Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook


The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.


Sterling Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by alfnail

  1. Look Out for the Spectacle of the Eight

    Twice a year, once in February and once in November, the light shines into Palma Cathedral in a way that projects the beautiful roseate window onto the opposite wall, creating a figure 8 with its twin window. The cathedral opens at 8 am on the days this event occurs, with the light causing the alignment at 8.30 am, and it is free to enter and watch.

    El ocho de la Catedral de Palma m – Mallorcati

    • Like 6

  2. 2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

    Bit disappointing, as is the June LCA. 

    But there is another "Noonans" coin auction on 15th June, so relatively hard on the heels of the 24th May event. Hopefully it'll be a bit better, penny wise.   

    ...and still not great at marketing rarer types. e.g. the Bramah 2c this time...........which is really difficult, and should have been mentioned in the wording imo. 

  3. Correct, Palma Cathedral, amazing place. That rose stained glass window is 11 metres in diameter, with over 1000 pieces!

    We are spoiling ourselves, making up for lost Covid time, as we did Cordoba Mesquita only 5 weeks ago, again an amazing building.

    Think the Alhambra Palace in Granada is still my favourite though as they also have such wonderful gardens. We did that early May, just before Covid, and at that time of year the smell of oranges in their gardens is quite overpowering.


    • Like 1

  4. On 5/4/2022 at 9:28 PM, 1949threepence said:


    Ian, In a footnote at page 407, Peck states that bronzed currency pieces exist for 1841 (no colon), 1853 (OT), 1855 (PT) and 1857 (OT).

    This is something that I've ever noticed, or seen referred to anywhere . May I respectfully ask whether you have ever come across any in your extensive experience? If so, should we regard them as scarce? I'd imagine they would only be noticeable as such, in very high states of preservation.

    Thanks in advance.   

    Hi Mike, just catching up after getting home from holiday, sorry for delay replying. Guess where we were staying?


    I'm sure I have come across several bronzed current pieces. Like Peck, I haven't got too excited about them. If you read his pages 206/7 (under George III), and then Page 405 (Victoria) where you will see that he says Victorian "current pieces subsequently bronzed to resemble proofs are not uncommon". Half way down Page 405 he then describes "specious bronze patina", and I am sure that most Victorian 'Young Head' penny collectors will have noticed the 'patchy' type of coin which he describes within their own collections.

    I'm pretty sure that the reason why he doesn't bother to categorise them with separate reference numbers is that he didn't consider them anything special, just copper pieces treated post-mint. I think this is why he has simply added a footnote at the bottom of his Page 407 list.

    Specious means "misleading in appearance, especially misleadingly attractive".

    This increased attractiveness was probably a good little earner, particularly if the treated coins could then be passed off as genuine bronzed proofs.

    Personally I don't think it's worth spending a lot of time searching for bronzed current coins.    

    It does help to have an 1839 penny to see the clear differences.

    • Like 3

  5. On 4/21/2022 at 6:09 PM, jelida said:

    I have had a chance to look at my 1882’s this afternoon.  I have three F111 2/1 coins, one is as BP 1882 Ka, and the other two appear not to be ‘K’ but much more like the F114 2/1 Gouby shows,  with a small spike further to the left. These both have a miniscule protrusion on the top of the arch of the 2 that could be the top left serif of the 1. Then I have one F114 2/1 as per Gouby BP 1882 Ma. I would say that one of my F111’s is identical to the F114 overstrike, and the other may be but the spike is less distinct. So have I possibly a new variety? I will try and get some microscope pics to show what I am looking at.


    Thanks for the pictures Jerry.

    Your ‘undoubled’ example of Ka does seem to reinforce that this is a different type of overdate to my Kb examples.

    Perhaps even more interesting are your middle 3 pictures which seem to not just show the protrusion top left (like an F114 Ma) but also top right too. I think you would be justified claiming this as a new type of F111 requiring documenting, Kc.

    Your F114 Ma (final picture) is exactly as I have seen myself. It’s interesting that MG says on his page 79 “the only part of the 1 that can be seen, on this example, is the small portion that sticks out centrally, half way up the 2”. I think, however, that the tiny protrusion top left can also be seen in his picture on Page 79 and may even be a clearer identifier than then protrusion halfway up the 2.

    I  attach my own example as confirmation of this type.

    1882Ma Predecimal.jpg

    • Like 1

  6. On 4/8/2022 at 6:04 PM, Rob said:

    How common or rare is BP1882Ha given it isn't in Freeman or Spink which only list the 2/1?

