1846 variation or not?

[Touvex]

Hello all - any experts here can help me with this coin please? The “1” in date looks like a double strike, but Marsh only has “1 over inverted 1” as a variation for this year - is this that? Or just a “normal” coin? Thanks!

Ps. This is different to the coin I will submit to NGC, mentioned in the other tread, this one I’m not sure…

[Zhorro]

7 hours ago, Touvex said:

Hello all - any experts here can help me with this coin please? The “1” in date looks like a double strike, but Marsh only has “1 over inverted 1” as a variation for this year - is this that? Or just a “normal” coin? Thanks!

Ps. This is different to the coin I will submit to NGC, mentioned in the other tread, this one I’m not sure…

Double strikes are unusual but are not rare.  Marsh only seems to list errors where it is one letter over a different letter (or the same letter rotated), or, one number over a different number.

Edited July 15, 2022 by Zhorro
Extra info

[Touvex]

1 hour ago, Zhorro said:

Double strikes are unusual but are not rare.  Marsh only seems to list errors where it is one letter over a different letter (or the same letter rotated), or, one number over a different number.

Thanks for the info!

[refero]

2 hours ago, Zhorro said:

Double strikes are unusual but are not rare.  Marsh only seems to list errors where it is one letter over a different letter (or the same letter rotated), or, one number over a different number.

"Variations" in my opinion (which of course counts around 0) are an INTENTIONAL attempt to mint something different from the original and official pattern. 1859 Ansell, 1863 with 827 on truncation, the 1838 and 1843 narrow shield etc. Be that a personal initiative or something officially decided and authorized.

All others are just errors, casual and yet interesting results of "something gone wrong during the strike process". They can be percevied in a different way from a collector to another, and the value given to these coins it is something very subjective. I personally wouldnt pay an extra for an inverted letter or number or even a Roman I, when i can get the "standard coin" without an additional charge. 

It is a matter of fact that in the 19th century the striking process was still far from being "perfect" 

Edited July 15, 2022 by refero

[LawrenceChard]

10 hours ago, Touvex said:

Hello all - any experts here can help me with this coin please? The “1” in date looks like a double strike, but Marsh only has “1 over inverted 1” as a variation for this year - is this that? Or just a “normal” coin? Thanks!

Ps. This is different to the coin I will submit to NGC, mentioned in the other tread, this one I’m not sure…

 

 

3 hours ago, Zhorro said:

Double strikes are unusual but are not rare.  Marsh only seems to list errors where it is one letter over a different letter (or the same letter rotated), or, one number over a different number.

 

46 minutes ago, refero said:

"Variations" in my opinion (which of course counts around 0) are an INTENTIONAL attempt to mint something different from the original and official pattern. 1859 Ansell, 1863 with 827 on truncation, the 1838 and 1843 narrow shield etc. Be that a personal initiative or something officially decided and authorized.

All others are just errors, casual and yet interesting results of "something gone wrong during the strike process". They can be percevied in a different way from a collector to another, and the value given to these coins it is something very subjective. I personally wouldnt pay an extra for an inverted letter or number or even a Roman I, when i can get the "standard coin" without an additional charge. 

It is a matter of fact that in the 19th century the striking process was still far from being "perfect" 

Double punched numerals and letters are common on Victorian shield sovereigns, although you did not actually say your coin is a Victoria shield sovereign.

Alterations, such as overdates, letter corrections, and similar should be considered differently, as @refero says.

A Roman I instead of a 1 in a date is a significant alteration, but many cases of a 1 or inverted 1 instead of an "I" are simply missing or broken serifs, so do not deserve any special status.

Better photos, using a macro lens, would help, as would cropping the images before uploading.

😎

Edited July 15, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[Touvex]

Thank you @LawrenceChard - was hoping you would chime in!

