1762 3d

[Rob 3,152]

OK chaps and chapesses, we all know that the early milled small change is riddled with spelling errors. Does anyone else have a 1762 3d and if so is it struck from the same reverse die with F/R in FR or are there a number of dies? Ta.

[scott 144]

this one is mine

I cant say for sure if that is F over R though, but there are recuts on the obverse of mine.

so yes there are other dies, my letter spacing is completly differant

Edited May 16, 2013 by scott

[Rob 3,152]

Thanks Scott.

[HistoricCoinage 147]

Here are mine, which I no longer own.

[Debbie 58]

Rob, if you do a search on ebay there are a few examples on there.

[Peter 615]

Debbie is correct.

Here is one from newly listed.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GB-George-III-Maundy-Threepence-1762-/271207309553?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item3f253720f1

[Rob 3,152]

Here are mine, which I no longer own.

Difficult to confirm because you no longer have the coin, but on the bottom example are we looking at a recut G2 reverse die with a recut 2 over a 9 or possibly an underlying 1 for 1761 where the die wasn't used?

Debbie and Peter - thanks. I must try to remember ebay and the piles of shite found thereon. I'm afraid I have virtually blanked it for the past few years.

[HistoricCoinage 147]

Here are mine, which I no longer own.

Difficult to confirm because you no longer have the coin, but on the bottom example are we looking at a recut G2 reverse die with a recut 2 over a 9 or possibly an underlying 1 for 1761 where the die wasn't used?

Debbie and Peter - thanks. I must try to remember ebay and the piles of shite found thereon. I'm afraid I have virtually blanked it for the past few years.

Interesting point. I always suspected a 1 but, as you say, a 9 is more likely.

[Rob 3,152]

Here are mine, which I no longer own.

Difficult to confirm because you no longer have the coin, but on the bottom example are we looking at a recut G2 reverse die with a recut 2 over a 9 or possibly an underlying 1 for 1761 where the die wasn't used?

Debbie and Peter - thanks. I must try to remember ebay and the piles of shite found thereon. I'm afraid I have virtually blanked it for the past few years.

Interesting point. I always suspected a 1 but, as you say, a 9 is more likely.

The mintages of the various denominations can't have been too high and so it is easy to envisage the dies being recut for further use. The intermittent dates encountered suggest that demand wasn't that high. Going back to an earlier thread that I posted on the 1766 penny, I remain convinced that this is the unused 1765 die recut, or at least the die used for my coin. The big problem here is that no one has done a study. Dave Seaman would probably be the best authority on this, so must remember to ask the question next time I see him.

[scott 144]

something going on on the 2 of mine as well.

[Red Riley 2]

OK, here's my fourpenneth. The lower grade coin has particularly clean legend with no obvious evidence of re-cutting.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Red Riley

[Peckris 579]

OK, here's my fourpenneth. The lower grade coin has particularly clean legend with no obvious evidence of re-cutting.

Six penn'orth, surely?

Do I win the prize for being the first to state the bleedin' obvious?