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.

Paulus

Penny Acquisition of the week

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, terrysoldpennies said:

Hoovering  SUCKS full stop. :D

Depends if you left one lying around. ;)

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hit a full stop whilst speed reading once- very nasty.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 9:03 PM, alfnail said:

One was sold by London Coins in December 2016 for £400 + BP (Ex-Findlow, see link); I can't see that they have sold another one since.

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=155&searchlot=1202&searchtype=2

Other than yours, and the one Bob sold to Tony C, I am only aware of one other which I saw briefly on ebay (think about a year ago) and then it disappeared...…..not sure why!

So my feeling is that it is rarer than the 1897 Dot, and probably on a par with the 1875 Canon Ball.

Maybe other members know of additional examples, would be good to hear. 

The example which appeared on ebay a year or so ago was the same piece that was sold in the LCA December 2016 auction. I tracked down this ebayer and he said he made a mistake by putting a picture of the 1870 dot from his reference folder onto ebay, instead of the actual coin he had for sale!

So that means 4 known so far, not 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 8:54 PM, blakeyboy said:

I hit a full stop whilst speed reading once- very nasty.....

I hope it didn't damage your colon.

Regarding the 1890 - interesting, thanks for sharing.  Like Rob and perhaps many others, I wouldn't go out of my way to collect such a specimen - but if I had one just randomly, I would probably feel an extra bit pleased about it.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I hope it didn't damage your colon."

 

Good line.

 

 

The 1890 is an odd one- the date has so much more of a 'change' to it from normal than many varieties of other dates,

yet it's hardly commented on.

The London Coins examples make me want to look for more of them though.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My latest from Colonial Antiques, NZ. An 1862 CGS 65. Sorry about the photo as I did it on my laptop as I'm away from home.

Clipboard.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after a protracted search, I've finally managed to locate and buy a 1918H with probably slightly better detail than most. At any rate, I think it's the best one I'm going to manage.

The breastplate isn't fully struck up, but is not absent either, and there is some reasonable hair detail, which give the King's bald appearance on most 1918H pennies is a bit of an improvement.

 

punny1918H rev.jpg

punny1918hobv.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Well after a protracted search, I've finally managed to locate and buy a 1918H with probably slightly better detail than most. At any rate, I think it's the best one I'm going to manage.

The breastplate isn't fully struck up, but is not absent either, and there is some reasonable hair detail, which give the King's bald appearance on most 1918H pennies is a bit of an improvement.

 

punny1918H rev.jpg

punny1918hobv.jpg

That is a decent coin. I wish that i had found it first though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Iannich48 said:

That is a decent coin. I wish that i had found it first though.

 

Thanks Ian. There is a bit of a back story to this one.

I noticed this coin on Michael & Rendel Ingram's website a few weeks ago. I wasn't prepared to buy it at that stage though, because whilst it had potential, the photograph was appalling.

As a former customer and enquirer, I then received a "how are you, is there anything else you are interested in?" type e mail from them. To which my reply was possibly, but could you send me a better pic. I received the pics below - still awful and they couldn't even be bothered to take it out of the plastic wallet. As a result I then asked if I could have the coin on approval, without paying the money up front. This was agreed to, and having then received the coin, decided to buy it.

In hand it was good, but their photography is dreadful. 

    

Rendel 1918H rev.jpg

Rendel 1918Hobv.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must have seen it on their website too, but like you said, not good pictures.  Nice find.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Well after a protracted search, I've finally managed to locate and buy a 1918H with probably slightly better detail than most. At any rate, I think it's the best one I'm going to manage.

The breastplate isn't fully struck up, but is not absent either, and there is some reasonable hair detail, which give the King's bald appearance on most 1918H pennies is a bit of an improvement.

Believe me - finding a fully struck breastplate is very uncommon (except on the recessed ear varieties)! That's as good as it gets with a decent obverse. Lovely penny. :) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Peckris 2 said:

Believe me - finding a fully struck breastplate is very uncommon (except on the recessed ear varieties)! That's as good as it gets with a decent obverse. Lovely penny. :) 

Cheers Chris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given their condition, I'm not sure they're really "penny acquisition of the week" class, but they are scarce and they were bargains. A 1903 open 3 and a 1911 hollow neck, Gouby X.

