s.

The only example I know about in the thousand odd die number florins that has had a double die number is 1873 die 188, which had a wide and narrow spaced 188.

Ok, so the ticket i have saying die number 8 is so far obsolete then?

[azda 979]

Ok so back to Nicks pic, you can See a Full Cross in the crown and mine? We can all see things when we stare long enough At it, i mentioned i had a ticket with the coin that states die 8, again thats anyones guess, but you seem sure its die 39, yet rob had it down for 9 or 19

Nicks davies 762 is totally different to my picture hence the reason i don't see your theory, you said all those d 762s were die 39, yet thats die 3

The 9 or 19 was based on the original picture. The blown up one looks like a 39 to me too.

Do we have a good image of a high grade die 39 anywhere? If we could see the WW on one coin, it would establish the exact position of the WW and make the argument a lot more clear cut.

If you look back at Nicks full picture of the coin from Davies book i assume, then the WW is just to the right of the last digit. I have scoped to the right of the last didgit and more without any hint of WW. If Nicks picture is of a Davies 762 then i'm still not convinced of what just.me is saying, both OBVs are different in bust to rim and full cross showing

Edited July 26, 2011 by azda

[azda 979]

Ok, i'll upload this again. The picture i've looked at and the die number to me looks like 19, the 1st digit does'nt look much like a 3, although as i've said, the ticket has die 8. So.......Onwards, now to my mind, that looks more like 19 now than 39, so as i've been saying, we can make it look like what we want if we stare long enough, but if we stare long enough, we still can't see WW to the right of the last digit.

Also just.me, you stated that the die numbering was done by hand, was this done with a hammer and punch, because by the looks of Nicks picture the number looks raised to me, so i'm curious how that might have been done.

If it was done by a punch, surely it would be incused, the WW in Nicks picture also looks raised.

Edited July 26, 2011 by azda

[just.me 23]

Ok, i'll upload this again. The picture i've looked at and the die number to me looks like 19, the 1st digit does'nt look much like a 3, although as i've said, the ticket has die 8. So.......Onwards, now to my mind, that looks more like 19 now than 39, so as i've been saying, we can make it look like what we want if we stare long enough, but if we stare long enough, we still can't see WW to the right of the last digit.

Also just.me, you stated that the die numbering was done by hand, was this done with a hammer and punch, because by the looks of Nicks picture the number looks raised to me, so i'm curious how that might have been done.

If it was done by a punch, surely it would be incused, the WW in Nicks picture also looks raised.

Yes they were hand done, incuse on the die = raised on the coin.

You picked me up wrong earlier, all die 39s will be D762, not vice versa.

The 1st number is definitely not a 1, there is a very clear loop at the bottom.

[just.me 23]

Ok, i'll upload this again. The picture i've looked at and the die number to me looks like 19, the 1st digit does'nt look much like a 3, although as i've said, the ticket has die 8. So.......Onwards, now to my mind, that looks more like 19 now than 39, so as i've been saying, we can make it look like what we want if we stare long enough, but if we stare long enough, we still can't see WW to the right of the last digit.

Also just.me, you stated that the die numbering was done by hand, was this done with a hammer and punch, because by the looks of Nicks picture the number looks raised to me, so i'm curious how that might have been done.

If it was done by a punch, surely it would be incused, the WW in Nicks picture also looks raised.

Yes they were hand done, incuse on the die = raised on the coin.

You picked me up wrong earlier, all die 39s will be D762, not vice versa.

The 1st number is definitely not a 1, there is a very clear loop at the bottom.

[azda 979]

Ok, wel due to the confusion on this i'm going to keep this one until it can be verified one way or the other.

[just.me 23]

Are you in contact with Peter Davies? he would be a good person to ask an opinion of.

[azda 979]

Are you in contact with Peter Davies? he would be a good person to ask an opinion of.

I'm personally not, perhaps Rob?

[just.me 23]

I'll ask him at the weekend and e-mail your scans on.

[azda 979]

I'll ask him at the weekend and e-mail your scans on.

Ok

[Peckris 579]

Ok so back to Nicks pic, you can See a Full Cross in the crown and mine? We can all see things when we stare long enough At it, i mentioned i had a ticket with the coin that states die 8, again thats anyones guess, but you seem sure its die 39, yet rob had it down for 9 or 19

Nicks davies 762 is totally different to my picture hence the reason i don't see your theory, you said all those d 762s were die 39, yet thats die 3

My 1887 wreath reverse sixpence variety is a lot more of a sure-fire observably different coin compared to the regular issue than yours appears to be Dave. Yet how much interest has it aroused in this forum? Almost none. Sorry if I'm unsympathetic, but that's been my experience. Sour grapes? You bet.

