| The gallery tab shows only items with images. Click the thumbnails to enlarge. |
| Slot: |
1820 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1820 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 55 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3785C, Marsh 4 (Scarce)
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 3099, Lot 31931
Date: 7 May 2022
Critique: The very first "early" sovereign that I acquired. Not a very high grade, but an absolutely beautiful example of this date. Eye appeal is the main factor in my purchasing decisions, not grade. That tends to hurt me in competition, since I pass up a large number of mint state coins that are completely lacking eye appeal. Sometimes it's painful to make that decision, but I'm a firm believer in what Q. David Bowers always says, "Buy the coin, NOT the holder!"
|
| Slot: |
1821 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1821 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC MS 61 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3800, Marsh 5
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 3099, Lot 31938
Date: 7 May 2022
Critique: Sometimes I run into a coin that is rather expensive since it's in a major auction and has great eye appeal. Generally, someone else wants it more than I do, and I abandon the chase. But sometimes I end up on top, and this is one of those cases.
I really love the Laureate Head George IV sovs minted 1821 to 1825, because they have the most beautiful design for letters and numerals. Each one is extremely ornate and intricate, with sets of beads imbedded. Quite a lovely feature, but I imagine these fancy characters were very difficult and time-consuming to engrave. Since they can't be seen with the naked eye, when the new Bare Head effigy of George debuted in the latter part of 1825 these wonderful designs were abandoned in favor of the usual plain characters. Such a shame to lose this artistic flourish.
|
| Slot: |
1822 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1822 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC XF 45 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3800, Marsh 6
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 232219, Lot 62547
Date: 12 May 2022
Critique: A very interesting coin. A quick check of the George IV set and the GB date set shows that as of 07/2022 this is the only 1822 sovereign registered for competition! Hard to believe, since it's not rare at all. Plus this is the coin's 200th anniversary which I would have thought would make it more sought-after.
The second A of Britanniar is strangely cut, apparently on purpose by the engraver. The left leg is about four times thicker than on a normal letter A, and no crossbar is obvious, although grime could be obscuring it. This letter actually looks very much like an inverted V, although the letter V would not be introduced in this series until the Bare Head version of George appeared in the latter part of 1825. There are many examples of sovereign dates in which an inverted letter A was substituted for V, or where the crossbar of letter A is missing which makes the letter seem like an inverted V. But I’m not aware of any reports of this being found on an 1822 sovereign. The left leg of this letter does not seem to be wide due to wear damage on the die, since the two sides of the leg look perfectly parallel as if deliberately engraved. Also, this letter does not show any evidence of re-punching several times which might tend to widen the left leg, since the right leg looks to be normal width.
As far as I know, no letter V in this ornate style of 1821 to early 1825 is known to exist. I'm wondering if perhaps this was an experimental die punch, with the possible intention of replacing IIII with IV a few years earlier than actually occurred, but they decided against that. It's possible that perhaps the mint tested the punch out on a few coins (like this one) just to see how it worked, or perhaps they just tossed it in with the other regular punches, and when the normal A punch wore out they substituted an inverted V.
Another possibility is that when a new font set is initially designed, the engraver produces a master set of punches that includes one of each numeral and letter of the alphabet. Although each punch is not currently required, they are always available in the future if the need arises. In this case, if the letter A punch happened to break at an inconvenient time during coin production, perhaps the mint director allowed the inverted and heretofore unused letter V punch to be substituted until a new letter A punch could be produced.
. Another very interesting feature is that the two letters N were obviously made with different letter punches, which can be seen in the upper left corner. At first this would seem to be a waste of time to produce two separate punches for the same letter on the same die, but it was probably the usual strategy in order to ensure that one letter punch getting multiple usage did not wear out faster than the others.
Just based on wear, this coin looks more like AU55, so I think it was seriously downgraded due to all the adhered grime on the surfaces, especially in the denticles. If this coin were conserved properly, I think it would re-grade much higher than XF45. To me, it has wonderful eye appeal, which I value far above any numerical grade.
|
| Slot: |
1826 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1826 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 58 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3801
------------------------------------------------
NOTE: I've decided to temporarily remove the obverse image until I have a chance to do more investigation into the strange lettering in the legend and get expert opinions. I'm certain that Steve Hill of Sovereign Rarities Ltd in London, who revised the 2021 edition of Michael Marsh's classic reference book, is going to be eager to examine this coin.
