secret santa

Lots of things are misdescribed and the mistake inevitably perpetuated because many collectors have blind faith in the literature and don't question inconsistencies. As always, it pays to know what you are buying, because when the time comes to sell you can rest assured that someone will point out the incorrect listing if wrongly described as a rare variety (but are usually more reticent when a rare type is catalogued as a common one) . Buyer beware applies to each and every purchase. It doesn't matter whether the mis-attribution is intentional or not, just that one day the owner is likely to meet up with someone knowledgable. It could be very expensive. For anyone interested in these patterns, a copy of the Magnay or Adams sale is a useful reference. Both collections had large numbers of them. All three of the above images were from the Adams collection. Rob, I've got the Adams catalogue (I was there) and I can get their low resolution pics from their archive - do you believe that Spink will have described them correctly ? Hopefully a bit better than their efforts in last week's Andy Scott sale ! It seems quite risky to collect these patterns without being able to check the coins out in the flesh beforehand - the differences in these 4 obverses are far more subtle than the currency Victorian pennies. And then again, there is no reference against which to check values against variety. They are all "rare" but what makes a coin worth £200 as against £1000 ? Is it just the difference between R17 and R20 as estimated by Freeman ?

Thanks, in that case several of my coins have been wrongly classified - I agree with you that the 3 and 4 look alike and the 1 (non-gilt) definitely isn't a 1. I wonder how many other coins have been wrongly catalogued and purchased in ignorance over the years ? Definitely a case of buyer beware !!!

Rob, do you agree with my labelling of the 4 close-ups ?

Sadly I do - that way I discovered the pattern QEII obverse which Michael Gouby now calls C*. It also makes identification of some coins more precise. And it comes in handy when I can't get off to sleep.......

Steve, we met at LCA at Bracknell a few years ago and you showed me your website - that was what set the spark that has finally ignited !!!!

Echoing the sentiments of others - indescribably good. You should write a book. Any more details than what we got in the thread about it? Michael sent the coin to the Royal Mint in 2011 and they had it for 5 months before replying. Their reply was that the shape of the 6 was not consistent with UK coins of this period and that they consulted the die records for the 1920s and "nothing came to light which could have given rise to the striking of such a piece." That clearly is questionable given the variety of coins and die combinations that have emerged from that period. Michael suspects that they may not have spent much time investigating the coin. I think that he may well be right in that they are not much interested - when I wrote to them about my 1922 penny with M.E. obverse and 1927 reverse, they never replied apart from the initial promise to get back to me. Further prompts brought nothing. I guess they get many requests like this ??? Michael also sent it to Steve Hill at Baldwins who recommended the Mint enquiry. Stephen Lockett got his cataloguer (Paul Redford I assume) to examine the coin under a microscope and he said there was a trace of a number under the 6 but it was NOT a 7. Michael made many other points that support the view that it is not a 1927 penny that has been "doctored" after issue from the Mint. He wrote back to the Mint but there's no mention of a further response from them. It was enough to convince me that the penny is an experimental piece that was produced along with the other anomalies that I mention on my website. Heaven knows how they all "escaped" !

Spot on! Well done Rash, works like a dream Thanks everyone - Chrome was the answer !

Eureka ! (I think)

Thanks for your efforts to help but it's no go. When I type the URL in the box and try to click OK nothing happens. In fact the page goes dead and I have to alt+< to get out. Maybe I'll try in a different browser.

Sadly, that doesn't work. I must have done something wrong. Pasting within the signature as described above doesn't work so I just typed in the ERL, and I can't rename it. I'll have to live with it.

I think I've done it a different way. If not, I'll try your way.

still can't get it in there as a link. Anyone help please ?

Oooops, try again

This is just a test post to see whether I have successfully added the website link to my signature. If not, Help !!!!!!

PWA - I'm not sure how to do that (short of typing it in every time ?). I'm sure some kind soul will assist !

Thanks again. I've just made a mental decision to go through the bronze pennies (particularly Victoria) and change all the obverse/reverse descriptions to include Freeman's descriptions as so many people still use them. Thus an 1860 F10 would be described as 1860 F10 (Gouby D+d; Freeman 2+D). It might be more useful ?

Thanks Nordle for the compliments and advice - absolutely agree about the Wordpress theme ( I did try others but this one seemed to work the best. It's not the flashiest but very easy to work with and the content is the key).

Yes, Michael Freeman offered it to me 3 years ago but I paid significantly less for it this time. Worth waiting for. He also sent me some useful background material last time.

Thanks - please don't tell me what they are or I won't be able to sleep at night !

Thanks for the compliments, guys, but it will probably only serve to increase my sad obsession !

Freeman doesn't differentiate between Gouby A and B. The big difference which you can only see on unworn specimens is in the engraving on Victoria's cape. On obverse A the stem of the upper right clover leaf is long and stretches down to the rose on the left. On obverse B, the stems of the two top right clover join below them at the top of the third clover leaf. The clover leaves are smaller on obverse B. Gouby then goes on to note 2 minor variations in obverse A - one where the R & E of REG touch at the bottom and the other where R is rotated slightly so that its toe is a little below the back of the E. Pretty geeky stuff ! But the Ebay coin is clearly an obverse A. If you want to see pictures, take a look at my collection website which I'm putting together (thanks to members who have given me tips) Address is www.englishpennies.wordpress.com Freeman 763 is one of the more common examples of the early beaded patterns but still a rare coin.

The Ebay coin was an A+b (F763)

Did anyone spot the VF specimen of the hugely rare 1861 F27 penny on Ebay last month ? Sadly I missed it.

Nordle, thanks for the tip about the dual images - that works. Now, it seems to take ages to upload JPEG images - any tips on a better format of image ?

Just began the website process. Nordle, how did you get two images side by side ? I've just wasted an hour trying with no success !!!