Leaderboard

A well known variety. See screenshot from Michael Gouby's website below. Typically a master die in the Victorian period had just the 18.. pre-entered on it, and from that working dies were made that then had the last 2 digits hand entered. (This is behind all the date width varieties for example on Victorian bun pennies). For 1857 shillings, one working die had the last two digits entered with numeral punches from the wrong font thus causing the example above.

Bawbees are notorious for having circulated deep into the 18th century by which time they were barely identifiable - so this rather decent 1679 example is an exception to the beater bawbee rule.

Four Pence Victorian 1840 & 1877 (Maundy) Delving through the hoard today...... and these two I though were worth a show as they are in incredible condition.... which is a bit of a rarity amongst my lot.... 😲

The 'ribbon' on this 1859 is die clashing, explained on Gouby's website, where he now also references Peck 404. The 'overlay' picture below also highlights the 'clash' area.

The reverse lis and lions sit distinctively high in their respective quarters…I did find this, which belongs to an anchor obverse. I guess we’ll have to wait and see!

I particularly like the 1860/59 tie ribbons (plural)............always present in same place + further clashing under Victoria's chin.

Another unlisted one. Sadly it's in sold listings on ebay. But worth noting down for reference if you like that sort of thing Reads Her instead of Hen on the obverse. Think its class 1b1 Rodbert at Winchester.

Today more sorting out and I found a shilling its dated 1857, on magnifying it highlighted that the numbers were different sizes the 7 has a few blobs deformation to it as well ... possibly done at the mint with numbers changed as worn out?

It's definitely a London coin, but not class 1 or Henry II because the N and D are ligated (joined together). If memory serves me right that feature first occurred on class IVa, which was issued under Richard I, but the lettering style isn't right for that. My guess would be class V or VI (so John or Henry III) and judging by the position of the O of ON probably a moneyer with five letters in his name. A bit more research could probably tie the class and maybe even the moneyer down a bit. Edit: you beat me to it Ukstu; I was glancing through my copies of Mass and Slevin for inspiration, but we seem to broadly agree on class 5 or 6.

Obviously this bawbee from King William III from 1697 circulated as a halfpenny deep into the 18th century given it's wear pattern

Not the best example but an unusual pairing. Withers 411 Bradford Workhouse counterstamp on a Samuel Fereday Bilston token.

So the reason of asking is if a coin is rare its condition goes by the side a little... this crown although its seen circulation is in quite good condition.... details are legible and minor rubbing... where would this Crown sit on the grade scale?

Forgetting the grade, the good thing about it for me is that there are no major digs or edge knocks/bruises, etc., making it a collectable fine too. Potentially your most valuable coin to-date?

I think I would have to give a split grading - "aF" on the obverse but "nVF" on the reverse.

A solid Fine for me.

on looking through the pages ...I do have a 1840 Groat and others with duplicates😲 ...looks quite good as well. 👍

Sifting through my bits and bobs and came across this one. Not listed in any books that i can find so one to mark down. Maybe a complete example will turn up one day who knows. Its a 1a4 obverse with the Seriffed X and a 1a3 reverse with a nice square E. Hvnfrei at York mint.

wow....so its wrong font...Awesome to know this.. it looked odd so now all explained. many thanks for this👍

Spotted this on Ebay. It was in the sold listings. Its got the 1 3 5 crown and reversed N we see on Rhuddlan coins but i cannot match the reverse. It's probably a mistrike of some sort but interesting enough to keep a note of.

There has been a few halfs on ebay recently that are not listed as Rhuddlan. Sellers are just listing them as Short cross coins with incorrect class details because they are unaware of the mint. Keep an eye out. They seem to be listed as buy it now though so you've got to check regularly or they get snapped up by ppl in the know. Stu.

Good eye Jerry. That didn't even register with me when i looked at it lol. I was reading the D as an E like a divvy. Stu.

Good spot, and an absolute bargain penny. The half is probably Rhuddlan too, the reverse reads OND.ON for SIMOND.ON.RVLA. Found a nice cut half of SIMOND detecting years ago. Jerry

Hopefully not lol. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you 🤞

I managed on Sunday to get a whole example of a half I've had for year's. Sweating now waiting for it to arrive 😆

I’ll give you this much, you’re quite the detective. Your knowledge of these little details is very impressive. I do get the thrill, though, especially on those occasions where you’re seeking out (or waiting for) a complete example to finish the puzzle. Great stuff!

looking at the Half penny's that I have , like yours the details are still very vivid also being silver you'd think that they'd been cashed in melted down and re used ... Ive found 5 Halves that I have ...as yet no quarters, Hopefully others will join in, it will be of interest.... 👍

Have a look at Gouby's (brilliant) website if you want to learn more about all the various types of coin varieties, and specifically at this page for this die-clash ribbon issue: https://michael-coins.co.uk/cp1848 ribbon.htm I also insert a screenshot of some of the subtly different clashes that have typically been observed by Gouby based on the impact pressure and transfer of detail for separate clashes.

Just because someone has made a random claim on eBay that this is a "rare variety" does not make it a documented fact of any substance. And herein lies the whole problem of so called "AI" - it just regurgitates superficial stuff trawled from the internet with no discernment or discrimination and presents it as gospel truth. Alfnail's quoting Gouby regarding die clash damage above is proper scholarly documentation, actual fact, and derived from many years of human expertise, experience, analysis and real intelligence. Yet AI couldn't manage to reconcile that internet based evidence...

