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

One indicator i have just noticed looking at the pictures ,is the tide on D is above a tooth but on E directly to one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, secret santa said:

Am I missing something ? I can't see any difference in the rock between 1909 rev D, 1909 F169 rev E and 1910 rev E

Nor me. It's not an indicator like whether the sea intersects a tooth on the right or goes into a space, which is clear and obvious.

(Ouch, that will teach me - or not! - to notice whether there is a new page...)

Edited by Peckris 2

Share this post


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

Am I missing something ? I can't see any difference in the rock between 1909 rev D, 1909 F169 rev E and 1910 rev E

828639545_1909F168revzoom2.jpg.f3e04105c8f377dbecfa079ad5ed1361.jpg

1909 F168 rev D

 

 

29092871_1910F170revzoom2.jpg.11102234e3138d30d0394e784a66cee5.jpg

1910 rev E

Possibly.

In relation to the differences between reverse D and Reverse E, Freeman said: "the rock above Britannia's foot has a different outline"

Of the three pics you provided, discount for comparison purposes the reverse E shown on the F169, which is worn, and merely concentrate on the other two non worn specimens showing reverses D & E respectively. Then compare the rock above Britannia's foot on the 1909 rev D, F168, with the same rock on the 1910 rev E, you'll notice that the downwards gradient from left to right on the F168 rock is gentler than the left to right gradient on the 1910 rev E, which shows a sudden abrupt sharp drop after a short distance. I think that may be what Freeman was alluding to when he said the two rocks had a different outline. At any rate to am impartial observer the upper outline of the two respective rocks does indeed show a variance.    

       

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, looking at the 2 reverses, there is a greater difference in the waves, which are engraved completely differently on the two varieties.

Share this post


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

Actually, looking at the 2 reverses, there is a greater difference in the waves, which are engraved completely differently on the two varieties.

 

There is also a lower sea level on one coin from the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RLC35 said:

There is also a lower sea level on one coin from the other.

It may look that way because of the different number of border teeth on the 2 reverses.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched a nice 1911 Hollow Neck sell for £1800 plus commission at Tennants auction.

258773650_1911HollowNeckobv.jpg.e03882666bfb36700cc89db5260d58fc.jpg

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Just watched a nice 1911 Hollow Neck sell for £1800 plus commission at Tennants auction.

258773650_1911HollowNeckobv.jpg.e03882666bfb36700cc89db5260d58fc.jpg

I hope the buyer viewed it in hand and did not just buy it from the OBV picture 👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, PWA 1967 said:

I hope the buyer viewed it in hand and did not just buy it from the OBV picture

It was on Ebay earlier this year and I enquired of the vendor whether it had been cleaned, polished etc as the apparent lustre could have been enhanced. I was hoping that the auction house would give it a more accurate description - I certainly wouldn't have bought it without viewing first. But it may be fine. I get some pics of the reverse from Tennants but they weren't very useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, secret santa said:

It was on Ebay earlier this year and I enquired of the vendor whether it had been cleaned, polished etc as the apparent lustre could have been enhanced. I was hoping that the auction house would give it a more accurate description - I certainly wouldn't have bought it without viewing first. But it may be fine. I get some pics of the reverse from Tennants but they weren't very useful.

Yes i remember it ,i only mentioned it as often people seem to be buying coins from pictures for quite a lot of money and in this case there was only one side 😀

I also asked for the pictures ,so they probably sent the same ones. 

So long as the buyer is happy that is all that matters and beginners dont just pay a good few quid from a picture of just one side.

Edited by PWA 1967

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I noted that but thought that as I already have three I shouldn’t be greedy!

Jerry

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I saw you had 3 out of only 7 documented specimens to date, well done...... must drive you dotty!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 😀👍

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, alfnail said:

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?

I don't have any pictures of this type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both of my 'dots below the I' are the small date too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does your Cannon Ball have the repaired 5 Blake.... same question for Jerry x 3?

Share this post


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

Links to the two LCA pieces Richard:-

Thanks Ian, I'll create a  new page for these in the next few days.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, alfnail said:

Does your Cannon Ball have the repaired 5 Blake.... same question for Jerry x 3?

None of my three have a repaired ‘5’, looking like yours, though the two better ones clearly show a very minor degree of doubling of the ‘8’,  ‘7’ and ‘5’.

Jerry

Share this post


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

Does your Cannon Ball have the repaired 5 Blake.... same question for Jerry x 3?

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

Share this post


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

Both of my 'dots below the I' are the small date too!

Blake, can you post or send photos for my website please.

Share this post


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

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

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.

Jerry

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, alfnail said:

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

Apologies for my earlier typo, I should of course have said reverse k (not L).

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

×