Obverse pic will return in 2024. Once the coin is properly identified, I will probably show the highly detailed NGC PhotoVision views instead of the normal views.
Meanwhile, the reverse is a nice example of pivoted hub doubling (DDR), in this case running from about 8 o'clock clockwise to 1 o'clock. Hard to see on this normal view, but crystal clear on the PV view.
------------------------------------------------
|
| Slot: |
1829 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1829 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC MS 61 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3801, Marsh 14 (Scarce)
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 3109, Lot 32775
Date: 19 August 2023
Critique: An extremely lovely example of this supposedly common date. The auction listing stated that the coin possesses "fewer abrasions compared to examples graded a full two points higher", and I definitely agree. Just based on appearance alone, it's hard to believe it was not graded MS63. The only minor detractions that I can see are a lack of luster on the obverse and a somewhat weak strike on the center reverse. Weak strike is never a cause to downgrade, so the rather dull obverse must have been the issue. But perhaps in the future I will send it in for reconsideration just to get a second opinion. This particular coin may have been graded many years ago when standards were a bit stricter.
Because of its A-class appearance, the auction listing went on to say that this coin represented "a relative value opportunity," but unfortunately that turned out not to be the case. This was a major annual auction, well-attended by way too many wealthy collectors willing to bid aggressively, and so I ended up paying full retail when the onerous 20% Buyer's Extortion was added in. Still, it was a rare opportunity to acquire such a beautiful piece, and I'm delighted to have it in my collection now.
Although there are eleven different coins listed in the George V Complete Set category, three of them receive no score as they are considered unobtainable by the average collector. Of the remaining eight "competition" coins, for specimens in the same grade the 1829 and 1830 coins receive the highest score. Apparently the NGC judges felt that these two are just a bit scarcer than the others. It would appear that this 1829 date is indeed scarce, since as of 11/2023 no other collector in the Geo IV category has an example of one registered.
|
| Slot: |
1830 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1830 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 55 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3801, Marsh 15 (Scarce)
Ex: Uvedale collection
Acquired from: Sovereign Rarities, London
Means: Auction 6, Lot 44
Date: 28 June 2022
Critique: A very bright, shiny example of George IV. Much better than he probably looked in real life. A few minor hairlines on his neck make him look like he cut himself shaving, but the reverse is so amazing that I couldn't resist buying.
Although there are eleven different coins listed in the George V Complete Set category, three of them receive no score as they are considered unobtainable by the average collector. Of the remaining eight "competition" coins, for specimens in the same grade the 1829 and 1830 coins receive the highest score. Apparently the NGC judges felt that these two are just a bit scarcer than the others. It would appear that this 1830 date is indeed scarce, since as of 11/2023 only one other collector in this category has an example of one registered.
|
| Slot: |
1833 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1833 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC MS 61 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3829B, Marsh 18 (Scarce)
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 3101, Lot 35729
Date: 28 August 2022
Critique: Another very expensive coin trapped in a major auction that had too much eye appeal to pass up. The reverse is almost pristine.
|
| Slot: |
1835 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1835 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC VF 30 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3829B, Marsh 19 (Rare)
Acquired from: SINCONA, Zurich
Means: Auction 79, Lot 1378
Date: 24 October 2022
Critique: A rather sad condition for William IV, but the auction company listed it as an example of the exceedingly rare overdate 1835/3 and I thought that might be correct. I ended up paying WAY too much because some other collector thought he needed it more than I did.
This particular overdate is quite newly discovered, and not yet listed in Marsh/Hill (2021 edn), I've seen one other specimen of this variety, a raw coin that looks to me to be in splendid AU58 condition, which sold at a British auction in Feb 2022.
After some time, the more I examined this coin, the less likely it seemed to be a true overdate. Looked more like just a die break that merged the top of the 5 with the curling section directly underneath. Things just didn't seem to line up properly to be a 5 on top of a 3. So I sent images directly to the acknowledged expert on gold sovs Steve Hill, and he gave me the bad news that he also doesn't think it's the 5/3 overdate. In fact, of all the other examples claimed to be 5/3 he doesn't believe any of them! I guess that's why it's not listed as a true variety in his book.
