Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

jelida

Accomplished Collector
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,801

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    110

 Content Type 

Everything posted by jelida

  1. jelida
    This 1860 penny sold on EBay a few days ago, I did put in a lowish bid but was deterred by the apparent corrosion, others were clearly more optimistic as it went for over £300. If it does clean, a bargain. If not, I suppose the price is fair, it appears to be excessively rare. But which is it? The obverse is clearly one of the thick rimmed early pattern/currency coins, but I cannot tell if the gaze is horizontal or downward. I cannot make out the shamrock etc clearly on the bodice. The reverse shield detail is delineated by double raised lines, not treble. Is this one of the Freeman 8 coins? Any ideas? https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/-/202347077689?nordt=true&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l10137 Thoughts appreciated. Jerry
  2. jelida
    Welcome to the forum. If you collect pennies you will spend a lot of time here, why not join the forum as a member and tell us a little about yourself. Jerry
  3. jelida
    Spink gives £130 in VF so you haven’t done too badly I reckon. Looks like a nice coin, enjoy it. Jerry
  4. jelida
    Whatever your view on another forum member’s opinion the above post is entirely inappropriate and you should remove it or apologise for your language and personal abuse. We do not always have to agree but we do have to disagree in a civil fashion. Jerry
  5. jelida
    You have rotated it the wrong way sideways. Try rotating the N anti-clockwise, then it fits perfectly. 🤗 Jerry
  6. jelida
    Well this is an image I have adored for over 50 years, and it is only when you start to examine it forensically that you realise the posture is unattainable. But I don’t think there is any mystery here, the technique has been used a multitude of times over the millennia. It is known as ‘artistic license ‘. LCW may not have been the best artist on the planet, but after a few very minor modifications over the first couple of years the resultant image is appealing, was popular and struck well in the new medium (bronze). I am not sure photo-realism has ever really taken a hold in numismatics, if one discounts those ghastly Princess Di stick-ons. Jerry
  7. jelida
    Totally fake, as are most of his offerings on EBay. Jerry
  8. jelida
    Well, that clarifies my point about the upper half of the 3. I can see that a ‘spike’ appears to rise from the almost worn away lower curve, but I suspect this is an artefact due to the surrounding dents and the angle looks wrong for a 2 diagonal anyway. I don’t think photos can clarify this on such a worn coin, if you remain adamant I can only suggest getting an ‘in the hand’ expert opinion. Jerry
  9. jelida
    Why do you think it is 3 over 2 Richard? By comparison with my specimens, there seems to be a dent in the back of the upper half of the 3 giving the appearance of a detached spike , but the spike represents the back of the bulbous curve on an undamaged coin, which is why the upper curve of the 3 looks much narrower than normal on yours. Try superimposing the images if you can. This is a very worn, battered coin and I am truly surprised you can express a confidence of one in a thousand! (‘99.9% certain’). I’m dubious, sorry, as I would love to see clear-cut new varieties. Jerry
  10. jelida
    I wonder what the sales of the updated Freeman book have been, every serious penny collector will surely have bought one, and Gouby’s Specialist Edition too. Chris P, can you help? That is not to say every collector can afford four figure sums, but it would give an idea of the collector base. Jerry
  11. jelida
    Richard, the difference is so much more marked in your first two pictures, which are also closer in grade, what I think we need are close-ups of the first 1911 that you show. The subsequent pictures are certainly less dramatically different, particularly given the wear. I would go for a genuine difference on the first pics, but am less convinced by the second pair. Do you have that first 1911 to photo? Jerry
  12. jelida
    Interesting....do you have access to the coins? If so, could you take close-up photos of the two hands under identical lighting, Jerry
  13. jelida
    I was pleased to spot this as a 'buy it now' on Ebay, so I bought it then! Purchased on the first, it arrived today! I had been tracking it through Ebays 'Global Shipping' system, finally I can sleep at night. F24, with the missing top leaf. Cost me £150 all in, £40 of it postage via 'Global Shipping', what a p-i-t-a. But I wasn't going to argue, under the circumstances. One for your 'Rarest Pennies' page, Richard. Jerry
  14. jelida

