jelida

Ah, I see. Well it clearly entered circulation somehow, so that is one possibility. Another is a sticky fingered child. One of my pervading childhood guilts is that I took and spent a couple of half crowns from a bag in dad’s desk. He wasn’t pleased, he had previously collected better early C20 examples from circulation . I think I managed to share the guilt with my brother though, so a small victory. Jerry

Or that it’s not a silver proof? There is definitely that coppery tinge to the obverse hi lights. Jerry

I doubt you could grind out the full depth of a misplaced repair on a die without creating a massive and obvious bulge in the field of a struck coin. Far easier to fill the die locally, polish the die surface (field on the coin) and re-punch the necessary repair. And I do agree re the HALP halfpenny, all those I have seen look very much like a flaw, especially when compared to the 1860 E over P penny which is clearly an erroneous repair with a clear clean loop of the P. Some nice discussions over the last couple of days, Penny-wise. Jerry

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

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

Spink gives £130 in VF so you haven’t done too badly I reckon. Looks like a nice coin, enjoy it. Jerry

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

You have rotated it the wrong way sideways. Try rotating the N anti-clockwise, then it fits perfectly. 🤗 Jerry

Totally fake, as are most of his offerings on EBay. Jerry

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

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

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

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

Interesting....do you have access to the coins? If so, could you take close-up photos of the two hands under identical lighting, Jerry

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

At a glance it looks like a Venetian soldino or ‘galley halfpenny’, widely circulated in the UK in the C16/17. Jerry

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

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

Yes and no. Jerry

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

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

https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/the-stamp-and-coin-shop-online-limited Jerry

Yup, I would say F 17. The flaw on the last colon seems to appear on the latest 1861’s. Jerry

Quite true, unusual die pairings should certainly count, and are of course an act, deliberate or mistaken, of man (or woman). Jerry

I’d agree too. Mis-strikes may be of interest to some (not me), but to be a true variety it has to be a physical alteration of the die, whether a deliberate or erroneous action of a human. Failings of the manufacturing process alone , and even die wear and tear (ONF pennies, dot coins etc ) may merit comment in the catalogues but in my opinion not varietal status. The only reason Freeman listed the ‘97 dot penny is that it was initially thought to be a deliberate die identification mark. Jerry