Sword

Very nice. The lack of contact marks makes it attractive despite a trace of wear. I have always like the proof-like quality of Victorian currency.

I just googled "coin ticket hand of Peter Mitchell" and had a look at the images that came up.

Don't have anything to do at the moment and so looked up tickets written by Peter Mitchell. Two examples are shown below. Does look like that the right two could be his. The bottom stroke of the Roman numeral III is missing. This is also the case in the Roman II shown below. The lower case s looks similar.

The florin has arrived and the obverse tone is richer than shown in the photos. Although the obverse fields are not "clean", the marks are light and have toned in. Hence, they mostly cannot be seen without magnification. Reasonably happy with it. There is one thing I have never understood. Why do double florins have both Roman and Arabic One for 1887 and then just Arabic for later years? One theory is that the Roman I was a "mistake" and was corrected later. I never believed this as the florins used just the Roman One all the way through. Any ideas?

😀

There is the PCGS in Paris. https://www.pcgseurope.com/submit?l=en

I was debating that point with myself. There are quite a few marks on the obverse but they are not deep. Will soon be able to see how it looks in hand.

Shipping to UK is practically selling ice to Eskimos.

Latest addition and awaiting delivery. High grade Jubilee Head florins (except for 1887) are not easy to come by. Hence, I have got this instead of waiting for an UNC example. How would you grade it? GEF?

How about a mouse mat?

I think it is unlikely that the coin is returnable. It was obviously not brought from a specialist coins auction as the coin would not have been described as a proof in such houses. Non- specialist auctions often have clauses that their descriptions are only opinions and cannot be relied upon as statements of fact. If it is returnable, then I would return it. Otherwise, it is not an expensive mistake and can be put down as experience.

That's a truly wonderful example. High grade and beautiful tone. And almost no contact marks! Can look at this all day!

I understand what you are saying and rarity is a matter of opinions and guesstimates. However, it was somewhat disappointing that the 6th "Fully Revised" Edition (published 23 years after the 5th edition) has not made any (?) attempt to update the rarity values given in the Fifth. One would imagine that a token effort involving several experts could have been made. E.g. if a couple of experts say that several examples of a coin is known, the R7 shouldn't be given. I do take your point that one has to know your area by experience and auction archive searches. The ESC is a bit like a tabloid newspaper. It makes an entertaining read but just don't trust it too much.

I have checked my 1992 edition and it has got the same information. I am also disappointed that the rarities have not been updated going from the fifth to the sixth edition.