Well, just another reminder that labels on holders should never be trusted, nor should opinions of auctioneers. I hope this is the last costly mistake like this I make, but I seriously doubt it. :(
|
| Slot: |
1837 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1837 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC VF 35 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3829B, Marsh 21 (Scarce)
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 232220, Lot 63541
Date: 19 May 2022
Critique: LoL. What a joke! Tied for Bottom Pop! At the time, I didn't have a single William IV sov, and this looked like a cheap way to get started. On the plus side, the coin has very clean fields with few scuffs -- probably because they were crushed out when the coin was run over by a truck. Actually, I guess they didn't have trucks in 1837, so maybe it was flattened by an elephant. Makes more sense.
|
| Slot: |
1842 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1842 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC MS 61 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3852, Marsh 25, 'Closed 2'
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 3102, Lot 32597
Date: 4 November 2022
Ex: Doctors Without Borders charity
Critique: A very sad day for grading by NGC. This is one of the worst examples I've seen from them on over-grading a coin. The grader had the nerve to call this MS61, when it clearly shows signs of wear on the obverse. I would grade this coin AU55. The reverse is a pathetically weak strike, evident on the lower central portion of the shield. This was most likely caused by excessive die lapping in this area, a process by which used dies were polished in order to extend life. All of the high points in this area, including harp, lions, leaves, and ribbon are heavily worn down. Die lapping was frequently used to "erase" surface die cracks, and there appears to be the remnants of one from the wreath up through the lions. So this may have been the main target of the technician doing the lapping, and he got a bit too aggressive.
So what happened here? I've shown the full NGC holder for the obverse so that the very interesting provenance to "MSF" charity can be seen. Obviously, this coin was originally auctioned in Europe, since the reference to MSF is shown in both French and German. In English, the organization is known as "Doctors Without Borders." This is actually a very fine group, and I've personally contributed to them in the past. Perhaps the NGC grader had a soft spot for them, and boosted the coin grade a bit to help them out financially? A nice gesture, but not really ethical, since grades should never be compromised based on the owner or provenance of a piece. So I'm guessing that the grader had a fight with his girlfriend on the day he handled this coin, and went temporarily insane. That could explain this travesty.
To make matters worse, there was a brief but intense fight for this coin during the auction, and I ended up paying about 20% more than it's worth IF it were actually MS61 (which it clearly is not). So, since I was well-aware in advance how badly this piece was over-graded, and saw it was quite over-priced during the auction, why did I buy it? I know what you're thinking ... I had a fight with my girlfriend that day and went temporarily insane! No, sorry to disappoint. And I didn't buy it solely for the very unusual provenance, even though it has some personal connection to me.
I'm very interested in mint errors on old gold sovereigns, and one particular kind of error that I watch out for is examples of doubling, where the image is struck slightly off, usually during multiple strikes to create the working hub die. In modern times, when this is found to have happened the die is immediately discarded. But 100 to 200 years ago, the process of die creation was very expensive and time-consuming, so if the doubling was deemed minor or at least not very noticeable, they went ahead and used the compromised die in coin production. As it turns out, this particular coin shows the most extreme case I've encountered to date of pivoted hub doubling on the reverse. On modern coins this would be listed as DDR. The doubling starts around 3 o'clock, and proceeds clockwise all the way to 12 o'clock, meaning 75% of the reverse was affected. The doubling was so intense, that it not only affected the legend and medallion (thistle/rose/clover), but also can clearly be seen in all of the outer denticles from 4 o'clock clockwise to 1 o'clock, as well as in portions of the wreath and the top part of the crown. This is without doubt the most extreme case of this type of doubling that I've ever seen on any coin, so I decided that I had to have it in my personal collection of mint errors, no matter what the cost.
It's not possible to see the fine points of doubling using the normal picture produced by NGC, which I've shown here in close-up. But on the very nice NGC Photovision pic, the details are crystal clear. I've gone ahead and shown the normal view here, since the PV version never shows the correct color of the coin, and I assume that's what other collectors prefer to see for these pix.
|
| Slot: |
1843 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1843 G.britain BROAD SHIELD |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 55 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3852, Marsh 26 -- Normal variety
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 61255, Lot 97289
Date: 30 January 2022
Critique: A very disappointing coin. One of the very few I own which I think NGC over-graded. Looks more like AU53 to me. I've seen quite a few coins which I think NGC over-graded, but I make it a point never to buy them! Acquired this when I was just getting started collecting gold sovereigns, and didn't really know how to grade them properly. Live and learn...
