Peckris 2

..

the moon today:

I don't know this Numista rarity index at all, but from what I can see it appears that the higher the number, the rarer the item. I was initially thrown by the R7, because the grading scale used by ESC (for example) only goes up to 7 which means extremely rare. Freeman goes up to 20 which is ‘possibly unique’. With your (fairly standard) Charles II 4d rated R40, I deduce that index may go up to 100? ETA: just Googled, and indeed it goes up to 100, but they say it’s based on how many Numista members have the item and how often it is up for ‘swap’, so fairly esoteric, I'd say!

Recut letters - a frequent occurrence on Victorian coppers and bronze.

The engraver was Bertram McKennial not de Saulles. I wonder where you get the R7 from? Quite a nice coin, between F and VF for me.

Anything's better than that.

This is what happens when you've not noticed you did ‘Flip horizontal’

Pictures of said coins would not only be appreciated, but are a must!

Welcome to the forums You can always ask here for advice, especially about where to buy from, and what to get. What are your main interests?

Creating those historic prices was a right bit of hard work! So I've only done it for coins in my collection, but luckily I've got all the relevant Seaby/Spinks for the years listed.

I created my own database set of tables using FileMaker Pro - this is just four of the tables showing one of the coins:

wouldn't be a joke in America where they pronounce it ‘booey’ not ‘boy’!

there's a hammered forum here

my best guess - and that's all it is - is that they might have been an attempt to try and resolve all the problems caused by conversion from large thick copper to smaller thin bronze. The sheer number of varieties that occur between 1860 and 1862 shows the scale of the issues they had, the repairs needed, and the huge number of dies involved.

the 1806 is a halfpenny not penny - but quite common in that grade and not worth expensive treatment. if you didn't mind the resulting retoning (paler) you could immerse overnight in balsamic vinegar which would dissolve the verdigris into darker patches. not to be done on a more valuable coin of course

if anything at all it might be a 6 … or a cud

that is alarmingly convincing for a repro

the 1929 is a florin not a shilling - as you can see from the reverse!

That's long overdue, but how could it be done?

To give just one example : Satin numbers (John Jerraims?) which are assigned by one expert to his post-Freeman observations of new varieties. However, we then have to have Peck, Freeman, Gouby, Satin, numbers. It does make life confusing but what other way is there?

Ok, I take that point, but… 1. it’s an obverse / reverse combination unknown on circulation pennies and therefore surely desirable? 2. it could very strongly be argued that NONE of the 1933 pennies was intended for circulation. Nevertheless an incredible collection.

Well, that is a pretty awesome collection, and yes I'm envious! Can I make two corrections and an observation on what I've seen so far? 1. The mintage figure for the 1869 only accounts for all pennies minted in that year. An unknown but significant number of these were dated 1868. 2. OMNIUM does not mean a long life - it’s part of OMNIUM BRITANNIARUM meaning “(ruler) of all the Britons”, OMNIUM meaning “of all”. 3. One penny that you may still be lusting after is the ?proof 1926ME that has the non-mule, i.e. 1927, reverse, of which I believe only 1 is known?

That reminds me of the reason pewter beer tankards have glass bottoms. It was so drinkers could spot the “king’s shilling” in the bottom of the drink they'd been bought by the press gang - they could then refuse the drink and avoid being press ganged into the navy.

Very interesting piece, but hopelessly overestimated.

Not a hammered coin, so posted in the wrong forum (I only noticed because I generally mark all Hammered posts as ‘read’ as I have zero interest in them).