A love of Impossible reality, excited, an incredible a dream

[Accumulator 52]

OK, stop rubbing that one in! LOL!

Please please won't you see if you might at least pull a bit of that verd trace off with at least pharm. acetone?

Posting that pic has reminded me I was planning to bathe it olive oil!

[Peckris 579]

Or this

You don't want this one, the lustre is suspect.

I remember that coin (from Manchester?) and did wonder about the lustre. The 1933 and 1954 are both on my bucket list, together with the 1920 3+B!

Otherwise, I have to do with this (apologies for those that have seen it before). Particularly as it only cost me a penny!

No apology necessary - I'd love one of those! But one thing seems quite clear - if you look in my previous post just above, that Photoshopped image is of a genuine 1927 reverse. The so-called "1922 with 1927 reverse" (yours) is nothing of the sort really. It has a much wider rim and longer & thicker teeth. It is really a reverse on its own, a 'try out' if you like. It should be reclassified as a unique reverse, and given its own number. It's not even identical to the 1928-onwards reverse either, as the rim and teeth are different.

In fact I'd go as far as saying that the reverses from 1922 onwards would be :

Reverse X - normal 1922 reverse, also used in 1926

Reverse X2 - the rare "1927" 1922 reverse (pattern?)

Reverse Y - 1927 reverse

Reverse Z - 1928 - 1936 reverse

(I've given them XYZ letters as I haven't bothered to dovetail them in with previous Geo V reverses)

[petitioncrown 4]

SHOW YOUR DREAM COIN/S

Exeter Half-crown

A magnificent and beautiful specimen of exceptional quality, a full round coin. Deeply toned with underlying lustre. A portrait and fine engraving seldom seen. Our appetite for such quality is never satisfied.

Elizabeth I, Pattern Penny,

1601,1.96g.,in copper, crowned bust three-quarters left, wearing elaborate dress and ruff, the pledge of, rev. crowned monogram of Elizabeth dividing date, a penny (Brown and Comber P8; BMC 4; N.2051), a gemlike coin, the portrait expressive and delicately engraved, in mint state with a deep chocolate tone, excessively rare in copper

provenance:

W Brice, collection purchased en bloc by H Montagu, 1887

H Montagu, Sotheby, 7 May 1888, lot 256

J G Murdoch, Sotheby, 31 March 1903, lot 675

J O Manton, Sotheby, 10 February 1947, lot 69

R C Lockett, Glendining, 11 October 1956, lot 2059

Peck recorded six known specimens in copper, including those in the British Museum, the Fitzwilliam Museum, and the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow

[VickySilver 775]

Incredible piece there, I think you've come to spoil us! If I can get picture posting down, perhaps I could add just a bit as well.

[Peckris 579]

Elizabeth I, Pattern Penny,

1601,1.96g.,in copper, crowned bust three-quarters left, wearing elaborate dress and ruff, the pledge of, rev. crowned monogram of Elizabeth dividing date, a penny (Brown and Comber P8; BMC 4; N.2051), a gemlike coin, the portrait expressive and delicately engraved, in mint state with a deep chocolate tone, excessively rare in copper

provenance:

W Brice, collection purchased en bloc by H Montagu, 1887

H Montagu, Sotheby, 7 May 1888, lot 256

J G Murdoch, Sotheby, 31 March 1903, lot 675

J O Manton, Sotheby, 10 February 1947, lot 69

R C Lockett, Glendining, 11 October 1956, lot 2059

Peck recorded six known specimens in copper, including those in the British Museum, the Fitzwilliam Museum, and the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow

That's an early milled beauty, it really is. Just supposing your dreams came true and you had the funds to realise it, how much would that set you back?

[VickySilver 775]

OK, test of another 1922 Image...

Horrible quality and needs to be rotated to view; still, a rather nice 1922 entombed it may be though.

Special 19220001.bmp

Edited October 22, 2011 by VickySilver

[Rob 2,996]

Elizabeth I, Pattern Penny,

1601,1.96g.,in copper, crowned bust three-quarters left, wearing elaborate dress and ruff, the pledge of, rev. crowned monogram of Elizabeth dividing date, a penny (Brown and Comber P8; BMC 4; N.2051), a gemlike coin, the portrait expressive and delicately engraved, in mint state with a deep chocolate tone, excessively rare in copper

provenance:

W Brice, collection purchased en bloc by H Montagu, 1887

H Montagu, Sotheby, 7 May 1888, lot 256

J G Murdoch, Sotheby, 31 March 1903, lot 675

J O Manton, Sotheby, 10 February 1947, lot 69

R C Lockett, Glendining, 11 October 1956, lot 2059

Peck recorded six known specimens in copper, including those in the British Museum, the Fitzwilliam Museum, and the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow

That's an early milled beauty, it really is. Just supposing your dreams came true and you had the funds to realise it, how much would that set you back?

£9645.25 plus postage at 2003 prices

[Rob 2,996]

Slightly more mundane. A pattern shilling in copper.

[Accumulator 52]

OK, test of another 1922 Image...