I don't normally collect non Freeman ID'd pennies, but this one is so well known that I couldn't turn down the opportunity at just £30 (unopposed bidder).

    

panny 1903 open 3 rev.jpg

panny 1903 open 3 obv.jpg

panny 1911 hollow neck rev.jpg

panny 1911 hollow neck obv.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

I don't normally collect non Freeman ID'd pennies

Freeman did miss some genuine goodies......................

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, secret santa said:

Freeman did miss some genuine goodies......................

He missed the gold bunhead halfpenny of 1887. Still everyone else seems to have missed this one.

BNJ 1967 p196-8, Peck's addendum to his 2nd addition. Item 24 (ref BMC p440). Examined by Peck: Victoria halfpenny in gold, specimen of BMC 1843 (weight 226.9 grains).

Owned by Spink at the time....what happened to that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, oldcopper said:

He missed the gold bunhead halfpenny of 1887. Still everyone else seems to have missed this one.

BNJ 1967 p196-8, Peck's addendum to his 2nd addition. Item 24 (ref BMC p440). Examined by Peck: Victoria halfpenny in gold, specimen of BMC 1843 (weight 226.9 grains).

Owned by Spink at the time....what happened to that?

I'm probably missing something very obvious here, but I've got Peck's second edition in front of me, at page 440. There is reference to 1843 - an 1887 halfpenny, but I can't find any mention of it being gold, nor a relevant addendum. Can you point me in the right direction?    

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

I'm probably missing something very obvious here, but I've got Peck's second edition in front of me, at page 440. There is reference to 1843 - an 1887 halfpenny, but I can't find any mention of it being gold, nor a relevant addendum. Can you point me in the right direction?    

It's in British Numismatic Journal, 1967, p196-8 and is on a web as a PDF - it was a list of new varieties that Peck would presumably have added in a 3rd addition of his book, if he'd had time to update it. But unfortunately he died the next year. Also is 1882 penny no H, and other interesting ones.

Put "Peck BNJ 1967" into Google and scroll down to "....miscellanea - British Numismatic Society"

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just looked at BNJ 1967 and there's no page 196-8 unless I'm doing it wrong - are you sure it's 1967 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, oldcopper said:

It's in British Numismatic Journal, 1967, p196-8 and is on a web as a PDF - it was a list of new varieties that Peck would presumably have added in a 3rd addition of his book, if he'd had time to update it. But unfortunately he died the next year. Also is 1882 penny no H, and other interesting ones.

Put "Peck BNJ 1967" into Google and scroll down to "....miscellanea - British Numismatic Society"

Ah, thanks. Very interesting. Indeed, wonder what did happen to that. Lost in the mists of time.

2 minutes ago, secret santa said:

I've just looked at BNJ 1967 and there's no page 196-8 unless I'm doing it wrong - are you sure it's 1967 ?

It can be seen here. Item No 24, page 197 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, secret santa said:

Thanks Mike

No worries, Richard. You just wonder what becomes of these unique items. Presumably in private hands, somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting excerpt regarding the 1882 no H penny:

When studying the Victorian bronze series it is essential to work rigidly to the principle that no new variety is acceptable unless it is entirely beyond question. Details in the designs of this series cannot be satisfactorily studied from worn coins, though, unfortunately, this is attempted by some collectors. The fact that only two really fine, undoubted examples of this penny have turned up during the nine years since this catalogue was first published is ample evidence of the scarcity of these pieces. Any worn pieces, seemingly without H, can now be re-examined in a much more favourable light. Craig tells us (The Mint, p. 335) that 'the Mint stopped work on 1 February 1882 for ten months'—for reconstruction. During this period the coining of bronze was undertaken by Heaton and it is extremely unlikely that the Mint would be in a position to strike any bronze during the January preceding this upheaval. This leaves December as the period during which these pennies without H were almost certainly struck —doubtless a small issue to tide over

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about missing Hs, I picked up this 1876 penny recently - no trace of the H at all ! Assume a filled die given the position of the date. 

 

 

1876noh.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JLS said:

Talking about missing Hs, I picked up this 1876 penny recently - no trace of the H at all ! Assume a filled die given the position of the date. 

Either a filled die or more likely, someone removing the H 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×