|
|
The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com |
|
|
Coinpublications.com
Predecimal.com
Mr T
-
Content Count
1,079 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Mr T
-
-
Is the die crack through the R on the one in the slab? I can't quite make it out.
-
http://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/2853-unlisted-12d/ is the the thread (it was hard to find with search).
-
Late to the party but I use Google Sheets which I periodically export as a .csv and store on my phone for offline access/as a backup.
-
Nice find - noted.
-
1
-
-
Looking on a bigger screen the plait looks quite flat but the rest of the coin isn't overly worn - do you have a bigger picture of the obverse?
-
I think from the small numbers I've looked at only the halfpenny variety is hard to find.
-
First I've seen of something like that - I too thought they came in little draw string bags.
How many came in each bag anyway? I've never been able to figure out the monarch's age relating to the number of coins because sets of four are a thing but unequal numbers have been made in some years.
-
Weight seems okay and from my phone at least nothing is jumping out as suspicious, but there are a lot of good fakes. Maybe do a search on the forums for previous discussions of fakes and see if there is anything to look out for.
-
1
-
-
Decimals are clearly coming into their own!
-
On 1/19/2022 at 6:20 AM, jelida said:I pondered this previously, why the need to mark the engraved face of the die to monitor longevity, when the die could be marked elsewhere in greater detail ; they would have to have counted the number of actual coins struck per studied die either way. And the die marked coins seem to have been too few to be practically monitored for ‘in circulation’ studies. Could partially worn regular dies be lettered or numbered to in some way monitor a later stage of their lives, or to be brought back into use? Perhaps with such a tiny mark the die would not even need annealing. Is there evidence out there?
Good point - has there ever been a true explanation of die numbers on the silver coins, or is all we have speculation?
-
Not too bad - was that the one whose entire mintage was shipped to Australia?
-
1
-
-
Interesting - I've never heard it called die chatter before - must be the mint's internal terminology. I would have just called it double-struck.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Martinminerva said:Not true! Reverse I lighthouse also has two windows as picture above shows, albeit masonry is a bit heavier (and akin to reverse F as Zo Arms says above).
Yes you're right - there are fainter lower windows. Maybe I meant there are no upper windows when I wrote that - I don't have a reverse I in hand but it doesn't look like there aren't upper windows.
-
On 1/11/2022 at 6:43 AM, Martinminerva said:Definitely reverse G.
Easiest way to spot is the sea meeting rock level at the extreme left of the exergue. On Rev. G it rises up slightly and does not cross the linear circle. On Rev. I it is pretty much level and does cross the linear circle. See enlargements below...
In the notes I've left myself I have reverse G has lighthouse with two windows and one rock between lighthouse and shield, reverse I has lighthouse with no windows and two rocks between lighthouse and shield.
-
1
-
-
On 1/14/2022 at 5:40 PM, Sword said:I meant it lack the intricacies of the traditional designs which we admire. It doesn't come across as cutting edge or innovative like a good modern design should be. The reverse is a poor rip off of the William IV half crown.
I agree - I think the design isn't too bad all things considered but it does have a cartoony look to it.
-
What is plate 432? Is it a Canadian provincial coin?
-
Has anyone got their hands on a copy yet? I'm tempted to get one from https://spinkbooks.com/products/english-silver-coinage-since-1649-7th-edition-maurice-bull?variant=40339604963522 but is there much new in the 1816-1970 section? I don't expect so as Bull doesn't go as in-depth as Davies but the 1837 mule sixpence slipped under my radar in the 6th edition.
-
1
-
-
Has anyone read The Diary of Leonard Wyon? It was published by Spink a few years ago: https://spinkbooks.com/products/hard-at-work-the-diary-of-leonard-wyon-1853-1867-by-attwood-p-bns-sp9
Is there anything new or interesting in there related to the coins he worked on?
-
-
Oh nice - they're back.
-
The centre one's not too bad.
-
1
-
-
Nice - though at 26 pages I'll have to put some time aside for this.
Thanks for posting.
-
On 12/18/2021 at 5:40 AM, 1949threepence said:In many cases it's very obvious, for numerous reasons, that a given coin is a proof. There are certain features or aspects which definitively mark it out as such. But with others there just doesn't seem (for me anyway) to be anything about certain coins, touted as proofs, which in any way distinguishes them from an ordinary business strike, let alone a specimen or early strike. But clearly many coins have become marked as proofs over the decades, and now sell as acknowledged proofs, often for a very high price compared to their currency contemporaries.
I agree - to me it's only really a proof if it's mirror finish with frosted devices, though I know in many cases that's wrong. My understanding was that a lot of 19th century proofs (and possibly early 20th century) "proofs" (i.e. without contrasted finish) were just nice early strikes anyway, but were labelled as proofs.
-
2
-
-
In the 1970s a guy named David Gee produced fake 1902S two and five pound coins (in gold) - I thought this might be an off-metal attempt.
-
1
-
1898 Sixpence with SMALL date / small font digits
in Confirmed unlisted Varieties.
Posted
What is it about the ribbon that seems different? I can see the different distance between the rim and design and the different alignment of the digits.