    Tudor?

    jelida replied to DrP's topic in British Hammered

    At a glance it looks like a Venetian soldino or ‘galley halfpenny’, widely circulated in the UK in the C16/17. Jerry
  15. jelida
    I think the market is more polarised, people simply don't want to live with such a poor coin in their collection but had it been in fine or better it would have soared. And it was bought well over the odds previously. And LCA does seem to be the place to sell pennies, for some reason. Jerry
  16. jelida
    I’m afraid this is a modern Chinese replica, there are increasing numbers of various dates appearing on EBay, not all correctly described despite the fact they have only been around a couple of years and the vendors must in most cases know their origin. Jerry
  17. jelida
    Yes and no. Jerry
  18. jelida
    As I pointed out above, a worn collar will constrain the coin less and allow a fractionally greater rim size. At no point was a strike ‘outside the collar’, mentioned. Perhaps you mean ‘without a collar’ , when the struck coin (not blank) may well be broader and thinner, with an ill-defined rim. The only other way that rim size can vary is if the design on the die excluding the rim is smaller, allowing a larger rim on a standard size coin. I really thought I had made my logic clear above, if the size of the design on the die can be shown to be smaller (narrower teeth, reduced size of lettering, spacing, portrait could all influence this) then a wider rim could occur within a normal size collar. If the design on the die is normal, then a broader rim could only occur if there was less constraint from the collar, for example if it was worn, which will have occurred over time. Jerry
  19. jelida
    My point about rim width variation is that it may be determined by the collar in which the coin is struck rather than the die, and the collar inner diameter may vary fractionally due to wear. Where the breadth of the die varies- ie maximum diameter across the coin teeth - varietal status might be more justified. I do not believe a particular die should be considered to have two varieties merely because for part of its life it was used in a slack collar. Teeth alignment issues may be isolated, in that a letter or number on one die was entered slightly differently to another die, or more general due to a different number of border teeth, changes in font or legend spacing for example. I would be more likely to call the latter a variety than the former; we have to be realistic, in the early years one might declare almost as many varieties as there are dies on date alignment alone. Jerry
  20. jelida
    I am inclined to think that most of these changes are more in the execution than the design, in that relief is probably a factor of strike depth, whether in preparation of the working dies or the striking of the coins themselves, this is very variable especially on obverse 2. The rim edge is not technically part of the design, and might be influenced by variations in collar size or wear. The subtle relationships between bust/teeth etc are certainly the work of man, when making up a new hub from the individual portrait and letter punches, from which to strike a master die, I suppose dramatic variations from the norm might merit sub-variety status, Jerry
  21. jelida
    Is that the only difference in tooth alignment? Count the teeth. Jerry
  22. jelida
    I suspect that one of the ‘C’ punches in use had a little raised spike at its edge giving this mark on any dies prepared or reinforced using it. I doubt it was deliberate. I am sure the tooth flaw on Obverse 6 was present on the master die, from fairly early in its life preparing working dies. I suspect that in the later ‘60’s a fresh master or masters was produced to the original Obverse 6 design (whether from large scale cast or hub I have no idea) but this effectively removed the flaw from working dies from this master. Looking for other subtle changes in these ‘no flaw’ Obverse 6’s might be fruitful. Jerry
  23. jelida
    Several more copies of this available on Abe books. Jerry
  24. jelida
    I agree. This coin looks like it has been in the ground, thick patina missing in some areas and raised due to underlying corrosion elsewhere. Jerry
  25. jelida
    The cannonball is rather higher on the wide date 1875 ‘cannonball’ non-variety 😜, but it does look similar otherwise, perhaps there was a piracy issue in 1875. Jerry
×
×
  • Create New...
Test