Leaderboard

1826 penny inverted FAKE. Thought i would share this just incase anyone sees one for sale and before they perhaps pay to much for one ,believing it to be genuine. I could not tell looking at one ,no signs of anything to the outside edge or inner rim ,right weight ,size , looks genuine. BUT i had two and found pictures of another ,they are all the same with the same bag marks etc and could easily be passed off as genuine if you are not able to compare with another. Similar to the 1905 Half crowns that were done in the seventies and look real but all the same.

They are in my 2015 6th edition.

This was discussed 10 or 15 years ago. Not only the 'circulation marks' match, but there are also small pits on the rim which are present in all cases. FYI the die axis is about 160 degrees and not 180. A couple more examples apart from the one Pete posted

No worries Mike. I had already started on 1858, whilst counting the large roses. Year 1 for 1858's has just over 400 coins, of which about 10% are No WW, and of those 2 are missing serifs. I haven't counted the other 4 years yet. I believe the missing serifs on the first I of BRITANNIAR only occurs when paired with a single obverse 'No WW' die (most examples have the same flaw after T of GRATIA). Several years ago, I tested several B26a coins, which I had accumulated over the years, against the wording found on Page 108 of Bramah, as follows:- "Another prolific source of minor variation is provided by the colons on the rev. Probably every die creates a colon variant and the only really satisfactory way of describing the position identifiably is by measurement and by the rather delicate indication afforded by projecting the line of each colon and so cutting the inscription opposite". Below is a picture of one of my B26a coins, with the projected lines as per Bramah. I tried to find the best pixel to identify the centre of each colon dot, and then drew a straight line through these centres to the opposite side of the coin. The teeth where the projected lines meet the opposite side are numbered (larger figures). Numbering starts from the tooth where the stem of the rose hits the border, and then works clockwise. The smaller numbers measure the distance between each pair of colon dots. I found that all my pieces had very similar sets of numbers i.e. within a range of 3 border beads, so I think Bramah's theory does work quite well at identifying individual reverse dies.....if one has the time to do this!!! Just thought that may be of some interest; I have reduced image size to meet the predecimal limit.

Hi - I have attached copper and bronzed proofs pictures from the Verene collection, as the bronzing was actually a chemical dip, the surfaces are much more even in colour - allowing for toning variation given the 200 years passage of time. Will send next the same two farthings in opposite lighting - yes its hard to photograph. The copper farthing is ex Peck

I wanted to pick your collective brains on the “onc tenth” florins of 1853-1860, and possible theories on how the error came about. 1. Is it a “c” or an “e” with the oblique bar missing? A comparison of the “e” and “c” on the obverse seems to show a slight difference in the width of the letters. 2. If it’s an “e” with the bar missing, is this due to die fill? The oblique bar is very fine, so this could be a possible explanation. But if so, why does it only affect the “e” in “one” and not that in “tenth” (or the “e” in “One florin”, for that matter)? 3. Whether it’s a “c” or an “e” with a missing bar, could it be that a wrong or faulty puncheon was chosen when sinking the die? But again, why only the “e” in “one”? 4. Is it possible that there were puncheons for the entire word “one”, one of them was faulty, and that this was occasionally used over the course of 7 years when sinking new reverse dies? Each pair of dies produced only around 25,000 coins at the time, so the 1853 florin alone (mintage nearly 4 million) would have required upwards of 150 dies. 5. If 4 is the correct explanation, it could also explain the sudden disappearance of the error in 1860 – the faulty puncheon was detected and destroyed, or it wore out and was discarded. 6. A quick survey of auction archives would suggest that the error is more common than might be inferred from Bull. ESC 7th edition Heritage London Coin Auctions Noonans Spink 1853 “scarce” 2 3 1 1 1854 “4 seen” 1 9 1 1 1855 “5 seen” 1 1856 “7 seen” 1 1857 “6 seen” 1 1858 “4 seen” 1859 Not recorded 1860 “5 seen” 2 2 Number of examples of “onc tenth” florins offered at four auction houses between 2010 and 2023. With the exception of London Coins, most were not catalogued as “onc”. Any thoughts or insight on this would be much appreciated.

Interesting that there was a trace of the missing bar, as it is completely missing in the examples I found on auction sites. This contrasts with the so-called xxr error in the 1881, where there is almost always a trace of the missing serif. In both cases, I think a broken punch is more likely than die fill, given that only specific letters are affected. Also interesting that florins were being catalogued as "onc" as early as 2005-7. Does anyone know when onc florins were first spotted? All I know is that they are in the 7th edition of ESC (2020) but not in the 4th edition (1974).

