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.

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Gouby Obverse P, which you'd normally observe as the natural obverse for an 1881H, shows the Queen with a hooked nose. Gouby Obverse M shows a straight nose. 

Obverse M has 22 fewer teeth than obverse P such that there are only 5 border teeth from the upright of the R to the top of the I in VICTORIA (6 on Obverse P) and the tip of the outer tie ribbon points out rather than down. Of course, the teeth have to be still visible for this distinction but it is a striking difference.

1263515599_1881F102obvzoom1.jpg.34f83a5f83cbea57e5e0aa5b0067af95.jpg

Edited by secret santa
Correction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/31/2020 at 10:56 PM, Peckris 2 said:

"Just out of interest Father Andrew had already addressed this issue, and he of course used the correct terminology, minor varieties. "

Not sure of your point? Members here have used the term micro-varieties often enough that we all know what is meant. And I think you could in theory easily divide the world of varieties into 3 : major (e.g. H and KN), minor (e.g. 1953 obverses), and micro (e.g. the thickness of a worn 7). FWIW...

Exercise in semantics here.

Having read Bramah's book recently, he uses the term "minor varieties" to describe every slight variance that is not otherwise (subjectively) "worthy" of categorisation. Maybe "micro" was not a word used in that numismatic context back then.

Personally, I'd be inclined to use the term minor variety in the same context Bramah did, and reserve the term "micro variety" for variances which are not readily visible to the naked eye. Although that might encompass a few classed as significant........     

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 6:46 PM, secret santa said:

Changing the subject, I "swapped" collection websites today with Kevin Booth who has now put his impressive penny collection up onto a website and is happy that I share its URL with Forum members.

it's Kevin's penny collection

 

 

 

A very impressive collection. 

I'm not sure I agree with a few of his estimates on numbers currently extant, however. Moreover he's another one who adds "A's" onto Freeman numbers, for varieties not classified by Freeman at the time of his writing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I don't know whether he's invented these "new" Freeman varieties or they were described as such when he bought them. He described his website as being designed more for "beginners" as opposed to mine which he describes as more for "experts". I'd probably use the term "pedants" 😀

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I'm not sure I agree with a few of his estimates on numbers currently extant, however.

Nor me. I'd say some are way off the mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

Nor me. I'd say some are way off the mark.

He seems to have taken the midpoint estimate of rarity provided by Freeman, in most cases. 

I don't think he's too far wide of the mark on the 164A, which he's obviously considered separately. But somewhat curiously, he's given his own rarity estimates for the 175 and 176, which are at odds with Freeman's opinion, and still a gross over estimate of the current availability of both types.

As Freeman rightly points out at page 199 (195 in the 2016 edition): "the estimates of rarity for most of the 20th century pennies and halfpennies will require revision as large numbers of these coins were withdrawn for melting. The more easily identifiable scarcer pieces have, however, been hoarded since the date of striking and will consequently not become scarcer in the same proportion as common coins". 

With that said, still a fantastic, well put together collection which it was a privilege to view.       

Share this post


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

I don't think he's too far wide of the mark on the 164A,

 

With that said, still a fantastic, well put together collection which it was a privilege to view.       

I thought the F164a was one of those that was off! 20? I'm pretty sure as a forum we could rustle up that many without too much trouble - doesn't even warrant a mention on Richard's site.

I thought the 1922 trident dot was way off at 10 too.

I haven't had chance to have a proper look through yet but I would certainly agree with your last point, albeit with exceptions like the 1887 coronation head which needs chucking in the bin*.

 

 

*Other opinions are available and no less valid, I guess. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

I thought the F164a was one of those that was off! 20? I'm pretty sure as a forum we could rustle up that many without too much trouble - doesn't even warrant a mention on Richard's site.

I thought the 1922 trident dot was way off at 10 too.

I haven't had chance to have a proper look through yet but I would certainly agree with your last point, albeit with exceptions like the 1887 coronation head which needs chucking in the bin*.

 

 

*Other opinions are available and no less valid, I guess. :D

I did a back of an envelope exercise a few months ago, putting together the 164A's we know about on here, plus those sold at LCA and other known auctions, plus those in well known collections. It came to about 23. So you could perhaps reasonably assume there are say 60 +/- 10, extant in total worldwide. Something like that.

So when I said not too wide of the mark, I meant by comparison with some of the other estimates, not that it was a truly accurate representation !

As you say the 1922 trident dot is no doubt an under estimate as well.        

