jelida

Here it is. I seem to have posted the wrong number, as you point out. I am not really up to speed with this ipad. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1763-SHILLING-GEORGE-III-NORTHUMBERLAND-ISSUE-VERY-RARE-IN-THIS-GRADE-/221681026769?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item339d3806d1 Jerry

Interestingly both of these features also appear to be present on the one coinageofengland are selling on Ebay at the moment 171675159718 Jerry

That is awful! And look at the effort they've gone to to give each other good feedback! Jerry

Thanks Nick, I may be retired but I'm not senile (yet). When first posted, it was '1882 no H' , 'the coin every collector wants' etc, all in big capitals. Perhaps the vendor reads this forum....... Jerry

Oh dear, here we go again, wrong obverse and you can clearly see the remnants of the 'H'. Jerry http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SUPER-RARE-NO-H-Queen-Victoria-Penny-1882-NO-H-/351304701883?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item51cb6457bb

My point was that the ONF 1860 penny is , like the 1882 'clogged H' penny , due to die deterioration, I am aware that the former is considered a variety, and the latter not. I am also aware that the genuine 'no H' 1882 penny was struck at the Royal Mint with no 'H' on the die. The issue is the extent that a coin struck from a damaged die, with perhaps interesting consequences, should be considered a true variety. There are various factors that seem to determine whether this becomes the case, the main one being attractiveness to collectors. But these coins , to my mind, are not equivalent to coins struck from a particular die variety. However, if anyone has a spare ONF penny at a sensible price........ Jerry

I suppose that we do pay a premium for other consequences of an ageing/ damaged/clogged die such as the 'ONF' 1860 penny, so why not the '1882 clogged 'H' penny? Not one for me though unless in Spink , and I find one very under-priced. Jerry

From the pics there is certainly a hint of the 'H' left by the clogged die, I hope it didnt go for too much....... Jerry

Surely no amount of 'carving' can turn an 8 into a 2? Especially as the 2 is of good form. However the 2 is considerably lower than the correctly positioned original number , the top of which is visible as demonstrated above. It seems to me that this was a worn 'normal' 1882H reverse die with a clogged H and the number 2 was re-entered somewhat lower than correct alignment. And I did see a worn 1882 no H with the 'wrong' obverse at the Birmingham Coin Fair last week, and even under a 40x magnification could see no evidence of malpractice. I dont think all of these are fakes, simply that the tiny 'H' on the die clogged on occasion. Jerry