Rob

I'm not familiar with that article, so you will have to fill me in on it. Some of the things match but not all. The date is wider on the short hair, narrower on the long. The triple incuse line is only on one side of the cross (nearest the bottom of the shield), the other side of the cross has 2 incuse lines. The wrist doesn't appear to be thinner at the narrowest point and any difference would have to be minute. Having said that, it does appear to be narrower over a greater distance i.e. the shape is different. The flagpole is non-existent on mine but that could be die fill. I'm not sure which incuse line near the shield base you refer to, but both have a short vertical incuse line of the same length to the left of the cross at 6 o'clock which goes approximately 35-40% of the distance to the join with the St. Andrew's cross

I should also add that although this feature also applies to Peck 1751 (Nicholson 390) it is not a currency use of a former proof die. P1751 has much of the linear circle missing and a mast connected to the flag on the ship. My piece has 99% of the linear circle and no top to the mast.

An unrecorded variety of beaded border reverse. Peck and Freeman both list only one type of reverse i.e. A. There are however at least 2, one with short hair (rare) and one with long hair (common). It is not just a case of die filling or weakness because the field is continuous underneath the hairline at the back of the head. A comparison of the two shows it clearly. Apologies for the toned reverse on the common variety.

How on earth can you find it stressful? A should I / shouldn't I decision if getting carried away at auction is about as stressful as it gets. For everything else there is time to seriously rationalise your thoughts. Relax, be happy.

I don't get the Mail. Was it the same gold mancus sold at Spink in Oct 2004 for £230K ish and bought by Allan Davisson for which he presumably had to get an export licence? I assume the BM would try to raise funds to buy it. If so it's a pity as they have so many coins that virtually the whole collection is inaccessible to the public because nobody knows what is there and most are locked away for eternity. At least a collector will sell it on in the future so that others can enjoy.

Cancel this request. I've got one.

I'd like to be a professional coin collector. The trouble is that I don't have a grade A* bank account so have to continue working.

Yes. I routinely walk to the pub and back every Thursday night for a game of darts.

There is Davies - British Silver Coins since 1816 which is available on a few sites. If you can't find one, his ebay id is rapprochement, that's the only contact details I have but he does have copies too as I bought mine on ebay off him.

Help please. Has anyone out there got a copy of Glendinings catalogue for the auction on 30th April 1986. If so, please contact me as I need a scan of a pictured lot. Thanks.

1+A, 1+B, 2+A and 2+B with values of rarity C7, N, R and C15 respectively. Obv. 1 & 2 are similar with colon dot between GRA and BRITT nearer the A on 1 and almost touching both adjacent letters on 2. More border dots on 2 and colon dots after IMP are direct to tooth on 1 but not on 2. Rev. A wide date, B is close date and lettering is slightly closer on the latter, but the date is the easiest. 1911/2 is rev. A and 1914 on is B.

Yes.

Sorry, brain in neutral, it's a 1 not 3 ore. Everything else applies.

Very good Mint Mark. It's a 3 ore from Sweden. ref KM253.1, mintage just over 12 million and gives values of VG $1, Fine $2.25, VF $8.00 and XF $40

Davies only notes that the two may be distinguished by checking the "ring" by quote "placing the coin on finger tip and gently tap with a pencil. A low note indicates sterling silver and a higher one debased silver". He also notes the finish on the 0.500 silver is dull, so a comparison of a pre 1920 sixpence with a 1920 piece could also indicate which variety it is, but this would only work for a mint state example. I would also add that the debased one may have traces of verdigris being 50% copper. Hopefully not, but it does help the I D.

No. It can't migrate from one coin to another because it isn't alive. The first coin to suffer does so because the storage conditions aren't ideal and it is the least protected for what ever reason be it surface deposit or in an area of the cabinet with a greater temperature differential. The root cause is the environment the coins are stored in.

It isn't mobile as such, it's just oxidation of the copper as a result of a humid atmosphere and will affect all copper similarly. Different rates of oxidation between coins are probably down to variations in surface contamination in the toning/crud/whatever is on the surface. Just make sure the collection is kept in a dry and preferably constant temperature environment as this will ensure no condensation can occur on the coins which will enhance oxidation.

Yes

So where does this leave me? I want a society where government money spent is used in an effective manner for the majority with a fair share spent on all. This is inclusive because everyone needs something provided by the state, but not necessarily the same thing as the person next door. At present, disproportionate amounts appear to be spent on those sections of society who reject any notion of working for the common good ie. society, yet are first in the queue for handouts from the very people they stick two fingers up to. Society isn't something you can opt into and out of. However, if you take the view that being a member of society is an optional thing, then what remains of society (the vast majority of this country) should have the right to reject those working against the majority. This is not the exclusive ideology you allude to but an inclusive one. The exclusion is currently the preserve of our current government who rake in excessive amounts of taxpayers' money to pee against the metaphorical wall. All we can do is hope it's our wall they use.

The 4d or groat was last issued in 1888 as a currency coin, however, they were also issued as maundy money throughout the reign and are still issued each year. You can easily tell the difference between the two issues. The currency coin has a seated Britannia on the reverse with FOUR PENCE to either side and the date in the exergue whilst the maundy money has the number 4 on the reverse with the date split either side of the 4. Value will depend on grade, but it is not a rare year, so even with a perfect example you would still be looking at a value of less than £100 (currency) or £25 (maundy) or more likely a couple of quid if worn to any extent.

I've always assumed that the different shaped letters were a result of the mint or mints purchasing letter punches from different sources. The fact that Heatons do not have this variation found on the Tower mint pieces lends credence to this theory. I have always assumed that they would be bought in items, but even if they made the letter punches in house, there would still be a number of individuals working in this area, so individual characteristic flourishes should be identifiable

Colin Cooke mentioned in passing a couple years ago that he used to keep some coins in the bank. Conditions were not ideal in this particular branch and he returned to them later to find that some base metal had degraded. Any collectors thinking of using a safe deposit facility should consider this. Silver and gold should be OK.

Expand into gold and you will really need the insurance, even for the 20th century only. There's more than a couple rare sovereigns to break the bank.

I'm sure he will accept any method of payment. Get him to do a swap for your duplicates. 1 million 1967 pennies should just about cover it.

The former is decidedly uncommon. The Adams penny collection didn't contain one which suggests the R9 rarity given by Freeman may be a bit out.