Leaderboard

By way of introducing myself let me tell you about my favorite coin in my collection. I had been collecting bronze penny coins since I was a young boy. Then, in 1975 I rode my brand new motorbike the nine miles to the Somerset town of Frome. In a junk shop on Catherine’s Hill I saw two coins displayed in the window. I thought that the smaller one looked like an old penny. I did not know what the larger coin was as I had never seen the like before. They were offered as two Victoria copper coins from 1858. They were priced at £6.50 and £7.50 respectively, a lot of money in those days. I decided to buy the smaller, cheaper penny sized coin. When I got home I looked it up in my 'Check Your Change’ book and found that at 28.4 mm in diameter the coin was in fact a half penny. I got straight back on my bike and returned to Frome for the other coin which proved to be a penny at 34mm diameter. On closer inspection I realised that the number 8 was struck over a number 7. At the time I thought that I had discovered something special. It turns out that I had not. They were very nice coins though, and kindled my interest in copper pennies, halfpennies and farthings.

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.

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.

Favorites are a fun thing. Mine is very likely my 1818 Crown. Bit of rim damage (ex jewelry?) but that kept the price where I liked it.

Agreed. That was one of the first things i noticed about it. The full one i bought just arrived today. The portrait is a bit scuffed but i can't complain as it was cheap. Looks like a match with my half. Slevin 1a5 / Brand 1050. Stu.

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.... 😲

No. All have the same size font digits. What you might be getting confused about is that some 1849 specimens (not yours above) have the small WW initials next to the date obliterated by the linear circle. These ones are taken from an 184(8) pattern matrix which has had the linear circle re-engraved (and the 9 added), thus obscuring the original WW initials. Or possibly a confusion with 1849 halfcrowns, which are indeed known with both normal and smaller date digits (latter is rarer).

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.

That could be a good shout. My 1723 shilling has damage just at the critical point, but here is the 3 from my much better half crown. I can see that the sixpence 3 appearance could be due to a chunk missing.

a early Florin minted only for 1848-1849... unfortunately its not in the best of condition, rubbed with a gash 😟 I did read some of these have smaller numbers... I take it this is the large numbers ?

Here is my best example of the later Vic florins - 1852 - for comparison. Shame about the scratches due some previous owner's over zealous cleaning. As is so often the case, they are far less visible in hand - the camera seems to pick them up.

My favourite coin in my collection would be the Gothic Crown, but I have posted that many times before. Second favourite is much more difficult as there are many candidates, but this one is high on the list - 1723 SSC Crown. You see the shillings all the time, but the Crowns are much scarcer.

Mine

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?

I agree that halfs and quarters are often in almost perfect condition because they were easily lost soon after they entered circulation. I too look for nice examples, scarcer mints, errors, etc. and enjoy the challenge of identifying them. This is one of my favourites. Walter (Waltier error) on Northampton, square E's on obverse (round on reverse), class 1a2/1a5 mule, possibly Mass 148, although the X looks different.

In my experience there are 4 different obverse dies which have been altered to 1848/7. These are illustrated in the pictures below. Whilst Bramah does not have any pictures to illustrate his type 10b, he says the following in his 1929 book:- "The die has been altered from 1847. The 7 shows very plainly beneath the 8, its up-stroke dividing the lower loop of 8 into two unequal parts, that on the left being much the smaller." Interestingly, I have found two different obverse dies which fit Bramah's 10b description. These are the top two pictures shown below. Surprisingly, these Bramah 10b types do not appear on Gouby’s website. Bramah 10c / Gouby C (bottom left) is probably the most common of the 8/7’s Gouby D (bottom right), with the 7 at back of bottom loop of the 8, I think is the rarest type……and probably why Bramah has missed this variety. Gouby Ca and Cb are doubled examples of his variety C I believe his Da is simply a worn example of his type D. He actually remarks upon this himself i.e. "Possibly a worn version of D !?" If anyone wishes to see additional detailed legend pictures to support any of the above then please feel free to contact me.

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?

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.

I was just comparing my various 1723 silver coins when I noticed something odd about the 3 in the sixpence date. I checked ESC, which mentions a 3 over 0, but this doesn't look anything like that. Any thoughts?

This is an example currently on ebay https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/286858256262?_ul=GB&rb_itemId=286858256262&rb_pgeo=GB&ff=11&mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5339059258&toolid=10044&customid=EAIaIQobChMIw4mbmJKCkwMVNZFQBh1XmwlQEAQYASABEgJPmfD_BwE&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIw4mbmJKCkwMVNZFQBh1XmwlQEAQYASABEgJPmfD_BwE&wbraid=CkEKCQiA5I_NBhCCARIwAMgyZG8xxosq4BPX_CPxcGrxjS_UTjJ9HmTKiqjU2kNd9LefuQ78iABAQGBdF3BnGgLBPw&gbraid=0AAAAADA7Q_KTN7L5aJF6e68c0HDcbcgrU&adtype=pla&loc_physical_ms=9045836&loc_interest_ms=&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=20511325147&gbraid=0AAAAADA7Q_KTN7L5aJF6e68c0HDcbcgrU

Nice coins. Sorry, but I am not a Liverpool supporter.

Interesting token. I suspect this would come under the heading "Gaming Token" as it loosely resembles the Guineas and half Guineas from the 18th century. Many gaming tokens included advertising on the reverse, though usually a little more subtle than that one! Probably struck in brass and originally gilded.

My fav at the moment a 1902 crown will put pic on soon

Welcome to the predecimal forum! It's really nice that you have kept the coins from your early collecting days. £7.50 was indeed a lot in those days. Having one of those blue Wellington fivers made me felt rich when I started secondary school in the 80s. I collect silver rather than bronze but have brought a few pennies and half pennies as type examples. I think the first bronze I have brought was the same YH type: 1853 half penny. I then got a bun penny and half penny as I am fond of that portrait and it's a shame that it was never used on silver coinage.

That's amazing. Very good spot.

I think the half is Brand dies 2540; the offset halves of the O are quite distinctive.

That's a very nice find Stu; I'm really annoyed to have missed that one. I used to check daily for Rhuddlans and picked up about 30, mostly halfs and quarters and one full Halli, but got fed up with the quality and asking prices. I'll definitely start checking again now. Steve.

Fine for me too.

I would say Fine, reverse better

A solid Fine for me.

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.

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!

Thanks, Stu, fingers crossed! It would end up being a freebie if it comes good…would end up being a previously unknown pairing, too, with the no-mark reverse! Though this is what makes me feel it probably isn’t. knowing my luck with trying to get hold of one of these, it will more likely end up being the crud from an old plug 😆

Looks promising Stu. Goodluck !

Is it or isn’t it? An online bid today in a bulk lot of 6 coins! Was a cheap enough buy to chance finding out. The only spanner in the works is what appears to be a no-mark reverse.

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

cheers Stuart 👍

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.

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!