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you get over a handful of known examples I think the demand is more important than numbers available. Open 3s, 1926MEs or F164As might sell as you point out, but there is virtually zero interest in things like F175 & F176 unless they are in better grade. i.e. the number of serious variety collectors might be more limited than you think. I've tried listing a few low grade items of the latter two over the past couple of years with limited interest. They have always had to relist a few times before selling for opening  bid. I sold one a few months ago, but given that had been relisted a few times threw the rest in the scrap pile and they went to the great pot in the sky once lockdown was lifted. The numbers were 4 175s and 2 176s melted. I might have a couple more that were recently acquired in a bag of pennies, but won't be busting a gut to seek them out. When you get a couple quid at most after costs, it ain't worth it.

Just as when Pete got his 1890 penny the other day from me. That had gone round a few times as well - advertised as the variety, but b****r all interest.

I recognise that the number of daily visitors to my website is insufficient to provide too many sales, so wouldn't list them there in any case unless higher grade, but when ebay with it's worldwide reach and seemingly limitless numbers of un-discerning collectors also fails to inspire, then it's worth questioning the breadth of interest in much other than a decent example of all dates. Just an observation.

Share this post


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

 4 175s and 2 176s melted.

I would have been pleased to save them from the melting pot. :(

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

I would have been pleased to save them from the melting pot. :(

Indeed - there was somebody on one of the facebook coin groups looking for both - as long as they were at least in fine condition. They could have been given away to an up and coming collector rather than destroyed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Rob said:

Once you get over a handful of known examples I think the demand is more important than numbers available. Open 3s, 1926MEs or F164As might sell as you point out, but there is virtually zero interest in things like F175 & F176 unless they are in better grade. i.e. the number of serious variety collectors might be more limited than you think. I've tried listing a few low grade items of the latter two over the past couple of years with limited interest. They have always had to relist a few times before selling for opening  bid. I sold one a few months ago, but given that had been relisted a few times threw the rest in the scrap pile and they went to the great pot in the sky once lockdown was lifted. The numbers were 4 175s and 2 176s melted. I might have a couple more that were recently acquired in a bag of pennies, but won't be busting a gut to seek them out. When you get a couple quid at most after costs, it ain't worth it.

Just as when Pete got his 1890 penny the other day from me. That had gone round a few times as well - advertised as the variety, but b****r all interest.

I recognise that the number of daily visitors to my website is insufficient to provide too many sales, so wouldn't list them there in any case unless higher grade, but when ebay with it's worldwide reach and seemingly limitless numbers of un-discerning collectors also fails to inspire, then it's worth questioning the breadth of interest in much other than a decent example of all dates. Just an observation.

True, and it's only last year that Terry and I observed the fact that even high grade specimens change hands at very modest prices (about £250), despite their rarity at that grade.

But that still doesn't negate the fact they are rare, and especially so in high grade. 

Rather than destroy the specimens you hold, why not instead list them on your website as freebies to anyone who wants one and pays the postage? 

  

Share this post


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

Exercise in semantics here.

Having read Bramah's book recently, he uses the term "minor varieties" to describe every slight variance that is not otherwise (subjectively) "worthy" of categorisation. Maybe "micro" was not a word used in that numismatic context back then.

Personally, I'd be inclined to use the term minor variety in the same context Bramah did, and reserve the term "micro variety" for variances which are not readily visible to the naked eye. Although that might encompass a few classed as significant........    

I'd give a few different examples to make the point:

Major: H and KN - mint marks are clear and obvious

Minor: the recut portait for large silver in 1920 - some authorities denied this existed, but after research the obverse has sufficient small differences to register as a variety

Micro: the two reverses of 1937 penny, which hinge entirely on whether the horizon meets a tooth or a space.

Edited by Peckris 2
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were only fair, but still unambiguous as the variety. The point is you can only do so much. If the variety description doesn't do anything for people, then there's not a lot you can do. Many people start their collecting buying from eBay, so it is reasonable to assume they will look there for specifics.

I'm not sure 175s and 176s are that rare given there were 8 in a 30kg pile which had a high number of G6s. They came from a farmer's family (not a collector) where the old man had put aside a disproportionate number of 1945 and 1946s for some reason, so effectively 8 in 15-20kg . 8 in say 2000 seems quite a lot for a rarity when you consider the number of much commoner dates present as well.

I've had a few in previous accumulations as well which must come to at least a couple of dozen combined since 2006, but they've raised maybe £20 in that time. I've picked up more change from the pavement going round the corner to the newsagents in the same period.

The website is on borrowed time due to insufficient eyeballs, a lack of coins to buy and list and my inability to configure it in order to achieve specific results.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rob said:

They were only fair, but still unambiguous as the variety. The point is you can only do so much. If the variety description doesn't do anything for people, then there's not a lot you can do. Many people start their collecting buying from eBay, so it is reasonable to assume they will look there for specifics.

