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. Sadly ‘yes’ Mike, I have definitely looked into 1797 ships. 

    I have owned and logged 40 different varieties of 1797 ships paired with 10-leaf obverses, and a further 7 different ships paired with the 11-leaf obverse.

    I have taken digital microscope pictures, all to exactly the same scale (65x), for comparison. I have now sold all but 4 examples retained in my collection.

    Apart from the number of gun port differences there are also many distinct differences in positioning of flag, bowsprit, platform, sails and rigging, also size of ships, roughness of sea and angle of ship in the sea.

    I attach 8 examples to demonstrate some of the differences I found, reduced in size to meet the site 500Kb limit.

    Hope this helps!

    Ships 1 to 4_Sized.jpg

    • Like 3

  2. I’m just sorting through a few Victorian pennies, with a view to thinning down the collection, and thought the following pictures may be of interest to variety collectors.

    They show 6 slightly different 1853  3/3 repairs. Top left is the exact same coin pictured on MG’s website, which he calls Date Style C (?):-

    1853 Copper penny 3 date styles (michael-coins.co.uk)

    Bottom left is the closer DEF colon (Peck 1503). I have owned 12 examples of this type over the years, and noted that they always show exact the same obverse / reverse legend features…… indicating that the closer DEF colon is only found on a single die pairing.

    The fact that I have 6 different 3/3’s, all with Date Style C (Plain 5), I think demonstrates the difficulty that would be encountered if one ever tried to re-catalogue all the minor sub-varieties that are found in this copper series.


  3. On 8/24/2021 at 5:58 PM, DaveG38 said:

    Curiously, just after you posted this, I was going to comment that, for me, it will be a sad day when The Rolling Stones start to fall off their perches, and blow me if Charlie Watts hsn't gone and died. The beginning of the end of my childhood music!


    On 8/22/2021 at 10:48 PM, Peckris 2 said:

    Bit before my time. The Beatles awoke my own interest in pop music.

    I remember as a teenager, in the village I grew up in, peer pressure forced you to choose between Beatles and Stones..........couldn't be both..........a tricky one!


    • Like 2

  4. The fact that the 5 is an exact match (apart from blocking) + the distances to both the sea and linear circle (which place the dot in the correct position) make me think that it is an example of the cannon ball.

    If the tooth on the better example had been flattened through wear then the horizontal red line would also meet at the same point as the lower grade (worn) piece.

    Here's another shot of the cannon ball on the worn piece, which I think is a little more convincing. The overhead shot with the digital microscope, used to get the measurements, has light reflection and makes the actual dot less convincing.

    I think this is a cannon ball penny, but guess we will see whether Richard agrees!

    Cannon Ball (2).jpg

  5. On 8/11/2021 at 7:50 PM, jelida said:

    I am pretty sure that the silhouette of the two ‘5’s is identical, which it should not be if there was a mis-placed ‘repair’.  I think there is another reason for the apparent difference other than an altered die. Can you superimpose the images? Perhaps the apparent dent in the horizontal of the above ‘5’ is an earlier stage die fill.

    Hi Jerry, I've had time to knock this out this evening with the superimposed images you requested.........good idea!

    Actual pictures of both 1875 'Cannon Ball' coins are at the left hand and right hand ends, both shot at the exact same 100x magnification, and identically positioned.

    The unusual (italic looking) 5 picture has then been over-laid onto the normal 5 picture.

    Looking from right to left, it has then been gradually removed, 10% at a time, using the software transparency feature.................to slowly reveal the normal 5 underneath. 

    As you suspected, it is pretty convincing that the unusual looking 5 is NOT an altered die......... even though at first sight it  would seem to be so.

    I guess it is just a late strike of this variety, with part of the top of the 5 now blocked out.

    Hope the pictures are clear enough; I had to resize to stick within the 500K limit!!


    0 to 100sized.jpg

    • Like 1

  6. 1 hour ago, jelida said:

    I don’t think anything is underneath, either a bit of die fill or a small knock to the crossbar of the ‘5’. But it could do with photo superimposition on a ‘normal’ ‘5’  to be sure that the outlines are the same. This surely must be a single die variety.


    Re. your 'must be a single die variety' comment Jerry, I have just taken digital microscope shots of this low grade Cannon Ball (with repaired 5) and compared to my higher grade example (no repaired 5) to attempt to pinpoint the dot in relation to a) the sea level and b) the linear circle.  Whilst the border teeth are flatter on the more worn (repaired 5) example it does seem to me that the cannon ball fits in well with the expected location.....and must be bona fide.


    Cannon Ball Measurements Better Example.jpg

    Cannon Ball Measurements.jpg

  7. 55 minutes ago, blakeyboy said:

    No- I looked earlier.  That '5' on yours is really interesting- what the hell is underneath???


    17 minutes ago, jelida said:

    I don’t think anything is underneath, either a bit of die fill or a small knock to the crossbar of the ‘5’. But it could do with photo superimposition on a ‘normal’ ‘5’  to be sure that the outlines are the same. This surely must be a single die variety.


    I think it looks like top part of another 'higher' 5 Blake, but then there is no other part of an underneath 5 protruding elsewhere which I guess I would have expected to see e.g. like this 1862/2  

    2 croppedtextsized.jpg

  8. 43 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

    I looked at that and even sent a link to a friend as the 5 looked like it was over something on the ebay picture ,both of us did not notice the dot ,so well SPOTted 😀👍

    Well spotted yourself Pete. I too saw that the 5 looked a bit strange, made me question whether the cannon ball was present because didn't think other cannon ball examples had anything going on with the 5.

    Anyway, here is a close-up to put you out of your misery.


  9. Poor grade, but found this 1875Ce (Cannon Ball) on ebay the other day.

    I noticed looking at latest MG page 68 that he still has the other type of 1875 with a dot (i.e. under the first I of VICTORIA) down as a Cd, with same obverse (his L) as the cannon ball.

    However, the only coins I have seen with dot under I  have had the narrow date reverse. In fact I have only seen two 1875Cd's being sold since his 2009 book when type was first documented, both at auctions with LCA in 2016.

    Q. Does anyone know if the dot under first  I of VICTORIA has actually (definitely) been seen paired with reverse L?

    Q. Isn't the dot under first I, type Cd, equally as rare as the cannon ball (and 1870 dot under Y) and worthy, therefore, of being in Richard's rarestpennies list?


    BP 1875Ce Reverse.jpg

    BP 1875Ce Obverse.jpg

    • Like 4

  10. 6 hours ago, bagerap said:

    Sorry, but Midsummer night's dream takes us back to the same problem. There's a line in the Rude Mechanicals version of Pyramus & Thisbe which could be interpreted as racially offensive:

    Thou wall, o wall, o sweet and lovely wall, show me thy chink to blink through with mine eyne!”

    Wasn't it a cue for Bottom to grab a hand? I guess if it had been the other way round that may have also caused an issue with FB!