Greaves

Many thanks Martinminerva for your two very interesting and informative replies and for taking the trouble to upload the pictures. I was not expecting anything significant here given I found nothing mentioned on London Coins and other sources. However I have learned something and that itself has value. Mike

I have two silver Victorian florins - one dated 1875 mdccclxxb and one from 1856 mdccclbi. I understand the b is equivalent to a v. I would be grateful if anyone can tell me if these are variants, with most coins with these dates using a v and if so do they have any rarity value? The former is in fair condition, the latter is very poor. Thanks.

PWA 1967 - sounds like a good idea. I'll give that a try.

I did contact CGS by e-mail as advised and asked if they could examine my penny and give me an opinion. After 10 days I have not received a reply or an even an acknowledgement. I am not surprised given a previous enquiry to London Coins who I understand are the same organisation received the same "customer service."

1949threepence - I agree it would not have been the intention of the Heaton mint not to include the H but surely this is true of all other die errors for penny and other coins. Presumably the rarity value of an erroneously struck coin is not dependent on the intention of the miller but the fact the coin exists as a rare variant however produced. Gary1000 - True. This would have been my suspicion had I bought from a coin dealer purporting it to be a rarity. However I bought a large batch of mixed pennies, possibly 300 or more from a private individual who was not a collector and I come across this one as a laboriously sorted through them.

Thanks to all. I did not realise my post would generate so much interest and comment. However no one appears to have answered my query whether a 1876 penny, apparently without an H, like mine, if produced from a filled die or a very worn die meant that the H was absent from the coin when it came off the mint or it was a very faint H and was worn out in time. I will e-mail CGS and ask if they will take a look. Naturally I will report back their response.

Thanks for all these useful comments, however I would be grateful for clarification on a number of points. I have no problem in principle in paying £14 for a professional opinion from CGS to examine the coin under a suitable microscope and lighting. However before I do can anyone please explain if the H has worn away why are the numbers of the date themselves very clear and not worn? I have re-examined the coin and Rob I cannot see any "hint of an H upright in line with the gap between teeth immediately to the right of the 8," I am happy to e-mail or private message (if available) anyone my JPG photo which can be enlarged with much more detail visible than the photobucket one. Secret Santa thought that any apparent H less specimens were from filled or very worn dies. If so when the coins were minted would they have had no H at all or a very faint one, which easily wears away or is it impossible to say? If a faint H has worn I assume various members here are saying high powered magnification can still detect a faint imprint?

I recently acquired this 1876 penny as part of a large collection from a private individual not a dealer. It looks like it lacks the H. I enclose a photo. Under a magnifier there is no trace of the H and although the coin itself is in poor condition the numbers of the date itself are very clear suggesting wear of the H has not occurred. Viewing by eye there is a very faint light patch where the H might have been but the coin has other light patches below the exergue. Any comments would be welcomed. http://s1287.photobucket.com/user/Greaves101/media/DSCN0102_zpssnn6lqvj.jpg.html

Prax, many thanks. It is now very clear and I can see the difference. Mike

Just.me recommended checking London Coins photos to see the difference between an open 3 and a normal 3. I have done this but I am not sure I can distinguish the two varieties. Does the curved diagonal stroke relate to the serif on the top horizontal bar of the 3, or the downward diagonal arising from the centre of the 3. Thanks in anticipation for any assistance.

Thanks. Got the coin now, alas not a Freeman 189, but in excellent condition, probably UNC.

Apologies if I was not clear. My query relates to a penny I have just bought, but not yet received. The colon dots appear not to point to a gap between teeth neither to the exact centre of a tooth but just off centre of the tooth. It is clearly different to all other 1920 pennies I have seen where the colon dots clearly point to a gap.

A Freeman 189 1920 penny, where the colon after the IMP points to a tooth is exceptionally rare. Does it have to point to the centre of the tooth or does the edge of the tooth count? Mike

Thanks all for the useful information. Any thoughts on the absence of teeth on the obverse especially between G: and B of BRITT? Just wear and tear? Bronze & Copper Collector says both coins are obverse 4s. In Michael Gouby's book "The British Bronze Penny" he uses capital letters for the obverses. I assume a 4 equates to a D?

I have just bought an 1860 bronze penny. I am pretty sure it is a reverse d. The teeth are very clear and consistent around the edge as the image shows. However I am unclear about the obverse. Firstly I am not sure if there are teeth or beads. If they are teeth they are certainly smaller than those on the reverse and less distinct. Also there are certain sections on the obverse where there are no teeth or beads at all, i.e. between the G: to the B of BRITT and at the bottom of the coin. Under the magnifier I can see no signs the teeth or beads are worn in these areas, and this seems unlikely anyway given the reverse is so good and there is no wear on its teeth. Any comments and advice would be appreciated