I'm not sure 175s and 176s are that rare given there were 8 in a 30kg pile which had a high number of G6s. They came from a farmer's family (not a collector) where the old man had put aside a disproportionate number of 1945 and 1946s for some reason, so effectively 8 in 15-20kg . 8 in say 2000 seems quite a lot for a rarity when you consider the number of much commoner dates present as well.

I've had a few in previous accumulations as well which must come to at least a couple of dozen combined since 2006, but they've raised maybe £20 in that time. I've picked up more change from the pavement going round the corner to the newsagents in the same period.

The website is on borrowed time due to insufficient eyeballs, a lack of coins to buy and list and my inability to configure it in order to achieve specific results.

 

Probably reflects pre meltdown numbers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly, but given there are roughly 60 common years starting with the veiled heads, that's between 30 & 40 per year assuming even distribution. In that context, 8 is a very big number. I would say disproportionately large. Even splitting the difference says not that rare.

Share this post


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

Yep, I wouldn't pay £9,999 for it. 

Without actually seeing it in hand, it's difficult to make an informed comment. It would be very interesting to see what the view of the Royal Mint was.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, blakeyboy said:

I have seen a copper penny similar and was told by a dealer.

The coin was put between two pieces of leather and over long periods of time slowly put under pressure and pressed.

The term is known as rolled and why the coin is the same weight and thinner.

So just done post mint in this particular instance ....I think.

Share this post


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

Possibly, but given there are roughly 60 common years starting with the veiled heads, that's between 30 & 40 per year assuming even distribution. In that context, 8 is a very big number. I would say disproportionately large. Even splitting the difference says not that rare.

Hmmm, well, whatever. I can only quote John (Stephen) Jerrams on this issue:-

Quote

Hello - You are viewing a Bronze Penny of George V dated 1913 - However, this is the rare Freeman 176 type -  ie. Wider Date with the smaller gap between the  A:B  to the Obverse.....this F176 has always been rare but it really does seem to have all but vanished in recent times !?  -  this is a collectable example with a pleasing overall appearance for the grade -  it is interesting to note that the wide date has fewer teeth under the date than for the narrow date !  - something that can sometimes catch collectors out  -  F175 is almost as rare and has also become more elusive than in previous times -  Lustrous UNC examples are truly very rare re both types but especially F176.....Please see our 100% positive feed-backs  -  Returns are gladly accepted - Have enjoyed Numismatics for many a year - Thank-you -

 

Share this post


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

They were only fair, but still unambiguous as the variety. The point is you can only do so much. If the variety description doesn't do anything for people, then there's not a lot you can do.

 

I understand that it's not worth the time or trouble to list and sell individually. Instead of chucking them in the melting pot, how about you chuck them in a not-for-melting pot, then every 6 months or so offer them on here as mixed low grade varieties for a very modest sum. You'd get a little more than scrap and you'd not be destroying them. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an option, but my table here is covered in things that were put aside so they didn't go in the scrap. Many have been there a long time.......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing the subject completely, what does anybody know about the history of the 1858 "large rose" penny? As in when was the variety discovered, and who discovered it?

Clearly wasn't Bramah or Peck as neither make any mention of it, and I wouldn't have thought it would have been regarded as a "minor variety" by either.

They can't be that scarce as I've seen a fair few on offer and a number already sold. Also I've just managed to get one for £40.99 - admittedly in not great condition, but still. 

Thanks in advance.

Picture: side by side - large rose above, small rose below

 

 

large rose by small rose.jpg

Edited by 1949threepence
grammatical error

Share this post


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

Changing the subject completely, what does anybody know about the history of the 1858 "large rose" penny? As in when was the variety discovered, and who discovered it?

Clearly wasn't Bramah or Peck as neither make no mention of it, and I wouldn't have thought it would have been regarded as a "minor variety" by either.

They can't be that scarce as I've seen a fair few on offer and a number already sold. Also I've just managed to get one for £40.99 - admittedly in not great condition, but still. I've got one.

Picture: side by side - large rose above, small rose below.

 

 

large rose by small rose.jpg

The first reference I came across was in Coin Market Values in 1998,  described as 1858 8/9 Large Rose, not having seen one or an image I thought it could have been a reference to a full rose, as most CP1858 are missing the top petal. It wasn't until several years later I found my first one. I thought at first it was a Penny Obv paired with Halfpenny Reverse until I looked at the trident.

Edited by Chingford
spelling
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chingford said:

The first reference I came across was in Coin Market Values in 1998,  described as 1858 8/9 Large Rose, not having seen one or an image I thought it could have been a reference to a full rose, as most CP1858 are missing the top petal. It wasn't until several years later I found my first one. I thought at first it was a Penny Obv paired with Halfpenny Reverse until I looked at the trident.

Thanks John. Thought it must be a relatively recent find.

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

×