DaveG38

It strikes me that the difference between some of these e.g. 29.24 and 29.25 is just the end result of the limit of tolerances in the strking process. 0.01 of a mm is scarcely visible it seems to me.

I can recall seeing a 1954 penny on a stall in the indoor market at Barnstaple, some 10-15 years ago. Not sure if this was Paddy, but the stall was on the left immediately inside the main access door.

Sometimes I wonder if I took my degree in Chemistry. Hypo is Sodium Thiosulphate, not Hypochlorite. Duuhhh!!

MT = Mint Toned, usually with Sodium Hypochlorite..

My dad was a postie back then, and often worked on Christmas Day, usually up to midday. He and my mum were grateful for the overtime and exceptional payments, but for me it meant I had to wait to open my presents.😟

Used to, in the 1950s.

Just to whet your appetite, I have found that he was buried on 15 March 1832 at Rodborough near Stroud, so died not long before. Got several images of data concerning him. In one case, though, there is only a transcript, not an original document. Will have a bit more investigative fun in the morning. I'll forward data/docs as a PM to avoid cluttering this thread up with stuff.

I'll see what I can find, but will be tomorrow now, whilst my other half is watching the footie!

I do have some access, but my family is/was all UK Based, so I had no use for records from overseas. If you want to PM me, I'll see what I can find.

Even more simply, given that the opening post refers to an auction 'the previous Thursday', which auction house was operating on 23rd Nov?

I think we have the basis for a BNJ article developing on this subject.

Clearly, the A is for the original die sinker Algernon, but he died, so Archibald took over. He thought he was better and didn't fancy his work being associated with that scoundrel Algernon, so he put the die letter to the other side of the lighthouse. Then along came Augustine who put his A anywhere he felt like, and didn't care what size it was. Sounds logical to me. Simples!!

Whilst we are on 1964 sixpences, have you found the two varieties of the more common obverse 3 type? One has a thick rim, whilst the other has a thinner one.

I first started looking for one, around 1998, 5 years after I rekindled my interest in coins. I finally got one in 2021 , together with the other varieties of Eliz II sixpences, in an auction. Cost, allowing for rarity and pro-rata with other coins was around £20, including commission and postage. Some years ago, on here there was a collector named Gary (D?), who only collected 20thC and who sold his collection in one go, rather than split it. I don't know who bought it, and what happened to it, but the set of 6d's I bought seemed to correlate very well with those from his collection, so maybe I got the benefit of the eventual split up? Anyway, I'm afraid that I don't have a spare, and if my experience is anything to go by, it will take quite a time to find one. They don't turn up with dealers nor ebayers, probably because they are a bit obscure, and so it isn't easy to find one in the usual way. For the rarer 1964 variety, I found that grubbing through boot fair pots was the answer, so maybe this would work for the 1965 one. Best of luck.

Ah, sorry, I didn't see the title of the thread.

Run of the mill!! The first lots I found were the 1826 and 1831 proof sets - estimated at £60-120k and £35-70k. If they are run of the mill, then my collection must be regarded as meagre and scarcely worth the trouble of collecting. However, I do take your point regarding the rest.

My copy of 'Collectors Coins 1998' shows that it was sold by private treaty in 1991 for £28,500. No mention of a sale in 1997 though.

I'm not surprised. I have tried to get them to include the 1695 DEI GRATIA halfpenny, for which their laughable reply was that they couldn't possibly include every minor variety. So, a major legend change is a 'minor varient', but the tiny differences in the early Victorian pennies are 'major' and worthy of inclusion. Spink are a joke and not worth the effort.

That is or was per coin. My understanding is that the tax free element of CGT has been reduced from around £12k a few years back to £6k now, and is due to fall to around £3k any time soon. This is off the top of my head, so please don't quibble if my figures are out, unless it is by miles.

If you do decide to cash in, beware the Chancellor and the new (lower) limits for Capital Gains Tax!! Best option is sell one lot just before 5 April and another just after, then wait a year and so on. To avoid being robbed by the government, you need to be creative.

Go to the end of the section, and you will find a list of notes, each identfied by number. The numbers shown here correlate with the number against the year date for the coin, and the note applies to that year and date of coin. For the 1870 Penny, the note identified by the number refers to the raised dot after 'PENNY.'

I'm still looking!!!

It seems to me that sloppiness in minting really doesn't matter at the RM, when they are knocking out coins for general circulation. Whether something has an error, a cud or whatever is irrelevant once it starts being spent. It may be of interest to us collectors, but as far as the mint goes I guess they see it in terms of numbers struck and whether they are of the recognised denomination. I'm not saying that they don't try to get things right, but it usually doesn't matter if they get it wrong on occasions. Errors also add to the collecting interest. Things are different with the packaged sets and proof coins, which are clearly intended for collectors, and where quality does matter. Based on the Flying Scotsman saga, it seems to be that they have allowed some sloppiness to ease into the collecting sector of their business, when it shouldn't have. Having said this, it depends on what the sloppiness brings. The 1982 or is it 1983 New Pence/Two Pence coin is a case in point. Technically it was an error to allow the wrong dies to be used. In practice anybody with the 'wrong' coin can make a nice little profit, and collectors are happy to have picked up an error, so everyone is satisfied.

Oh, bugger! Another change to the 20th Century bronze varieties book.

Too many edge nibbles and plenty of bag marks. Too many for that price.