|
| Slot: |
1844 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1844 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC MS 62 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3852, Marsh 27, Wide 4 4 (Scarce)
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 3101, Lot 35761
Date: 28 August 2022
Critique: A nice looking, fairly high grade example of this early Vic date. The only reason I bought it was to use in a future article on mint errors of gold sovereigns. Reverse shows pivoted hub doubling on Britanniarum. I've maxed out the reverse view, and the doubling can just be seen, especially on the N's. You can tell it's doubling and not simply repunched letters since the thistle is also doubled. Like, who repunches a thistle? Seriously!
|
| Slot: |
1845 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1845 G.britain E/E IN 'DEI' |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 50 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3852, Marsh 28x (assume R7 - Ultra Rare)
Spread 4 5
Acquired from: Heritage
Means: Auction 232251, Lot 64553
Date: 22 December 2022
Ex: Douro Shipwreck
Critique: Wow! When I first saw this somewhat worn, stained, sad-looking specimen up for sale, I instantly determined that I had to have it, at any price. Well, any price I could afford. This amazing little coin has so many interesting features that it's hard to know where to begin. So I suppose I will just start with the information listed on the holder itself.
The date is actually quite difficult to read and interpret, but I believe, as the NGC grader apparently did, that it truly is an 1845 gold sovereign. The holder is the very lovely "Shipwreck Blue" label by NGC, and it's certified as coming from the famous Douro sinking in 1882. See the extensive account of that event on my 1881-M coin. Most coins recovered from shipwrecks have quite a bit of staining and crud on the surfaces, and this coin is certainly no exception. Just based on wear alone, I think this coin deserved to be AU53 or possibly AU55, but apparently the grader knocked it down based on negative eye-appeal. Can't argue with that decision. The reverse in particular has extensive staining, which I suppose modern collectors refer to as "toning" and which I refer to as "unattractive discoloration." The obverse has some unpleasant rusty material clinging to the rims in the northwest and east. But what's really scary are what look to be drops of blood coming out of Queen Victoria's eye, nose, and ear! There are more drops of this blood in the southeast area, including within the date. An item involved in a violent collision at sea where many people lost their lives, that seems to be dripping blood from the orifices of Her Majesty, is enough to dissuade any superstitious collector from bidding. But I decided to take a chance anyway.
Finally, the holder lists this as being the variety having E/E in "DEI", and close inspection would seem to confirm that. Apparently the engraver initially punched the E a bit low and to the left, and then decided to adjust that with a re-punch. I base this estimate of which location was punched first according to what I've noticed on many other re-punched sovereigns, where the first punch appears to lie on top of the later punch. In any case, this small adjustment is not at all what is usually referred to as E/E in Marsh 28D, and later years in Marsh 43A and 44D. In those cases, a very serious blunder occurred where the E was initially punched way too high near the rim, and after the re-punch the top half of the offending initial punch was polished away. The kind of minor repositioning of a letter in the legend like on this coin is extremely common on early date Vic sovereigns but is not always considered a significant variety.
OK, so far my observations are interesting, but wouldn't cause Michael Marsh to get very excited. But here's where that changes ... If one carefully examines the numerals in the date, it's clear to me that each one has been over-punched. The numbers 1, 8, and 4 are re-punched with the same value, however the final number is absolutely a combination of a 3 and a 5. The straight top of the 3 definitely stands out against the top flip of the 5, and the descending strokes of the 5 on the left and the 3 on the right are clearly and unmistakably present. So this is a full overdate, which is quite uncommon. What makes it even more exciting, is that the numerals making up '1843' are clearly smaller than those making up '1845.' So this is one of the extremely rare examples of a complete overdate involving different sizes. And if everything is considered together, this full re-punch involving two different sizes and two different dates is spectacularly rare. The question then becomes, which date was punched first, and which was over-punched later? In my experience, the initial date always looks to be on top of the latter date. This is contrary to what might be expected, until you consider that the die image is a 'negative' to allow metal on the planchet to rise up when struck, and the initial punch would be somewhat deeper than the latter one, thus making the earlier date seem to be on top of the later one. Since the smaller date '1843' seems to be lying on top of the larger date '1845', then that would indicate that this is truly a coin minted in 1845 and not some unfortunate accident minted in 1843.
