Martinminerva

All explained in this thread from a while ago: https://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/14238-1953-farthing/?tab=comments#comment-202806 In summary, it is the pointing of the F that is crucial: to tooth on common reverse B but to gap on this VIP unrecorded one.

An over-letter would not account for the sharp gap between the round bottom bulb of the "B" and the vestigial leg of the R, whereas a scratch and metal displacement would. All other proven B over R's or R over B's on other Victorian denominations show no such gap as metal flow on the die when corrections are made maintains smoothness. I'm not saying it's categorically not, but we need a much clearer picture to be certain either way. This is the best I can do with the original supplied image - I'm sure I can see a scratch...

Think it is just a scratch that runs through the letter and has displaced some of the metal of leg of the R. Given that the coin has clearly been through the wars - looks like a detector find - with all its various dings and scratches, for me it is just damage. Can you do a much enlarged / better resolution pic to help be sure? I have blown up your existing image which I think shows the scratch:

I think it is post mint damage, I'm afraid. With a bit of judicious photo editing (see below), I believe one can determine a suspiciously straight line running through the R and across Victoria's cheek, typical of a scuff. I have done it myself on occasions when metal detecting and scuffing a coin with my trowel (boo!). That would certainly account for the flattening of the letters.

Yes, another good find! These are scarce rather than rare and there are many subtly different types of 1865 over 3 overdate, but yours is indeed nice and clear. Keep up the good work and welcome to the world of varieties!

Hi I will start a new thread and send it ! See my comments in that new thread. F41 is the small date 1862 penny.

Think that's not the one secret santa meant - this, I believe, will be your 1861 with the weak letters and serifs you mentioned in the other thread (die fill, rather than a true variety, by the way). F41 is the small date 1862 penny, and the obverse above surely cannot match the 1862 you posted earlier due to the massive differences in wear!!

Yes - indeed so. Jolly well done.

Please can you post a photo of that one too?

I have this one also - 13.5 beads and final 7 over 7:

Yes - yet another one of these (fortunately) crap copies from China.

Actually, the circulation ones being released are 2023 after all, and they too don't have mintmarks... So only the set ones from 2023 are mintmarked, and none thereafter, it seems.

The 2024 ones don't which is what I imagine are being released - see below. I haven't found this one in circulation by the way, so no claim to the prize/bragging rights, but many are for sale on ebay etc.

Well that sounds like one 'ell of a challenge !😉 But, how are you going to be sure it's not one from one of the year sets already released being scanned and posted...

I believe too it doesn't exist. As has been said before on this and other gothic florin threads, there are an awful lot of mistakes in the catalogues and listings for this series that just keep being perpetuated (eg the Bull reference)!

No - it is a high tide as Richard says above. Rather than mucking around with the sea level, much easier identifiers are that the shield almost touches the border beads at its bottom left, and the P of Penny points between two beads. On the common type, there is a distinct gap between shield and beads and P points to a bead. Simples!!

Ah, but it does have the wonderful "grade of G 6" if you read the ebay AI generated blurb. Clearly AI is yet to understand Freeman die pairs, then... 😉

Wishful thinking, I'm afraid. The 8 over 6 type is very clear as can be seen below (courtesy of Richard's penny website). Having said that, yours has signs of doubled entry/strengthening on the 1 and the 6 of the date, so the 8 too might have had work done...

On 6/10/2024, PWA 1967 said: Have you not sent LCA an email Rob to just post you one. Doesn't seem to work! See my original comment above...

Not had a printed catalogue for over two years now, despite regularly requesting them and having spent hundreds (and sold similarly) with them over the years. Likewise nowadays rarely bid with them. The online catalogue is a poor substitute for the printed, the latter which I used to like to peruse at my leisure. Lockdales did the same with me many years ago, and I have never bid with them since.

That's AI for you, as demonstrated by ebay's push to allow "intelligence" to create the listing blurb on behalf of a seller. Over the last few months, the amount of bollocks that is being said in coin listings (and no doubt other categories too) beggars belief. Thank god some of us on here still have human intelligence, but heaven help the world for the future... 😩

Somebody else now trying to jump on that bandwagon, though suspect this one is just total ignorance rather than fraud. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/266766404000?mkevt=1&mkpid=0&emsid=e11021.m43.l1120&mkcid=7&ch=osgood&euid=6152c033966842d9bd5af6cdef42cc77&bu=43098541495&ut=RU&osub=-1~1&crd=20240413030842&segname=11021 I particularly like the "obtuse" reference!!

Link and/or picture, anyone?

And here's another with die clash marks like yours by the ribbon, and in front of Victoria too. They are the remnants of Britannia's drapery etc. from the clash with the reverse die.

Just die clash marks where the dies have come together without a blank in between, resulting in transferring of some of the opposite side's design into that die and so causing permanent damage that then is transferred to any subsequent coins struck from that die. Very common, especially in the Viccy penny series.