Peckris

A filled die often means that dots don't get struck up, but are more noticeable when letters or numbers go wholly or partly missing. They tend to go in and out of fashion. For example, there was once a variety of 1961 halfcrown where the designer initials "EF" were missing on the reverse. It carried a modest premium in most price books. Then it fell out of favour, and you won't see it listed anywhere now, except perhaps in DAvies or (at a pinch) in ESC. Filled dies are quite common from the machine age (1797) onwards, and there are quite a few in the 19th Century.

What are we looking at, here? Care to talk us through the main points?

That's not a completely unattractive hole - have you thought about putting it on eBay?

No, I meant the tiny thin trench left by the rim appearing to come adrift from the coin. You can see it on the reverse, from the word DEF round to the word CROWN.

No I meant maybe someone messed with the coin long after it left the Mint. People do crazy things to coins!

Duh Bob? They never used full-stops on the coins back then. Thanks for the comment and I can only assume you are right and they did not use full stops. I am just a beginner in this but 'after the G' there is not a colon, as you can see from the picture. There is 1 dot. Maybe it's a forgery??? - or maybe it's a miss - strike. I'm just seeking help from the experts!!! Regards, Bob P. Actually, there is the faintest of impressions of the missing dot - it's level with the horizontal serif stroke of the lower upcurve to the G, which is where it should be. It's probably a filled die.

The more I look at it, the worse it seems. The biggest clincher is the gap between the field and the rim. Can't believe I didn't spot that right off.

Definately Reverse B, the gap between the trident prong and P of PENNY on Reverse A is twice as wide. The other way to tell is that Reverse A has a VERY low tide, and no sea at all behind Britannia.

The weird thing is that the '1' is exactly where the 'I' should be. Either that's a major coincidence, or someone has been tampering with the coin deliberately.

Interesting this came in a big box of coins I bought (mostly foreign) I do notice that there is a slight dip where the VI is on OBV and the I appears like a number 1 at top but I think that is probably as it is flattened and the top of serif may be stretched out. I dont know if a 1 could have been used intead of an I ? Here's a pic So what makes you think there are more??? Have these manufacturing flaws been recorded on the 1944 before? I was thinking of contacting Spink or would they just laugh in my face?? Regards Russ777 That's definitely a "1" - see how its base extends further into the field than the letters? Compare its size with the 1 in the date - they should tally.

I know I keep banging on about it but it's also got the broken R in George. This is Edward lol Luckily there is an R in Edward as well What an entertaining gap filler... It is actually quite attractive in hand esp the reverse and is very similar in color to one of my 1906's although Eddy looks a little haggard on the gap filler. Coincraft notes that these pieces often look ghostly or concave esp obverse and I think there is some reference in there about being made in Lebanon in the 60's. It weighs 14.1 gram. Going back to the 06, the rim is about 2mm wider on the currency issue. It doesn't ring true when gently dropped and I think there is a seam just inside the collar. I've had it 10 years and it still fascinates me. How do these people get their hands on dies? I think they make them from a genuine coin. They use a genuine coin to produce a mould then produce a casting from it

No problem with me David Strange, It's just this one forum, no others.

testing. Anyone else have a problem with this forum? It shows as "New Replies" every time, even when there aren't any. All other forums are fine.

1913 dates there is a difference in spacing and the relationship of numerals to border beads, but font is essentially the same to me David Very slight difference David (to my eyes) : the lower 3 is higher which overall gives a slightly slenderer look to it, where the top one is reduced ever so slightly in height, giving a more compact appearance. (The bottom one is the first reverse?)

I'm very impressed that you remember it was precisely £5/17/9d. Can you tell me what albums you sacrificed it for and how much they cost? I remember that one of them (which I still own) was the mono first pressing of Cream's Disraeli Gears. Not only a brilliant classic album, but in itself now worth somewhere around £60 - £70 ! Swings and roundabouts, hey... P.S. I seem to remember that albums back then cost 32/6 - one down in memory, two to go 32/6? You extravagant youngster. 19/11 in my day!!! PS: I've still got Disraeli Gears, but I think mine is the stereo version. If it's the first pressing it's still a respectable £40 or £50 in Mint condition.

