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

   Rotographic    

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.

secret santa

Accomplished Collector
  • Content Count

    2,538
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    162

Posts posted by secret santa


  1. 13 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

    Could you please tell me.... this is Obverse VI F with reverse VI f ? 

    It is obverse 4 (Gouby F) and the pictured coins are F24 - Freeman 4+F (Gouby F+f), but the same missing leaf has been seen on (2) specimens of F22 (Freeman 4+D; Gouby F+d).

    (no-one uses roman numerals to identify obverse types)


  2. On a different subject, I have been studying the obverse 4 missing leaf types where all the examples that I've seen bear slight traces of the "missing" leaf and a weakened linear circle above the missing leaf. The example in Michael Gouby's book, however, shows a complete linear circle:

    1413106812_1861F24missingleaflowres.jpg.a2852953965c0722b6b0f834e4b3e3f8.jpg

    However, close examination suggests that these 2 pictures are of the same coin - compare the shading and the dark spot on the right hand side. Perhaps the 2nd picture was doctored (definitely not by Michael) to illustrate what the missing leaf might look like. Michael agrees with me and intends to include a different picture in any future updates to his book.

    I therefore think that the genuine missing leaf types look like this, with weakened linear circle:

    714187847_1861F22DNWmissingtopleafzoom(2).jpg.0d35f4bfe229b028a24d8026397e5b13.jpg

    Which is probably what would be expected from a partially filled die in that area of the coin.

    • Like 4

  3. 3 hours ago, Coinery said:

    I don’t believe it’s a coin that was minted having used the G of the other Gs present on the obverse.

    The working die wouldn't have been created with a G in VICTORIA and therefore it must have been caused by manual intervention. London Coins note that the rogue "G" is of a slightly different format to the other proper "G"s (in D:G: and REG) and Michael Gouby suggests that it might have been caused accidentally through an intended die repair to the "G" of REG being carried out by a repairer forgetting that a "G" on the right of the incuse die will actually affect the left side of the struck coin, and inadvertently "repairing" with a "G" punch the "C" of VICTORIA instead which is on the right side of the die diametrically opposite the "G" of REG.

    Anyway, the error must have been spotted quite quickly given the restricted numbers of affected coins that reached circulation, as demonstrated by the fact that only 10 surviving examples have so far been recorded out of huge numbers of 1862 pennies.

    • Like 3
×