Sovereign Errors, Overdates and Varieties

[sovereignsteve]

3 hours ago, paulmerton said:

Before I send it back, is it possible that this is a struck-thru error on the centre of my memorial quarter sovereign?

Yes, but what on earth got between the coin and the die?

[paulmerton]

1 minute ago, sovereignsteve said:

Yes, but what on earth got between the coin and the die?

That's a good question, no idea! Maybe just a fleck of metal from a previous strike?

I'm tempted to keep it and get it graded as an error (assuming it's significant enough an error? the coin is pretty tiny as it is...) but there are two other duff coins in the set and RM won't replace those unless I send the entire set back   

[sovereignsteve]

6 minutes ago, paulmerton said:

That's a good question, no idea! Maybe just a fleck of metal from a previous strike?

I'm tempted to keep it and get it graded as an error (assuming it's significant enough an error? the coin is pretty tiny as it is...) but there are two other duff coins in the set and RM won't replace those unless I send the entire set back   

ah yes, I'd forgotten it was a tiny quarter😁

[JamesH]

1872 Young Vic shield sovereign acquired this week. Hope @Sh97if doesn’t mind me using his own pic here but I can’t take a better one. Noticed what appears to be an odd/over strike on the ‘1’ of 1872 and wondered what this may be and whether or not it was a rarity? Thanks all

[shawy2510]

Win this yesterday at an auction, got it for a reasonable price too

 

[GoldDiggerDave]

On 17/02/2023 at 12:42, JamesH said:

1872 Young Vic shield sovereign acquired this week. Hope @Sh97if doesn’t mind me using his own pic here but I can’t take a better one. Noticed what appears to be an odd/over strike on the ‘1’ of 1872 and wondered what this may be and whether or not it was a rarity? Thanks all

IMO it's just a "mushy" strike, it's very common to see die breaks in these 1872/1871 coins from the 1 to the neck line.....These are some pictures of some other 1872 and you can see the die slowly breaking down and the break getting worse. 

[JamesH]

Thanks for taking the time @GoldDiggerDave  appreciate the response

[mpiokpee]

So you remember back in 2014 & 2015 the ½ Sovereign & Full Sovereign had the "Unfrosted" Variety. Where the Obverse was a bullion strike and the reverse was a Proof, aka a Mule. Is this another instance of this? refer to the images provided. This is a 2022 ¼ Sovereign Bullion with a "Frosted" Reverse. What do you think ?

[Britannia47]

On 17/02/2023 at 12:42, JamesH said:

1872 Young Vic shield sovereign acquired this week. Hope @Sh97if doesn’t mind me using his own pic here but I can’t take a better one. Noticed what appears to be an odd/over strike on the ‘1’ of 1872 and wondered what this may be and whether or not it was a rarity? Thanks all

Just checked mine to see what’s normal or otherwise!…...die no. 60

 

[modofantasma]

On 09/02/2023 at 11:36, KevjustKev said:

As 90% of my gold and silver is for stacking, how do I find out if I may have something a bit different? Is there a good guide I can get hold of? I have the Marsh book but it's for general stuff, if you know what I mean.

First thing might be to just look through what you've got very carefully and catalogue it, so a photo of each side. (I find it easier to take clear pics and then can look through the photos over time without having to rush or go to the deposit box all the time)

In the context of this thread you can look for any errors or anomalies.

For more general learning... Make a list what you've got including date and mintmark. I learned a lot by looking at things in batches. Eg all my George Vs together or all my Ed viis 

Take a look at the mintages of what you've got and after a while you'll get a feel for what is a lot or not much. 

Also looking at bulk listings here and seeing what dates come up a lot or don't seem to come up often 

[sovereignsteve]

15 hours ago, JamesH said:

Thanks for taking the time @GoldDiggerDave  appreciate the response

top reply by @GoldDiggerDave

[sovereignsteve]

10 hours ago, mpiokpee said:

So you remember back in 2014 & 2015 the ½ Sovereign & Full Sovereign had the "Unfrosted" Variety. Where the Obverse was a bullion strike and the reverse was a Proof, aka a Mule. Is this another instance of this? refer to the images provided. This is a 2022 ¼ Sovereign Bullion with a "Frosted" Reverse. What do you think ?

Looks like it yes although I didn't know you could get bullion 1/4 sovs, you learn every day.