So how did this happen? Where did this hybrid coin come from? I have a theory. A very large number of coins were minted in 1843, and they probably knew about this in advance and prepared a large number of working dies. If those dies lasted longer than expected, by 31 December there may have been a few unused dies left over, which bore the date 1843. Not wanting to discard perfectly good dies, the mint simply stored them away in drawers somewhere. In 1844, they only minted about half of the number produced in 1843, and had plenty of dies on hand to produce the required amount. But in 1845, they ramped up production again, and perhaps sometime in December they realized that they were out of new dies. At this point, the mint director remembered the few dies stored from 1843, and instructed the engraver to re-punch them with the new larger 1845 date. If my theory is correct, then this coin does not represent a mint error, since it was created deliberately. One possibly worrisome consideration is that, while errors in punching the letter E in 'DEI' are known for 1845, none have ever been reported for 1843. That would make it seem like this was indeed an accident produced in 1845 where the engraver mistakenly picked up the 3 punch instead of the 5 punch, and then this would be a mint error. However, the difference in size of the two dates would seem to be the deciding factor, and I prefer the deliberate overdate explanation. If true, then this coin would be the first example of an 1843 obverse die with the letter E of DEI re-punched.
Another bizarre feature of this coin is that there are very obvious raised fingers of metal in between the denticles underlying the date. These never appear anywhere else on the obverse, only under the date. Could this have been some subtle marker that the mint director added to indicate the use of a previous year's die? Can't think of any other way to explain them.
As far as I'm aware of, nobody has previously reported a "large 1845 on small 1843 overdate" gold sovereign, and it is unlisted in the latest 2021 edition of Marsh's book. I've seen pictures of the 1843/2 and 1843/8 varieties from the Bentley sale, and they are not at all the same as this coin. As far as rarity is concerned, both Marsh and the anonymous person who amassed Bentley worked for decades assembling their respective collections of sovereign varieties, examining several thousand coins each, and neither one of them ever encountered an example like this. I've personally looked though hundreds of 1845 dated coins in most of the modern auction archives, and never found another. So it would seem to be excessively rare, possibly unique. How interesting it would be if this forlorn little coin rescued from the bottom of the sea turns out to be the only known survivor of this fascinating overdate. Only time will tell if another one eventually surfaces somewhere.
|
| Slot: |
1848 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1848 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 58 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3852C, Marsh 31 (Scarce)
2nd Large Head
Acquired from: The Coin Cabinet, London
Means: Auction 99 Lot 8
Date: 5 December 2023
Critique: A scruffy looking example of this early Vic date, not very high grade. Purchased as a raw, ungraded coin in this auction. Normally I would have had no interest in this specimen, however the image in the auction catalog was intriguing. It seemed to show a significantly flattened top to the numeral 8 in the date, characteristic of the rare variety 1848/7 in which the 8 was re-punched over a 7. There was quite a bit of darkening in this area, and so the picture was not really conclusive. But with nothing else to go on, I decided to take a gamble and buy it since the price was only a couple hundred US$ over melt.
When the coin arrived in the mail, even under 2X magnification I could not determine if this was 8/7 or not, so I sent it in to NGC to have a detailed PhotoVision image made. This is the image attached to this listing. Unfortunately, with much better lighting and higher magnification, it's clear that what appeared to be a flattened top on the 8 was really due to some damage caused during circulation. The top has completely normal rounding, but there is a definite ledge due to the damage. Although I requested the coin be certified as 1848/7 on my submission sheet, the professional NGC graders were not fooled and they have correctly assigned it to be the normal dated coin.
I did notice one interesting thing when I added this to my London complete mint set (1817-date). A quick review of the top 30 sets in the category shows that only one other collector has one registered here. However, there are several other examples registered in the London Victoria only category. So apparently specializing in just the Victorian issues from the London mint is far more popular than trying to complete the entire set of milled coins. I suppose that does make sense.
Well, just another failed gamble, to be added to my growing pile of similar flops. Usually on minor disasters like this, I believe that if I'd had the opportunity to view the coin in person before the auction I would have avoided the mistake. But in this particular case, even with the coin in my hands for over a month I could not determine the true situation. So I think it was worth the risk, and it won't deter me from taking similar low-cost gambles in the future.
|
| Slot: |
1849 |
| Origin/Country: |
GREAT BRITAIN 1816-1901 |
| Design Description: |
|
| Item Description: |
1SOV 1849 G.britain |
| Grade: |
NGC AU 58 |
| Research: |
View Coin |
Owner Comments
S-3852C, Marsh 32 (Rare)
Acquired from: The Coin Cabinet, London
Means: Auction 61, Lot 19
Date: 3 May 2022
Critique: Bought this nice looking sov because it was rare and cheap. Great combination!
|
|