Horrible quality and needs to be rotated to view; still, a rather nice 1922 entombed it may be though.

Interesting! It certainly looks like a 192A. Do you know which Grading Service and what grade they gave it?

[Accumulator 52]

No apology necessary - I'd love one of those! But one thing seems quite clear - if you look in my previous post just above, that Photoshopped image is of a genuine 1927 reverse. The so-called "1922 with 1927 reverse" (yours) is nothing of the sort really. It has a much wider rim and longer & thicker teeth. It is really a reverse on its own, a 'try out' if you like. It should be reclassified as a unique reverse, and given its own number. It's not even identical to the 1928-onwards reverse either, as the rim and teeth are different.

In fact I'd go as far as saying that the reverses from 1922 onwards would be :

Reverse X - normal 1922 reverse, also used in 1926

Reverse X2 - the rare "1927" 1922 reverse (pattern?)

Reverse Y - 1927 reverse

Reverse Z - 1928 - 1936 reverse

(I've given them XYZ letters as I haven't bothered to dovetail them in with previous Geo V reverses)

I agree. I was just trying to find a pic I had of the specimen 1922 with reverse of 1927, but with the ME obverse, to see if this was also identical to your X2 reverse. Unfortunately I don't seem to have it which may be because I promised to delete it after viewing!

[VickySilver 775]

Yes, that is a Specimen64 brown from NGC. Fair amount of red and a satin/matte finish...

[Accumulator 52]

Yes, that is a Specimen64 brown from NGC. Fair amount of red and a satin/matte finish...

It doesn't appear on their population report as far as I can see? I wasn't aware that an F192A had been graded by anyone.

[Peckris 579]

Elizabeth I, Pattern Penny,

1601,1.96g.,in copper, crowned bust three-quarters left, wearing elaborate dress and ruff, the pledge of, rev. crowned monogram of Elizabeth dividing date, a penny (Brown and Comber P8; BMC 4; N.2051), a gemlike coin, the portrait expressive and delicately engraved, in mint state with a deep chocolate tone, excessively rare in copper

provenance:

W Brice, collection purchased en bloc by H Montagu, 1887

H Montagu, Sotheby, 7 May 1888, lot 256

J G Murdoch, Sotheby, 31 March 1903, lot 675

J O Manton, Sotheby, 10 February 1947, lot 69

R C Lockett, Glendining, 11 October 1956, lot 2059

Peck recorded six known specimens in copper, including those in the British Museum, the Fitzwilliam Museum, and the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow

That's an early milled beauty, it really is. Just supposing your dreams came true and you had the funds to realise it, how much would that set you back?

£9645.25 plus postage at 2003 prices

Eh????? What catalogue lists values down to £...45.25???

No apology necessary - I'd love one of those! But one thing seems quite clear - if you look in my previous post just above, that Photoshopped image is of a genuine 1927 reverse. The so-called "1922 with 1927 reverse" (yours) is nothing of the sort really. It has a much wider rim and longer & thicker teeth. It is really a reverse on its own, a 'try out' if you like. It should be reclassified as a unique reverse, and given its own number. It's not even identical to the 1928-onwards reverse either, as the rim and teeth are different.

In fact I'd go as far as saying that the reverses from 1922 onwards would be :

Reverse X - normal 1922 reverse, also used in 1926

Reverse X2 - the rare "1927" 1922 reverse (pattern?)

Reverse Y - 1927 reverse

Reverse Z - 1928 - 1936 reverse

(I've given them XYZ letters as I haven't bothered to dovetail them in with previous Geo V reverses)

I agree. I was just trying to find a pic I had of the specimen 1922 with reverse of 1927, but with the ME obverse, to see if this was also identical to your X2 reverse. Unfortunately I don't seem to have it which may be because I promised to delete it after viewing!

Oh well, not to worry. Your picture is really nice anyway - a handsome specimen :-)

[VickySilver 775]

OK, excuse the caveman image but here is the obverse....

1922obv0001.bmp

[Peter 615]

I'm going for a poor little farthing.

Bearing in mind these coins were used all the time....how the heck did something like this survive.One day I will have one (currency) and it will be near as damn perfect....any copper currency coin between 1672 and 1724 will/would be acceptable.

http://images.goldbergauctions.com/php/lot_auc.php?site=1&sale=31&lot=2214〈=1

[joey 0]

I live in a thousand parallel universes where each has a different piece to idolise, so here's a coin from one of them. Peck 834 thick flan silver proof halfpenny and my website logo coin.

G'day Rob Just looking at your wish list here.Did you see the 1729 copper proof halfpenny Peck 835 on London coins preview of their December auction.Would be a nice mate for the 834.

[Rob 2,996]

G'day Rob Just looking at your wish list here.Did you see the 1729 copper proof halfpenny Peck 835 on London coins preview of their December auction.Would be a nice mate for the 834.

Thanks Joey, I've had several oportunities to buy this coin but always declined because of the wear to the laurel leaves and knee. I already have a normal flan piece without this detraction.