[Britannia47]

On 21/02/2023 at 19:01, shawy2510 said:

Win this yesterday at an auction, got it for a reasonable price too

 

Here’s my ‘raw’ 1829 for comparison. Check out the superb reverse shield!….

[Zhorro]

On 21/02/2023 at 19:01, shawy2510 said:

Win this yesterday at an auction, got it for a reasonable price too

 

What does "retained lamination" mean?

[GoldDiggerDave]

48 minutes ago, Zhorro said:

What does "retained lamination" mean?

I would presume there is a delamination however the surface is still intact. 

[Britannia47]

3 hours ago, Zhorro said:

What does "retained lamination" mean?

Good question!  Perhaps a photo of the reverse would be good, to see what is meant by ‘retained lamination’ - never seen it before. I wonder how that affects the value?……

[Simonz]

https://www.error-ref.com/retained-lamination/

 

Definition: A lamination error occurs when metal flakes off the surface of a coin or planchet.  It is generally believed that the flaking, peeling, and cracking is due to impurities in the alloy which causes metal to separate along horizontal planes of weakness.

A retained lamination error is a flake that remains attached to the main body of the coin.

[paulmerton]

Old cents are really good for peely lamination errors - I think it's due to how the sheets are rolled out before the blanks are punched. This sort of thing seems much less common on GB coins or am I imagining it?

[Britannia47]

On 21/02/2023 at 19:01, shawy2510 said:

Win this yesterday at an auction, got it for a reasonable price too

 

Anything to add ? Very curious to know what your reverse looks like, and being nosey, what you paid at auction if possible.

[shawy2510]

Here is the reverse, hard to see but can post better pictures when in hand. 

Yes you can be nosey, I paid for it today as the invoice arrived, it was from Europe & I paid £907.25 delivered which is a very good price for the Sov let alone with an error.

 

[Britannia47]

1 hour ago, shawy2510 said:

Here is the reverse, hard to see but can post better pictures when in hand. 

Yes you can be nosey, I paid for it today as the invoice arrived, it was from Europe & I paid £907.25 delivered which is a very good price for the Sov let alone with an error.

 

Hi again, 

Some of us are interested in the lamination error. Can you spot it yourself, if so where?
Its not obvious to me on the photo…. 

[shawy2510]

1 hour ago, Britannia47 said:

Hi again, 

Some of us are interested in the lamination error. Can you spot it yourself, if so where?
Its not obvious to me on the photo…. 

I don't have the coin in hand mate so can't show you where it is or what it looks like. When it arrives I will take a close up for you.

[shawy2510]

1 hour ago, Britannia47 said:

Hi again, 

Some of us are interested in the lamination error. Can you spot it yourself, if so where?
Its not obvious to me on the photo…. 

Tell a lie here is the auction houses picture.

 

[Britannia47]

Apologies- my fault - my brain and eyesight got the Obv & Rev mixed up. It’s now very clear, even on your photo!
Thank-you anyway. Cheers. B47🙄

[DrK]

I have a strong interest in the DISH varieties of the Jubilee Head gold sovereigns, and began collecting them a year ago.  Many of them are extremely rare, which makes the hunt quite challenging.  Recently I was looking through auction archives to see if I could locate a "short tail" version of 1891 (Marsh-129, DISH-L14) when I accidentally discovered a "medium tail" variety for which no numbers have yet been assigned.  Reported to Steve Hill at SOVR and his very cordial reply indicated that he and David Iverson had considered this, but opted to just keep things simple and group "short" and "medium" together since they are not very much different visually.  However, this got me wondering if perhaps other very rare varieties might exist for other dates in the series, so a made a quick survey of postings for the years 1890, 1892, and 1893.  My quick, unscientific investigation seems to indicate that all 1890 coins are of the "short tail" variety (actually "medium" which counts as "not long"), so nothing exciting there. However I did locate new unreported "short tail" varieties for 1892, 1892-M, 1892-S, and 1893-M which are quite different from the normal "long tail" varieties.  Also reported these findings to Steve Hill, and he indicated that he would consider including them in any future revision of Marsh "The Gold Sovereign Series" which he edits.  For those interested in collecting the DISH series, I would like to show representative images here, so you can be on the lookout for these quite rare varieties for which no Marsh or DISH numbers exist yet. 

The images below show a rather generic "long tail" horse for 1891, followed by my newly discovered "short" (or "medium") varieties for 1892, 1892-M, 1892-S, and 1893-M.