terrysoldpennies

Yes we should not assume he would ,in a way that's why I for one would consider your judgment, as being measured and informed . One type in question would be the Hollow Neck , classified as Gouby X , which is of course a totally new found die. It really should be listed in Freeman as a F171a, in a similar way to say the F164a, but a coin like the VIGTORIA will obviously be a highly sort after type , but is only in fact an error coin, so where should it be placed. Terry

I agree with what you say Richard, but the using of two systems is already confusing , what I tend to do is think in terms of the year , and the major definition in freeman , and if its a sub variation of one of them , then add after it the Gouby definition. Of course a new type find I suppose should be give a Gouby classification , unless it is a new die discovery, then who decides where to place it, Is Michael willing to adjudicate, or would you . Terry

That's great Pete, thanks. Terry

Pete, I sent a message about this some days ago via the message box . can you let me know if it arrived , or is it not working . Terry

Well actually your small 0 penny creates an even bigger conundrum , as on all of the small 0s I have found, all had the wavy E in PENNY & on the E in ONE ,whereas the one you show has wavy in ONE and straight in PENNY, that's as far as I can tell from your picture. But this still show that the wavy Es are only found on small 0 types. see mine above Terry

Hi I have been out all evening sorry, on the reverse B the gap between the 0 & 5 only vary because of the 0 being smaller and slightly narrower, the overall width of the date is the same on both F160 types [Rev B] ,but the rev C is slightly narrower. its the fact that I have only found the wavy E to be present on coins with the small 0 type date . terry

No Matt , not between the F160 & the F161 as both have the straight bottom to the E, but the new F160 if we may call it F160a has the wavy E . Terry

Good to see you back Matt . Did you see my post in Confirmed Unlisted Varieties on the 29th , I would welcome your thoughts on it . Terry

No your right Jerry , just a little cooler, all though unlike you, moving to a new large farmhouse , we will be downsizing in a few years time. Terry

Its funny when everyone thinks of Essex , they go errr . but this is Essex and this is my house and view. Terry

Jerry, I have a recessed ear type without the broken tooth , so I would assume that the tooth broke during 1915, and continued in use with the broken tooth into 1916. Terry ps being quite warn it is clearly recessed in the centre .

Hopefully you've all had a good Christmas, and as its now over I have a new type for the New Year . I'm sure most of you know that there are two types of 1905 penny listed, the F160 with the E in PENNY pointing to the gap between the teeth [ early type] , and the F161 with the rotated E pointing to the tooth [late type]. Well I noticed some time ago that some of the F160s have a small zero in the date, this by its self seemed of little importance , but I later realised that all of the pennies with the large zero , both F160s and F161s all have the straight bottoms to the Es in PENNY, whereas the small zero type, on all the examples I have managed to find , have the wavy bottomed Es. The straight and wavy Es were both in use from 1899 through to 1905, but only the straight type from then on. The small zero was used from 1901 to 1905, and after this the large zero from 1905 to 1908. This means that it is a transitional type reverse die used between the 1904 F159 and the 1905 F160. It also suggests that the differing bottoms to the Es, was a Font change, rather than a warn die creation. As if it was caused by wear, then you would expect to find at least some of the F160s and the F161s with the large zeros to have the wavy Es . Terry Top :- New type F160 Middle :- F160 Bottom :- F161

Its a Freeman 2+D [Gouby D+D ] Terry

I'm slipping how did I manage to miss that one. Terry

I could not believe it when it came up on E.bay. a buy it now £4, postage included, but I certainly sweated buckets when I thought it had gone missing. Terry

Thanks everyone I've been lucky . terry

I received this in the post today , its taken a month to arrive [ incorrectly addressed ] .and so I thought it to be lost , so I'm thrilled to at last have it safe in my hands. its one I did not have. Terry

I wonder if the distortion of the digits were caused by the same problem in the manufacturing process as that which caused the wavy exergue. Terry

I was just taking another look at my 1963 wavy exergue , and have noticed something overlooked at the time , because we were all to distracted looking hard at the wavy exergue. The 9 has a squared off chisel like end to its tail, and also that the circular part of the 9 is squared off at the bottom. A second pic in different light shown below . has anyone else got another one with this feature on it. Terry

The thing is that the 1951 has on over inflated reputation, and you cant blame the dealers from cashing in on it. Being one of the older generation I can tell you that people had more on there mind , and little money then to indulge in coin collecting. The boom really came in the 1960s when the introduction of decimal coinage was announced . Terry

As soon as the location of the 1951s was know people started hording them in mint condition , unlike the 1949 . The 1912h is another one that was horded , where as the 1912 most were melted down in the 1960s. Terry

Underneath the D in D G there's a Mark , and its present on both coins , I think they are the same penny . Terry

its a 2+d maybe they think its a 2*+d , Its not Terry

Its a better find than you think, there are four types of 1913 penny , Freeman 174 known as F174 Q.common] / F175 V.scarce / F176 V.rare / and F177 the most common type. Yours is a F175, and not a bad find for the price, though its a shame its been cleaned at some time. Terry

Hi Mr T , both have 138 teeth on the Rev. and 143 on the Obv. so no difference there , But as Mike suggested they may have been made by different mints , one James Watt and the other the Royal Mint , this may have been an identifier, so as to know which mint manufactured which, later to use the H and KN on coins. Terry