Noonan's sold this coin yesterday (the 2009 10 P mule) and wondered if anybody knows more of it. This is not heralded the way the 1983 2 New Pence "error" has been but evidently is much rarer - at least I believe this to be so. Do any readers know differently? When I googled it, I found only the London Coins specimen which had a scratch and one other reference that I have now forgotten. Was there any alloy change or other way of descriminating the 2007 vs. 2009 mule coins? And what would be the explanation for the mule, becuase I would have thought there would be more specimens out there if it had been a wrong reverse die. I think I remember reading that one of the 10 P coins had been found in a specimen currency "Anniversary" set or some such. I would think this coin would get a lot more attention or "play" as kids say these days...

Either or both of those would be an absolutely fantastic addition to a serious collection. But they're becoming almost out of reach.

I was going to bid for the 1895 pattern (F777) at Noonan's today. A similar specimen sold for £3500 on Baldwin's list in 2011 but today it went for £10,880 !!!!!!!!! Needless to say, I didn't buy it.

I expect he sees the ones he wants to see! He can probably see all of them - it's just a convenient excuse for getting out of answering any of my questions after he comes out with his usual nonsense. It's the same old story - there is no real perspective or realism in Peckris's blithe platitudes. It's all taken at face value from the media or politicians. He hasn't thought about it. He "hopes" China will come round - Xi has said that China will only change over to renewable energy when "others have shown it to be a success". If China can gain vast economic power from being the only country in the world that can do energy-intensive manufacturing, Xi isn't going to kill his golden goose - virtually limitless cheap energy, and the unfortunate result of net zero will be the complete economic ascendancy of China. So we're basically enabling a slave state to become the economic powerhouse of the world because they can, and do, burn as much coal as they want. To make all our renewables like solar panels for instance! Xi is safe enough in his stance - no one will ever make a success of it of course, as the renewables shebang has two huge flaws: its energy is not storable on any scale thus has to be used when made, and the supply is variable and uncontrollable. It's weather dependant, and cannot be magicked up when needed. You can't have bigger elephants in the room than that. "The wind will keep on blowing" - as you say, not if we have an anti-cyclone above us which happened for a prolonged period this Winter. And in Winter solar is basically useless with long nights and weak light, not forgetting it produces nothing for 50% of the year, ie night. So solar is only really significant on high Summer days when we least need the energy. So on not very windy days in Winter, how many nuclear power stations, small modular or otherwise, would we need to effectively produce 100% backup for ALL our energy needs? That would entail charging all vehicles, warming all buildings, hot water, all industry and all current electrical stuff? And how is our nuclear building programme going at the moment? We're tricked on every level - we're told renewables produce up to 50% of our electricity, often craftily called "energy" instead as if it's our total energy requirement. And yes it does produce up to 50%, but only now and again. But it also produces less than 5% of our electricity at other times. They don't tell us that, but just employ the phrase "up to". They don't mention that much of the rest of the electricity is generated by gas. And that's to order, unlike renewables. But electricity is only currently about 20% of our total energy consumption, the remainder being mainly fossil fuels with a bit of nuclear, that means our billions of pounds investment in renewables provides 20% of between 5% and 50% - so less than 1% to maximum 10% of our total energy requirement, produced randomly of course. Where does one start on this? - there are so many holes in it. Like some elderly acquaintances of ours who have just bought a mid-range EV, so as to tell everyone they're "saving the planet"! Help, help, help.....!!!

My lovely bottle brush tree died during the winter along with a few other temp sensitive plants , but at the moment the garden is just a pleasure to be in and its still work in progress on it a true labour of love

I bought one in a Bloomsbury sale (2005-7 but can't find the relevant catalogue at the moment). It was clearly a broken punch or filled die as there was a trace of the missing bar. I returned it not as described because it wasn't a genuine ONC as claimed.

The thing about 1826 pennies is they are fairly common so you would not emagine its worth passing of forgeries as the real thing

I remember an Estonian decathlete called Erki Nool which to me sounded distinctly like a sports injury.

Here are the same two proof farthing obverses from the Verene collection under different lighting, with the copper version again presented as the upper coin. The use of a chemical dip in bronzing does produce a more even color/tone - again complicated by variation in toning over time

Opinions vary. Like you, I prefer it like this - at least when the sun's out. Living in the South West as you do, you will have been less affected by North Sea cloud, which can persist all day at times in the East and Midlands - no hills whatever to prevent it rolling straight across the Midlands. Was clear today after a cloudy start, though. Went out for a quick spin on the bike earlier, and I must admit, even the the Sun was still up, it did feel decidedly nippy, due to wind chill. Of course on very hot days (and nights), wind chill is a Godsend.

How much will you give for mine?

The mindset of Russians beggars belief. One woman from Shebekino, upset at the recent border incursion that brought violence and destruction her town, bemoaned the fact that it was unfair. Apparently, 'All we wanted was to destroy Ukraine in peace'. Words fail me.