[azda 979]

I agree peck, but obviously no one knows how many of these exist and by the looks of things no one actually knows what it looks like. It could be unique or there could be dozens, its the finding things out , thats the joy of collecting my sour graped old pal

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

no one actually knows

That's the key thing to me, so much of what we know, or think we know can hardly be presented as definitive, yet it so often is.

[Peckris 579]

I agree peck, but obviously no one knows how many of these exist and by the looks of things no one actually knows what it looks like. It could be unique or there could be dozens, its the finding things out , thats the joy of collecting my sour graped old pal

Well, I have NEVER seen another 1887 "8/8" "8 7" sixpence, so unless I can get Spinks interested then despite its rarity it's a worthless piece of crap that no-one is bothered with.

Amazing how every other unrecorded variety posted in these forums has everyone in orgasms.

[just.me 23]

Ok so back to Nicks pic, you can See a Full Cross in the crown and mine? We can all see things when we stare long enough At it, i mentioned i had a ticket with the coin that states die 8, again thats anyones guess, but you seem sure its die 39, yet rob had it down for 9 or 19

Nicks davies 762 is totally different to my picture hence the reason i don't see your theory, you said all those d 762s were die 39, yet thats die 3

My 1887 wreath reverse sixpence variety is a lot more of a sure-fire observably different coin compared to the regular issue than yours appears to be Dave. Yet how much interest has it aroused in this forum? Almost none. Sorry if I'm unsympathetic, but that's been my experience. Sour grapes? You bet.

Hi Peck, I'd be interested to read the post on your Sixpence, could you let me know where about to look?

Thanks

[azda 979]

Thats probably more or leas the problem Peck, if its unique then its like buying a disc me old bean. Unfortunately the 1877 has been listed, so its known, just not what it looks like

[Peckris 579]

Hi Peck, I'd be interested to read the post on your Sixpence, could you let me know where about to look?

Thanks

Hi - it's on this page http://www.predecimal.com/forum/index.php?showforum=44 - about halfway down

Thats probably more or leas the problem Peck, if its unique then its like buying a disc me old bean. Unfortunately the 1877 has been listed, so its known, just not what it looks like

It's a sure-fire unrecorded variety Dave - the 8 over 8 is clear as daylight, and the wide space between the 8 and the 7 is clearer still. It can't possibly be a 'smudge' or a 'worn die' or anything like that. That's why I'm so miffed. It's so clear and so obvious. I did get some interest from our friend 1887 who agrees it's unrecorded and wanted to put it in his book, though it's all gone quiet on that front.

One of you guys who's friendly with Davies could do me a favour and point him towards the discussion pages, if you felt like it?

[Peter 615]

Peck

I will swap yur for a rare 2010 2p...I know someone(Rob)who has one for sale.

[Rob 3,152]

The problem with all these production variations as opposed to actual design variations is that they are an open ended can of worms. Minute differences in the spacing of the last digit or two have a definite place in the list of varieties for the specialist who drills down to the level of identifying individual die characteristics, but for your average punter it doesn't matter a jot as they will be for the most part satisfied with a relatively obvious difference in the overall design. Wide date, narrow date, or for the flat disc collectors out there, any visible date or no date. Young portrait/older features or whatever, it all depends on how clear it is at a glance.

Double cut letters as a result of reinforcing a worn die or making an old blocked one serviceable will result in yet another variety, but as has been said before, to create the interest you need to publish something because that work will act as the reference to define the variety. 1887's interest in the date is a rare example of the detailed study that needs to be done if all of these microvarieties are to have any relevance. I wish him well in his endeavours, as the mint's voluminous output for this year would test the patience of the most ardent researcher. But if he doesn't complete it and nothing gets published, then ..... back to square one. I've got a coin with a double cut 8 and a 7 that's .........

To get back to the original point of this thread, what is needed is a clear image of a high grade die 39 coin with WW clearly visible or not so that we can say for certain if the die is the same one and the WW is hidden or not. At the moment we collectively appear to be p*****g in the wind as nobody is able to come up with conclusive proof one way or the other. Does anybody have a good image of an attested B4 florin? Both these are required if we are to settle this attribution.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Rob