Forums

Personally it looks more like an S punch given the visible serifs on the top loop and half the number of serifs on the bottom loop, with the line joining the ends an afterthought. In Errorland, all options are on the table until proven wrong with a concrete explanation. Plenty of small S punches (including broken pieces used for reinforcing characters would be available from when DEFENSOR, GVLIELMVS or GEORGIVS were in daily use, or alternatively from DECVS on the collars. If you have a micrometer, you could measure the height of the 'S' and compare with the collar on a YH crown. It would have to predate the gothic characters used on the florins and crowns. Probably this could be corroborated by examining the RM museum's supply of remaining punches from the time before the date on the coin. If anyone has a copy of Hocking to hand, maybe they could advise if any are listed?   I have had a few 1861 halfpennies with rev. G that have the same offset and a quick perusal of the farthing images suggests the same phenomenon could exist here too. The curves in the groundline base will be of the same size as the diameter of the punch shaft from which the reduced size letter was ground out and formed, the force applied for entering the character being sufficient to ground it on the blank's field. 

For 1881H F108, Michael pictures 1881Ha and 1881 Hb - Ha with lower H and Hb with higher H, both with 11.5 teeth spacing. No mention of either of these being unusual, and no mention of rarity.

"One Penny 1881H with Low H, almost in contact with the linear circle, the top of the H just below the line of the base of the numerals, Gouby BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date spacing" Can I ask please anyone with Michaels specialised book is there a estimated rarity listed for BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date. Searching this forum no results are found. As far as I can see BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date is not listed on Richard's website. A single example of  BP1881Ha (P+p) with 11 1/2 teeth date is listed on LCA without reference to rarity. The coin however did sell for £300 listed as UNC. A similar grade coin with the same die pairing without the wider date and low H sold for 1/3 of that price. What I'm trying to figure out is the 80% remaining luster responsible for the tripling of the sold price or is it the low H and wider date.   Thanks.