    I wanted to dwell on this 1882 Obverse / Reverse pairing, and get some more views. Just to recap:-

    Gouby has the pairing as 1882Ha (P + p), plus overdate types 1882Ka (P + p) and 1882Kb (P + p)

    Freeman has the same die pairing as F111 (11 + M), but goes on to say in his footnote 23 that

    “All specimens of no. 111 believed to be 2/1. Only small sections of the ‘1’ are visible , as it seems to have been partially erased from the die”

    I have just spent a bit of time checking my previous sales of this die pairing, and find that I have owned 3 examples of Gouby type 1882Kb (P +p).  

    Below are high-definition pictures of the overdates on 2 of these 3 coins, which I believe is an exact match with the small picture bottom right on Page 78 of MG’s book:-


    The red arrow shows an extra bit of the underneath 1 which I think can sometimes be seen on better examples. Whilst I do not have a high-definition picture of the 3rd piece which I have owned (now sold) I can still see that the bit I have highlighted in yellow (on the Alderley piece) can be seen on all 3 coins, and I feel this is a distinctive / fairly obvious feature of this type.

    I can also see from my past sales that I have sold many more examples of 1882 (11 + M) which have no evidence of an underlying numeral 1.  Bearing in mind that the overdate is, in my opinion, fairly easy to see I am very surprised that Freeman believed there were no examples that did not have the overdate. If he had a number of 1882’s in his sample, with this die pairing, then surely some would not have had the overdate.

    Gouby, on the other hand, has 1882Ha as Rare and 1882Ka/b as Extremely Rare, which I think reflects my own observations.


    My second thought on this type is regarding 1882Ka; a full date picture can again be found on Page 78 of Gouby’s book.

    Whilst Gouby does not show a full date picture of his type 1882Kb I can see by examining my own pieces that the position of the numerals (and H) on my examples of 1882Kb seem to be in identical locations to the example of his 1882Ka. I also notice that the 1882Ka on Page 78 has all numerals (and H) doubled, and that there is additionally some ‘flawing’ between the base of the numeral 2 and the outer curve. This has left me thinking that Ka and Kb may both have been struck from the same die, but that Ka is just struck later after the die has become ‘flawed’, and that this flawing perhaps gives a false impression of a different (second) 2/1 amended die.

    I have looked at Richard’s ‘englishpennies’ website but see that he does not distinguish between Ka and Kb types. I am wondering if a member a) actually owns the Ka piece pictured in Gouby’s book or b) thinks they may have an example of this Ka variety.

    Apologies to any member who does not own Gouby’s book for reference!

    • Like 3

  7. 4 hours ago, Rob said:

    How common or rare is BP1882Ha given it isn't in Freeman or Spink which only list the 2/1?

    And a second question. How many date widths are there for 1869? I've got an 11.5 here and Gouby only lists 10.5

    Gouby says that the 1882Ha is 'Rare', and that the 2/1 variety (same obverse/reverse) is 'Extremely Rare'. I think that pretty much ties in with my own experience. I regularly try to spot 1882 types  with fewer reverse teeth on ebay (Gouby's Reverse P), and then try to determine the obverse type if I find the right reverse. Clearly you need a decent ebay picture to have a chance of spotting the 2/1 overdate, which is seen on both Gouby (P+p) F111 and Gouby (R+p) F114..................with the 2/1 on the F114 being particularly difficult to see. 

    I have also seen, and think I have pictures of, 1869's and 1864's with several different date widths.  

    • Like 1

  8. The 1860/59 clearly has the zero over the narrow date style of numeral 9, as the 'overlay' picture (RHS) below demonstrates; perhaps the same style of numeral 9 was also used for 1858's.

    Bearing in mind that no 1858 overdates are seen on type without WW, doesn't this imply that it must be a 9/8....... not an 8/9? Several have mentioned 8/9, but wouldn't an over-dated 1859 already have the WW on the truncation?  


    1860 over 1859 Narrow Style of 9 DNW.jpg

    • Like 2

  9. 14 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

    This type is not especially rare, although I've never yet made out the two dots referred to. The knob and vertical line are clearly very obvious.    

    Hi Mike, I think that it references the protrusion highlighted in the pictures on this thread from January last year. It was when I also thought, like Rob, that the top of the underneath numeral/s looked like a 4. There are also some other high-definition pictures on that thread which may be a useful reference for some members.

    1858/3 Penny - British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries - British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com


  10. On 2/21/2022 at 2:10 PM, terrysoldpennies said:

    My coin has no die crack , and with the die crack on all the sturdy 5s but not on the slim 5s it strongly suggests two different fonts !!

    Just been checking my past sales and found one which I had marked as 1875Ax with 5 now over a gap. Think definitely a different date style, also noting that the numerals 7 and 5 seem more distant from exergual line.


    1875Ax Predecimal.jpg

    1875 Ax Date.jpg

    • Like 1