The 1859 is interesting, not a deliberate ‘ribbon’ I suspect, perhaps a die flaw or foreign body impact or result of die clash but if more than a ‘one off’ could become collectable though probably not at a massive premium. The 1858 small date is scarce rather than rare, unless combined with large rose reverse which yours is not. Maybe a small premium over large date but value is low I think due to poor condition. Jerry

Hi, Newby to the site, first post. I have an 1859 penny, with a variant that I cannot find much information on. “ Tie ribbon between curl and neck” Also there is no W.W., not sure if this as standard. I would be grateful is someone could give me an idea of rarity, grade and value? I also have recently got an 1858 small date, again would like an idea of grade, rarity and value.

cheers Stuart 👍

many thanks for looking into this, the previous owner was a long time ago before I would have got it circa 1990's so Its great to finally have these looked and corrected, as all that I now have identified live in a page with others and I retain all of the information with the coins...albeit parts of coins .... very well done and much appreciated 🙏

Bit later in my opinion H. Its giving Class 5c - 6a vibes based on the lettering style and what i can see of the beard strokes. The S as well with the little tails & lack of pellet in the middle of it.

This seller needs to decide if this is 'no H' or die 11. Or just a plain old 1882 with an unbarred H. Lol. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/168180267318?mkevt=1&mkpid=0&emsid=e11021.m164380.l178264&mkcid=7&ch=osgood&euid=889a2ac81f444ef88a0f7c3bcfce70c8&bu=43203014853&ut=RU&exe=0&ext=0&osub=-1~1&crd=20260223054114&segname=11021&recoId=168180267318&recoPos=1

Another well loved bawbee but from King Charles II and dated 1678. And another beater bawbee, this from 1677.

OK - in the Phaidon series by Elizabeth Hallam as editor I find I also have "Chronicles of the Wars of the Roses" which covers Richard II in 1377 to Richard III in 1485. By Publisher Heinemann and collated by Anne Savage there is a great translation of "the Anglo Saxon Chronicles", which covers from the end of the Roman occupation to Henry II. I find this particularly useful as many TV documentaries quote the Anglo Saxon Chronicles in snippets, so it is good to be able to see them in full translation. (The chronicles were written by a series of monks over hundreds of years in old English, and were usually recorded withing only a few years of the actual events, so reasonably contemporaneous.)

Windows is covered above, but on Mac OS X the free bundled Preview will resize an image and let you know the file size in Kb.

It's a farthing. You are probably being misled by the size which is only a bit bigger than decimal pennies today. Victorian copper pennies were huge!

If anyone is still after this let me know i have a digital copy you can have. Stu.

I had a few looks, but I couldn't make much sense of this as a coin. The blank reverse is unusual and the detail on the obverse is difficult to make out. I thought a button, but at 36g that sounds unlikely. Maybe a plaque or insert to a decoration that has then been in the ground for a long time?

Just to clarify, as I realise my post may not have come over as it was meant to…I don’t remember shillings at all, but I kind of like the idea, as was said, for fun, if there were such a thing permitted in the commercial realms of politics Digging a hole here…sorry, Chris and Copper123, you may know where/how I made my mistake here (hopefully), sorry 🙏

Starting off, I owe you all a big Thank You...I came here 1 year ago and was recovering from a stroke... my reading and speaking has got better and my chaos has improved as well.... to a degree. Ive attached some photos of what's been paged and has put some order in place.... if the worse happen I'd hate to think what would have happen to these coins... The hammered coins (pennies) still cause problems for me and still there others to follow.... Sorry! 😟 once again a huge Thank You one and all for the support and clarification when assisting my queries, I wouldn't have been able to have got this far without it. Kind Regards "H"

To be fair, the chaos doesn't ever seem to subside. Sometimes you need to part ways with it for a while to regain the will to try and overcome it.

there was cupro nickel proofs in,1875, 1877, its such a shame the state of it and punched through, but what a find if it is, even in that state🤩

I think people get a bit worked up over the question of cleaning as the topic is somewhat nuanced. Every coin in circulation showing signs of wear has effectively been cleaned because the act of circulation ensures that contact is made with other surfaces which rub against each other. i.e. nothing different to taking a the use of chemical cloth to a coin and rubbing. That just speeds up the process. The only thing that is offensive in the eyes of most collectors is a case of a polished coin, with or without the use of chemical substances. Personally I love toning for the fact it gives added confidence that the surfaces have not been messed about with, but even that has a few caveats because silver dip will leave a residue on the coin which over time will give the piece in question a typically pinkish hue. Any coin in someone's pocket will end up from friction with lots of faint parallel lines, because they were there. Without polishing chemically, I defy anyone to see the difference between pocket rub and a soft cloth, though clearly it would be possible in the case of demonetised coins to use your loaf and conclude that not being in circulation any more, the only option left is deliberate. In the case of the Morgan above, if the surfaces aren't reflective, probably not other than 'cleaning' from circulation, because there is clearly wear to the high points.

What year is it, 187?. I imagine it's been plated by someone, possibly the same person that put a hole in it. The pics aren't that clear though. There were cu-ni proofs for some 1860/70s dates, so that's a possibility and perhaps the hole was made by someone who thought it was odd and wanted to see if it was like that all the way through. Need better pics and accurate weight to provide further clues.

Felt extremely stupid to have missed this ex Shuttlewood, eglantine penny, after my alarm failed to go off (I’m between nightshifts at the moment). Hammered at £260 - how cheap was that for such a great example!

Gotta love the large pennies from early in the reign of Victoria: