secret santa

Thanks Rob. I bought a 1552 crown myself many years ago (Lord knows why) and have only just noticed the variation in different examples. Spink just pictures a single design and the various examples that I've seen in auction never seem to differentiate between obverse or reverse designs. Are they all more or less as common as each other, to the best of your knowledge ? And is the Lingford catalogue accessible online ?

Can someone please explain the difference in the legend at the lower left between these 2 coins. also, one has a dot after the date,

But you have to have a lot of time and patience to trawl through them !

My website states quite clearly that F103 has obverse M with 5 teeth from R to I and so your "suspension" is incorrect.

Does this sum up the world in 2023 ?

Photos please.

Well done - I spotted that in a Spink auction recently.

It is obverse 4 (Gouby F) and the pictured coins are F24 - Freeman 4+F (Gouby F+f), but the same missing leaf has been seen on (2) specimens of F22 (Freeman 4+D; Gouby F+d). (no-one uses roman numerals to identify obverse types)

On a different subject, I have been studying the obverse 4 missing leaf types where all the examples that I've seen bear slight traces of the "missing" leaf and a weakened linear circle above the missing leaf. The example in Michael Gouby's book, however, shows a complete linear circle: However, close examination suggests that these 2 pictures are of the same coin - compare the shading and the dark spot on the right hand side. Perhaps the 2nd picture was doctored (definitely not by Michael) to illustrate what the missing leaf might look like. Michael agrees with me and intends to include a different picture in any future updates to his book. I therefore think that the genuine missing leaf types look like this, with weakened linear circle: Which is probably what would be expected from a partially filled die in that area of the coin.

I fear we shall never know.

Further to the above, I have a couple of 1861 pennies (F29 & F33) where the G of D:G: has been badly repaired (rotated) with both a "curved" and a "straighter" G punch so either of these could have been used to produce the VIGTORIA error.

It's a "No" from me..............

Yes, I understood that and was just demonstrating that they're curved on my examples.😉

On my proof and circulation 1862 pennies, the usual G is very definitely curved.

The working die wouldn't have been created with a G in VICTORIA and therefore it must have been caused by manual intervention. London Coins note that the rogue "G" is of a slightly different format to the other proper "G"s (in D:G: and REG) and Michael Gouby suggests that it might have been caused accidentally through an intended die repair to the "G" of REG being carried out by a repairer forgetting that a "G" on the right of the incuse die will actually affect the left side of the struck coin, and inadvertently "repairing" with a "G" punch the "C" of VICTORIA instead which is on the right side of the die diametrically opposite the "G" of REG. Anyway, the error must have been spotted quite quickly given the restricted numbers of affected coins that reached circulation, as demonstrated by the fact that only 10 surviving examples have so far been recorded out of huge numbers of 1862 pennies.

Just wear or damage. Definitely a G.

The above screenshot shows that I submitted a bid 2 seconds before the auction ended at 1:58 (I think I actually submitted it more like 20 seconds before the end) but was then able to enter another bid at 38 seconds after 1:58. This may suggest that the auction ends after 1:58 and 59 seconds but I have seen an auction continue beyond the minute after the end time.

Yes, ended on Wednesday.

Managed, at last, to get a VIGTORIA:

Yes, my experiences range from 20-30 seconds to 3-4 minutes. At one point it says that auction is closed and then mysteriously continues running for a while. It never used to be like that, i.e I've only noticed it in the last 2 or 3 months.

Desktop PC