secret santa

Just to tease you:

This same person also advertised a (non) 1862 8 over 6 and another spurious dot coin recently - avoid him like the plague.

Yes, that's why they don't want to list Medusa. I've now pointed out to them that it's not really a pattern - there are only circulated specimens in existence, whereas genuine patterns tend to survive in near FDC condition.

Over a year ago I wrote to Spink suggesting some additional varieties to include in the Penny sections of their "Coins of England" annual catalogues. I listed the following types with pictures of the interesting features: 1847 Medusa, 1858 large rose, 1860 ONF, 1862 3 plumes, 1862 VIGTORIA, 1862 B over R, 1863 open 3 and 1909 F169. I felt that they were all worthy of mention with associated values as they exist in collectable numbers, and offered advice from my records on recent prices paid for these types. I thought that Medusa would be a certainty. Today I received a reply saying that they would include only the 1858 large rose and the 1862 VIGTORIA, despite already including 1863 over 1 (a much less obvious type) and 1903 open 3. Rather disappointing.

Mine has got the same as Ian's.

Great stuff, Ian !

Th explanation for the "dots" was contained in an article that I wrote for Coin News last year. I'll try to precis it for the dot penny page on the rare penny site.

Looks like it - over to Ian to confirm !

Right, I'll update my descriptions.

I also bought a coin in this auction - an 1859 small date with what Ian Fall calls a "narrow" 9. It's taller with a larger and oval loop. I've been looking for one of these for a while so I think they must be scarce. Ian's comparison:

I seem to remember that years ago some weather forecaster said that there was an over 80% probability that tomorrow's weather in the UK would be the same as today's. How things change !

I'm not inclined to add it to the "Dot" pennies because virtually all of these have perfectly circular raised dots about which Paul Holland has offered a plausible explanation for their origin and I'd prefer to keep them together as a single "phenomenon". Possibly another page could be created for coins with extraneous extra metal such as this ? Let me think about it. Richard

At the time of buying the coin, Barker, of Hull, said he was “over the moon” when he discovered how unique it was. So, how unique is it ? Rather unique ? Quite unique ? Very unique ? A trifle unique ? I'm afraid that the word "unique" is going the way of "literally" and "amazing" - i.e. becoming meaningless.

I would expect a specimen strike to be much, much sharper than this.

Very rare 1881H F103 sold on Ebay today for £1420 - a reasonable price for a genuine rarity with fewer than 10 examples on my website.

Ditto for me - I agree that the die crack looks to be a definitive identifier for the obverse. I'll look a little more at the reverse.

Just checked my 1856 OT - detached clover is there but NOT the misaligned colon after DEF.

Great work as always, Ian.

A cursory examination reveals a die crack on the obverse from the C of VICTORIA to the rim and, on the reverse, the colon after DEF is misaligned.

I wait with bated breath (saves me looking !)

I've added a little more to the Victoria bronze obverse page on this. https://pennyvarieties.wordpress.com/victoria-bronze-part-2-1861/

Me too.

Thank you for your kind comments but the halfpenny site is very much an afterthought, something to do in Lockdown. Pennies are my main (only) interest.

F39