A wish list might be a bit misleading as I already have the two posted, but they stand out as a realised dream. On the question of unrealised dreams I would put forward this Truro crown as a candidate. Ex Montagu, Murdoch and Wakley, it was bought by Spink at the Wakley sale in 1909 and as far as I can establish has not reappeared in a catalogue since then. It may be in a museum by now, but on the assumption it isn't you may rest assured it will go for a lot of money should it come up for sale. At the Wakley sale it realised £30 compared to the Petition and Reddite Crowns' £43 each.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Rob

[Peckris 579]

I'm going for a poor little farthing.

Bearing in mind these coins were used all the time....how the heck did something like this survive.One day I will have one (currency) and it will be near as damn perfect....any copper currency coin between 1672 and 1724 will/would be acceptable.

http://images.goldbergauctions.com/php/lot_auc.php?site=1&sale=31&lot=2214〈=1

Nothing 'poor little' about that! You can add that to my "impossible reality", "incredible dream" too. :)

[Boomstick 0]

If we're playing with fantasy funds, I'd go for a Scarborough besieged piece. Grading irrelevant, a rough slab of currency melted from whatever was left in the castle has more embedded history than any number of UNC specimens.

[Rob 2,996]

If we're playing with fantasy funds, I'd go for a Scarborough besieged piece. Grading irrelevant, a rough slab of currency melted from whatever was left in the castle has more embedded history than any number of UNC specimens.

They used cut up silver plate, weighed it and stamped the value. That is why you get the odd denominations. No melting involved.

[Generic Lad 25]

To be honest, my top coins are all fairly common (although pricy!)

1. Gothic crown. I don't think there is a coin minted that looks as beautiful as the gothic crown. Unfortunately, it seems to be expensive despite the fact its a non-rarity. Either way, I'd like to have one even if I have to pay a bit too much for it, though its way out of my price range.

2. Victoria Una and the Lion 5 pounds. Its big, beautiful, old and its gold. What isn't there to love about it?

3. Some siege money produced during the civil war. While fairly unattractive, I have to say the history behind them is fascinating.

4. An excellent example of an Edward the Confessor, Cnut, or Aethelred penny.

5. The petition crown. Ok, its not really common, but its well known! Honestly it is a true masterpiece, if only Simon was alive today to correct the abomination of modern coinage! (Seriously, its a worldwide problem now, is there any country that still strikes beautiful coins in decent relief for circulation?)

[HistoricCoinage 115]

To be honest, my top coins are all fairly common (although pricy!)

1. Gothic crown. I don't think there is a coin minted that looks as beautiful as the gothic crown. Unfortunately, it seems to be expensive despite the fact its a non-rarity. Either way, I'd like to have one even if I have to pay a bit too much for it, though its way out of my price range.

2. Victoria Una and the Lion 5 pounds. Its big, beautiful, old and its gold. What isn't there to love about it?

3. Some siege money produced during the civil war. While fairly unattractive, I have to say the history behind them is fascinating.

4. An excellent example of an Edward the Confessor, Cnut, or Aethelred penny.

5. The petition crown. Ok, its not really common, but its well known! Honestly it is a true masterpiece, if only Simon was alive today to correct the abomination of modern coinage! (Seriously, its a worldwide problem now, is there any country that still strikes beautiful coins in decent relief for circulation?)

Number 4 probably isn't as pricey as you would think - well, not as pricey as the other four.

[TomGoodheart 373]

If we're playing with fantasy funds, I'd go for a Scarborough besieged piece. Grading irrelevant, a rough slab of currency melted from whatever was left in the castle has more embedded history than any number of UNC specimens.

They used cut up silver plate, weighed it and stamped the value. That is why you get the odd denominations. No melting involved.

And if you're really lucky with your obsidional (seige) coinage, you can see traces of the pattern of the original piece of plate remaining under the coin design. Some even carry signs of gilding. I sometimes think a collection of money of necessity/notgeld etc would be most interesting! Sadly the price of siege pieces is higher than I usually want to pay!

[TomGoodheart 373]

Oh, and if we're talking impossible dreams, one of mine is not finding new coins to buy.

Instead I'd be satisfied with a time machine which would return some of my coins to how they were when first issued; before someone clipped the edges off, carried them around in a bucket of sand and folded them in half!

Alternatively I'd like it to take me back - so I could pick coins I most like out of my change, like my Dad used to. Somewhere between 1640 and 1660 would probably do. I'd find a money changer and swap some gold for a few hours looking through all the shillings! *drool*

(I can't believe I'm having wet dreams over coins!)

Edited October 24, 2011 by TomGoodheart

[ski 1]

1950 double florin pattern

Is that yours, and if so is it the one that Roddy had?

1950 double florin pattern

WoW can we see larger photo? did it come in the last few years from a UK dealer?

my pin brain thought it was ExBarr, did not see your prior reply

no its not my coin......i can only dream.

i believe london coins may have sold one in september 2009 for £9000, i saw another this year listed in an auction with an estimate of £20,000. it didnt sell.