Yes it's a shield sovereign

I do not have a micro lense, but i can try take one with even bigger zoom on my loop and crop later at home - is there a chance this is the one in Marsh "1 over inverted 1", or likely not?

Best,

Arnold

[LawrenceChard]

17 minutes ago, Touvex said:

Thank you @LawrenceChard - was hoping you would chime in!

Yes it's a shield sovereign

I do not have a micro lense, but i can try take one with even bigger zoom on my loop and crop later at home - is there a chance this is the one in Marsh "1 over inverted 1", or likely not?

Best,

Arnold

It's not a "micro" lens, but a "macro" lens I mentioned. Some cameras also have various macro facilities, but dedicated macro lenses produce the best results.

Lighting also helps.

Yours looks like the 1 is double punched.

[Booky586]

An interesting coin! I find errors and varieties really interesting and I guess there are still lots of them out there to be found.

If you've looked in Marsh and Spink for a sovereign variety and not found what you're looking for I'd usually continue the search on the net. First stop is Allgold coins, they have a good knowledge base on varieties with some that aren't listed in Marsh:

https://www.allgoldcoins.co.uk/pages/knowledge-base

Then I'll trawl through the auction catalogues covering the Bentley Collection Sale, there's some very useful information by Steve Hill to be read:

https://media.baldwin.co.uk/auctions/Baldwins Auction/BA catalogues/Baldwins auction 73 - catalogue (Bentley Collection 1).pdf

https://media.baldwin.co.uk/auctions/Baldwins Auction/BA catalogues/Baldwins auction 76 - catalogue (Bentley Collection 2).pdf

https://media.baldwin.co.uk/auctions/Baldwins Auction/BA catalogues/Baldwins auction 79 - catalogue (Bentley Collection 3).pdf

Good luck with the search.

[Booky586]

Oh, and don't forget the reference stop for this thing on the forum here:

 

[GoldDiggerDave]

Some quick snaps with a iPhone 13 pro using the macro lens.  

 

[Touvex]

1 hour ago, Booky586 said:

An interesting coin! I find errors and varieties really interesting and I guess there are still lots of them out there to be found.

If you've looked in Marsh and Spink for a sovereign variety and not found what you're looking for I'd usually continue the search on the net. First stop is Allgold coins, they have a good knowledge base on varieties with some that aren't listed in Marsh:

https://www.allgoldcoins.co.uk/pages/knowledge-base

Then I'll trawl through the auction catalogues covering the Bentley Collection Sale, there's some very useful information by Steve Hill to be read:

https://media.baldwin.co.uk/auctions/Baldwins Auction/BA catalogues/Baldwins auction 73 - catalogue (Bentley Collection 1).pdf

https://media.baldwin.co.uk/auctions/Baldwins Auction/BA catalogues/Baldwins auction 76 - catalogue (Bentley Collection 2).pdf

https://media.baldwin.co.uk/auctions/Baldwins Auction/BA catalogues/Baldwins auction 79 - catalogue (Bentley Collection 3).pdf

Good luck with the search.

Thanks mate, this is super useful! Will do some more research on the internet!

[Touvex]

Thanks for the photography tips - unfortunately I don’t have a macro lens camera nor iPhone 13 pro

But did my best with 30x zoom loupe and bog standard camera.

Kind of looks like a “I” under the “1”? It doesn’t look like another “1” underneath?

Thanks!

[GoldDiggerDave]

Looks like a 1 over I  can’t tell if the I is inverted😂

No listing for a 1846 with this attribution just a 6/6.  You might be lucky to get a new listing if they do see it as a new variety.  
 

There is a listing for a “repunched 1” for a 1847

if you are intending to submit to NGC might be worth a chat with your account manger. 

I have seen 4 over inverted 4 for the same year

Edited July 15, 2022 by GoldDiggerDave

[Touvex]

Thanks!

That's what i thought too - potentially "1 over I" - will speak to NGC and see what they say, but i dont have an account manager though, not a VIP like you!