All Activity

Yes, the legend spacing is quite different between pennies and halfpennies. See my websites below for pictures.

Yes your spot on Paddy, although what about this one 😂

Something is wrong here I think. There shouldn't be any 1838 pennies? Are you perhaps looking at a halfpenny instead? Both farthings and halfpennies for 1838 exist. (The changeover from Copper to Bronze means the copper halfpenny is larger than the corresponding bronze halfpenny, so an easy mistake to make.) Check the dimensions and weight of your coin.

I maintain spreadsheets for all my collection (specifically predecimal bronze and brass from 1860) but recently offered to look through some early Vic pennies, among which is one dated 1838. I keep the mintage figures in my spreadsheet, but cannot find a figure for the 1838 penny from my usual sources, although there appear to be a few examples around. Can anyone point me to an authoritative mintage figure for the English 1838 copper penny? Some other scarce dates in this batch of 10 seem to have overprinting (or have been tampered with) so I might come back with more queries.

I have more often had sellers who went "oops, I can't find the coin I sold you. I have X if you're interested in it instead". Nothing expensive (most recently a 1981 Bailiwick of Jersey "Square" Pound and offered a Guernsey Type set in it's place) but annoying nonetheless.

This happens more than you may think , i have had two since CHRISTMAS were the seller has sent me a different coin. I also purchased two from a major coin auction not long ago, paid my invoice to be told a couple of hours later i couldnt have them and my money refunded 😂. I believe they are nearly all caused by busy bodies telling sellers what they have who probably already have one. This one the seller was probably told ? as otherwise why would he just swap one coin that was the only one worth anything.One i bought the seller just said he used a stock picture and sent me one similar and the same year. The other a farthing he said he had mixed the two pictures up of both sides., which wasnt correct as the coin that arrived was nothing like the one pictured. I know longer expect to receive any that were not attributed untill they arrive, sad but as long as people keep telling sellers it will continue.

Definitely two different coins, a slightly higher 9, but not from what I see the wide date with the high 9

Heres my 1799 a lovely example bought recently at least EF with lustre and no problems only £20 I wish i had a 1806 and 1807 is similar grade

Looks like a real winner now , I would try it sometime with a suitable coin I am sure you have at least doubled the coins value , its not worth a fortune but there again who wants to experiment with really valueable coins.

The verdigris may not show very well in the photo. Below is another "before" photo under different light. Work is in progress on coins with more obvious/stubborn verdigris. I will report back!

Strange. To my eyes the treated coin is DARKER.

Believe me, it was the same in the 90s after Spink took over, but some collectors still referred to it as 'Seaby'!

No question, these are not the same coin.

I can see that the treatment has lightened the tone quite a bit, but I don't see any real verdigris, before or after. Have you tried it on obvious verdigris?

1. I bought mine on Amazon. It is also available on eBay and from pet shops (for use as a buffer in fish tanks). It is sometimes branded as "Borax substitute" or "Crex" but read the label carefully - it must be sesquicarbonate. 2. Yes, Brita filters remove chlorine. 3. Yes, but not so effective as a quick dip in acetone.

Hi, yes - it's the JH replacement (second) type.

They're unquestionably different. The rare coin you bought has noticeably more wear, which you can see clearly on Britannia's robes.

Three questions: 1. where do you get sodium sesquicarbonate from? 2. Presumably filtered water (Brita) counts as chlorine-free? 3. dabbing with a soft towel would do instead of acetone to remove water?

I don’t like using proprietary products because I don’t know what’s in them, and I believe VerdiCare is difficult to obtain in the UK anyway. After some research on what the British Museum used to use to treat bronze disease and verdigris on large objects, like cannon, I tried the technique for myself on this battered 1799 half-penny. For anyone interested, the treatment was 100 minutes at 90°C in a 2% w/w solution of sodium sesquicarbonate in chlorine-free water. Followed by a rinse in chlorine-free water to remove the chemical and then a rinse in acetone to remove the water. The heat is needed as the reaction is impossibly slow at room temperature.

what an a**hole

Thanks both, much appreciated

Definitely different coins. A complaint is certainly in order, and negative feedback. I would point out to the vendor that the coin is still legally yours, and that it has unique features that make it identifiable in the future. However sadly legal action , even should the opportunity arise, would likely be prohibitively expensive. No harm in publicising the vendor if you don’t get redress. Jerry

They are two different coins.

Just back from holiday. Whilst away, on 26th January, I bought a lot of 25 low grade Victorian pennies. One coin amongst them was the very rare 1889 with the 9 high right in the exergue. After 2 to 3 days I enquired of the seller when he intended to post the lot, as he was supposed to have sent tracked, but no details yet on ebay. After a couple more days, and further chasing, he advised that he had sent them, but not tracked. Anyway, a package was received by my neighbour on 3rd February, so I thought that was ok after all. I returned home today, and opened the package to find that the 1889 was not as I expected. The return window has also closed earlier today! I just wanted to check with other members that you agree with me that the received 1889 is not what I bought. The picture on the sale was not great, but I still think that the differences are clear enough. Apart form the different numeral 9 location, I believe there are several other obvious differences. For example, around Britannia's head the received coin has a more pointed top to the plume, a dent in the head and a dark mark on border. I feel fairly confident that the delay must have been because someone else has alerted the seller as to the rarity of this variety, and he has swapped it with a different 1889. However, bearing in mind the poor quality of the image, I would welcome the thoughts of other members before I complain.