Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Sign in to follow this  
Diaconis

Ebay's BEST Offerings

Recommended Posts

I wonder where it is now 😉😇.

Jerry

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, copper123 said:

On the subject of edward VIII coins can anyone confirm that when Edward asked for one of the four sets he was turned down by the royal mint , that must have felt like a right smack in the face .

George V would have gone spare if he was turned down .

I remember reading that though maybe it was brother that rejected the offer?

I've noted to myself that the first stroke of the N in ONE helps with the 1909 penny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

The N in ONE Gary ,both of the uprights is to a gap and another indicator ?

You're correct Pete, inasmuch as it was the N in ONE...

Reverse D both uprights point to teeth

Reverse E the uprights point to a gap

Unfortunately, as I indicated in my original post, if the border is so worn that the position of the 1 cannot be determined, the same problem will probably exist regarding the uprights of the N.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jelida said:

I wonder where it is now 😉😇.

Jerry

Nice one, Jerry. Neat capture.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2021 at 10:45 PM, 1949threepence said:

Nice one, Jerry. Neat capture.

I'm laughing at the thought of someone in Weymouth screaming as their auction finished, and the coin making 20 times what they had hoped....:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2021 at 4:05 PM, copper123 said:

On the subject of edward VIII coins can anyone confirm that when Edward asked for one of the four sets he was turned down by the royal mint , that must have felt like a right smack in the face .

George V would have gone spare if he was turned down .

Yes, it was definitely the case that he was turned down, but by George VI , not the Royal Mint  - Royal Mint link

Quote

The shockwaves were felt in every area of British public life including The Royal Mint, where production of the coinage of Edward VIII had been scheduled to start at 8am on 1 January 1937. The mint was in an advanced state of readiness – reducing machines had begun the process of miniaturising the designs ready for coins and medals. The abdication put paid to these plans and no coins of Edward VIII were ever issued in the United Kingdom. However, there had been time for pattern coins to be prepared, many of which now reside in The Royal Mint Museum, the finest collection of such pieces anywhere in the world. Soon after the abdication, Edward requested a set of the coins but George VI refused. Because the coins had never been issued and not passed through the Royal Proclamation process, they were not deemed to be official.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's no surprise that George VI refused. Since, his brother didn't want to be King, why should he want a set of the coins?

Edward VIII's abdication hurt George VI deeply. Hence he didn't allow the Duchess of Windsor or their future descendants to use the HRH title. George told his staff not to put phone calls from his brother to him. The coins of George VI faced the same way as George V, which simply ignored the fact that Edward VIII faced the "wrong" way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George VI's effigy was very similar to his brother. The reverses of farthing, halfpenny, penny, shilling were all reused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2021 at 7:16 AM, Sword said:

It's no surprise that George VI refused. Since, his brother didn't want to be King, why should he want a set of the coins?

Edward VIII's abdication hurt George VI deeply. Hence he didn't allow the Duchess of Windsor or their future descendants to use the HRH title. George told his staff not to put phone calls from his brother to him. The coins of George VI faced the same way as George V, which simply ignored the fact that Edward VIII faced the "wrong" way.

I read recently the request came in 1951 as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2021 at 12:14 AM, 1949threepence said:

F.W.K.Gee was a contributor to Coin Monthly in the early days. He wrote an article on Edward VIII pennies in the October 1969 edition. Then he wrote articles on the same topic in the August, September, October, November and December 1971 editions. A five part series.

They were very detailed and informative articles, Jon. No idea what the "F W K" stood for though. 

With regard to the F169, I've never seen one on offer except at auction. I suspect there are one or two more, but difficult to tell as the border teeth are too worn to determine whether the 1 of the date is directly over a border tooth. Funnily enough in the November article, there is an interesting piece on how to determine whether a 169 is a 169 when the border teeth are too worn to otherwise tell. Bit late tonight as I'm practically falling asleep at the keyboard. But I'll dig out that specific article tomorrow, and post the details here.     

 

On 4/23/2021 at 9:00 AM, 1949threepence said:

Not that, although that may, of course, be something else we need to know about.

Rather than re-typing all the words, here's a photo of the relevant part of the article - from Coin Monthly, November 1971:-

 

 

freeman 169 article.jpg

Now that I've got a 169, I thought I would put Gee's 1971 observation to the test, and so bought a 1909 F168 penny of equivalent wear, and compared the two fists of Britannia directly together under a loupe. I can confirm that yes, even with worn specimens, there is a definite and discernible difference between reverse D (the F168) and reverse E (the F169). The outline of Britannia's thumb on reverse E is distinctly more rounded towards the base as it leaves the wrist, than her thumb on reverse D, which is altogether straighter in appearance. It was very obvious under magnification, which surprised me, as I wasn't expecting anything more than the most subtle variation. Now that I've confirmed the differences to my own satisfaction, I also note that it's visible to the naked eye.

The helmet plume on reverse E is slightly shorter, but it's not anywhere near as obvious as the two thumbs.     

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×