Red Riley Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 (edited) So.. Is the exergue part of the die ?I'm saying it isn't and that any activity within the exergue is not part of the die and therefore isn't of any significance.In my world thick and thin lighthouses are of interest, Wyons initials are of interest, numbers of berries and hair vvariations count, but the exergue has been created deliberately as an area in which ongoing working maintenance (such as changing the date) can take place, therefore it should be of no surprise that there are differences.My position is, that if it's below the exergual line, it's not a difference in the design, it's an unintentional (and inevitable) signature of the mintworker who engraved the plate.And therefore, to me, it's not a variety, it's a feature.These are just my thoughts, better expressed than withheld.Rgds as always.A good argument with which I broadly agree 400. However, what about Hs and KNs?!Actually I think what happens is that the exergue is left blank on the master die but punched in on the working die. This would mean that every working die would exhibit different date spacings if only microscopically. Has anybody bothered to check the positioning of the H? No, let's not go there... Edited June 13, 2010 by Red Riley Quote
DaveG38 Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 So.. Is the exergue part of the die ?I'm saying it isn't and that any activity within the exergue is not part of the die and therefore isn't of any significance.In my world thick and thin lighthouses are of interest, Wyons initials are of interest, numbers of berries and hair vvariations count, but the exergue has been created deliberately as an area in which ongoing working maintenance (such as changing the date) can take place, therefore it should be of no surprise that there are differences.My position is, that if it's below the exergual line, it's not a difference in the design, it's an unintentional (and inevitable) signature of the mintworker who engraved the plate.And therefore, to me, it's not a variety, it's a feature.These are just my thoughts, better expressed than withheld.Rgds as always.A good argument with which I broadly agree 400. However, what about Hs and KNs?!Actually I think what happens is that the exergue is left blank on the master die but punched in on the working die. This would mean that every working die would exhibit different date spacings if only microscopically. Has anybody bothered to check the positioning of the H? No, let's not go there...Not sure about the positioning of the 'H' but the 1918 has different spacings for the 'K' and the 'N.' Quote
scott Posted June 13, 2010 Author Posted June 13, 2010 and the victorian farthings have differant H location, even H over H i think on one if you didnt cout the things in the exergue would rule out every overdate :/speaking of date spacing Quote
Red Riley Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 Not sure about the positioning of the 'H' but the 1918 has different spacings for the 'K' and the 'N.'AAAAGGGGHHHHHHHH! Quote
azda Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 (edited) Peckris, i tend to agree with you about the staged moon landing etc, but what's intriguing is that date of 1933 AGAIN!!!! and Nessie plus the 1933 Penny. I think we have just begun our own X-Files for the date 1933.Just as a side note, i think RED is about to blow. Tin hats gents Edited June 13, 2010 by azda Quote
£400 for a Penny ? Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 A good argument with which I broadly agree 400. However, what about Hs and KNs?!Well, you're right of course about the H and KN because the reasons for them being there are of numismatic significance, so I have to concede the point.However, I don't accept that overdates and different numerals are of numismatic significance, they are evidence of mintworkers working the dies, but not part of a change in the design and therefore to me, interesting perhaps, but not important.And why they command the incredible premium that some of them do completely escapes me, honestly, it goes so far over my head that my hair doesn't even move.But, as has been said many times, it's a free world.I am starting to agree with Scott on this - that perhaps it is a clash of two different collecting cultures(countries).Rgds, Quote
Peckris Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 Peckris, i tend to agree with you about the staged moon landing etc, but what's intriguing is that date of 1933 AGAIN!!!! and Nessie plus the 1933 Penny. I think we have just begun our own X-Files for the date 1933.Just as a side note, i think RED is about to blow. Tin hats gents You did NOT see me smoking behind a pillar in an underground car park Quote
scott Posted June 14, 2010 Author Posted June 14, 2010 so whats 1862 Halfpenny date penny? the dates are the same size arn't they? Quote
argentumandcoins Posted June 14, 2010 Posted June 14, 2010 No, the date numerals are the same size as those used on the halfpenny.Pics attached with the standard date numerals for comparison.The difference is much more obvious in the hand. Quote
argentumandcoins Posted June 14, 2010 Posted June 14, 2010 The 1/2d die numerals Penny is on the bottom. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.