It could be genuine (it's hard to tell from a low-res enlargement). But my instincts tell me it might also be a casting, i.e. a forgery. There's a number of them about, it's a date you have to be very careful with. Is it yours? If so, the precise weight would be useful. Also, what kind of sound does it make if you drop it (gently!) on a wooden surface? If it was genuine, it's in a nice GVF condition, which would place its value somewhere around £1500.

Hopefully this one is better. What does the edge look like - any line indicating a join? Possibly grafted with a private issue, similar to "double headed" pennies ?Masonic David I don't see a join, but upon looking at it closer I think the side was sanded down as there are rings like a record and then the new shield was engraved. Certainly explains why I haven't been able to find anything on this. Thanks for all the help! Yes - I think you're right. The obverse has been machined out, then recut to make a vanity piece.

The former home to R&L Coins, and Peter Ireland, too. Well worth a jaunt.

LUL

If you look carefully, what appears to have have happened is that a chunk has come out of the lower 3. It's a piece missing. The question is, did it happen at striking which would make it an interesting (but probably not valuable) misstrike, or has been gouged out since? hi i know what you are getting at with the chunk but would pinching out after striking account for the leg sticking out at the back of the lower 3 in the middle some friends of mine suggested that it may possibly be a backwards £ sign I think it may have been gouged on both the upper (less) and lower (more) portions of the right hand side of the 3, which might account for the 'leg' sticking out. Don't forget also - there are two reverses of 1913 penny, and it is entirely possible that the style of the 3 varies (it's so slight that at normal magnification you wouldn't really notice anything).

I'm very impressed that you remember it was precisely £5/17/9d. Can you tell me what albums you sacrificed it for and how much they cost? I remember that one of them (which I still own) was the mono first pressing of Cream's Disraeli Gears. Not only a brilliant classic album, but in itself now worth somewhere around £60 - £70 ! Swings and roundabouts, hey... P.S. I seem to remember that albums back then cost 32/6 - one down in memory, two to go

Are you feeling ok ?? One should never speak to soon, just made a purchase I think i'm officially an addict. Do i get any tokens from the Government to help me buy coins? Do you realise, if you remove the Oalit faction from the Government, you end up with Coin?

I should have been more specific - I meant mechanised, i.e. post-Boulton & Watt. If you look at all milled coins prior to then, there's a certain crudeness to their production technique, though the designs are often very beautiful indeed. For one thing, you rarely see a milled edge, they are usually not perfectly circular, the design is slightly off centre, etc. Yet if you look at that medal, it is machine perfect, and only a mechanised plant could achieve that. Something to do with outraging the puritans as I recall. In common with most men, the only feeling I get when looking at the Cerne Abbas Giant is envy. Really? :lol:

Very handsome. Victorian, would you say? I don't think so Peck as it would have been called a Nachprägung in German which it wasn't, so i'm assuming an original. Oops. I don't think so. Ask the opinion of others here, but I think you'll find that is a machine minted medal, technology that was unknown at the time of Charles I. And everything about it shrieks "19th Century" (to me at least). My educated guess is 19th Century, though no less handsome for all that.

I must get myself a Peck as soon as I can afford one. There are just two available on Amazon, both later editions than the original offered by argentum, and both more expensive. There's one in a little corner bookshop. The shopkeeper has no idea what it is and has marked it up for a fiver, although secretly he'd accept £3 for it. When I find it, I'll offer him £4.... I've managed Dalton & Hamer and Freeman, but so far Peck has eluded me, the rascal..... As a schoolboy I ordered a copy of Peck from the local bookshop for the princely sum of £5/17/9 - but I got cold feet, cancelled, and spent the money on rock albums instead. Roll on 30 years, one is in an auction at Taunton. Costs me around £95 to buy. Funnily enough, that £95 didn't make me wince as much as the £5/17/9 made my younger self wince.