Rob

Does anyone have an Archbishop Lee halfpenny S2361/N1820. If they do and it is the E left, L right variety is the E reversed? Mine is but North doesn't mention any letter reversal. Thanks.

Sorry, that was me.

If possible, please supply a higher resolution picture as it is not possible to see the fine detail which will be necessary to identify what is present. This is important because the toothed border looks worn suggesting a low grade coin which make positive identification problematical.

Firstly, as it notes on the bottom of page 51 in ESC, the "inverted 1" is actually from a broken I punch. The picture below shows this. All the inv. 1s I have seen have the small notch in the top right hand side of the upright. Compare this with the 1 in the date and this notch is not present. Alternatively it could be a case of an infilled die so it would help if you posted a picture. An additional related query I would like to raise is whether anyone has a number of high grade inverted 1 pieces from both years to make a comparison. The lower inverted 1 in the picture is from an 1889 whilst the upper one is from an 1888. The later year is obviously struck from the same defective punch, but has an underlying feature corresponding to a normal I. As this is not found on the 1888 piece it must clearly be from either the earlier die subsequently modified or more plausibly a different die. Can anyone shed any light on this or does anyone have any ideas on the number of "inverted 1" dies used?

A good example of silly prices asked in the US for slabbed pieces is lot 2434 in next week's Goldberg auction. It is a proof 1893 shilling slabbed NGC Proof 67 with an estimate of $800-900. This for a coin which Spink prices at £95. Pay a premium for a really good example by all means, but bear in mind that this was on the Northeast Numismatics website for quite a while at $1750 and unsurprisingly didn't sell. A lot of the other British pieces in this auction are from the same source and were equally overpriced on the NEN list.

The first thing you do with a slabbed coin is disregard the grade and description and check for yourself the condition and identity. Unfortunately, the US grading companies are not that familiar with British coins and frequently overgrade. MS64 for an EF - gEF is quite common as are incorrect attributions. The best use I have found for slabbed coins from say NGC or PCGS is that they mention if it has been cleaned which is not always clear in a slab. The best thing is to learn to grade correctly and stick with it. Punters on eBay will rarely believe you if you give a grade, but nobody is forced to sell a £1000 coin for 99p so stick to your guns and don't underprice yourself.

You're a lucky person, it's obviously rare. Spink 2003 edition gives a value of Fine £150, VF £400 and EF £1250 or approximately twice that for a normal version. The value though will depend on the degree of corrosion. The obverse looks as though it is badly pitted and although in quite good grade probably doesn't make fine as a result. This will depress its value although the reverse looks better.

If you are using a scanner, take an image of more than twice the area required with the coin positioned to one side of the rectangle. If you repeat this for the other side you can copy and paste the image and move it around within the first box so that they are adjacent.

I'll back that one up.

Clearly aiming at the uninformed market. Hats off to anyone who can sell 1965, 1977 and 1980 crowns at £3 each. Describing s**t as nice condition also helps selling to the same group.

At first glance that is exactly what I thought, double date, but if you look at the 1 and the last 8, the underlying numerals are definitely larger, in height. If you look at the height of the 1, the difference in height between the two 1s is only about 3%. The picture below has both large and small date and here the difference in size is close to 10%. Also the last 8 on your coin looks as if it could be triple as opposed to double cut. The bottom digit is lower which could explain the apparently larger size, but the top left of the bottom loop looks to me to have two separate cuts, the upper being displaced slightly to the right unless this is an optical illusion. If you measure the height of the characters, they are all the same nominally.

Bad news for eBay. Where will they get their business from?

Usually, all you can see is the top right corner at the angle of the 7

There are some with a straight 8 but they are significantly scarcer. To be absolutely certain it is not over 7 you need a mint state one to eliminate wear.

Does know better. It's called a dodgy dealer or to be more accurate a liar. Grading is not that subjective.

FDC? this - not unless he really means fingerprints, digs and cleaned. He knows better. He wouldn't price it at less than £1500 if genuinely FDC.

A coin with a good provenance should hold its value better than one without. Historically, the famous collections were so because they frequently held the best or nearly so known examples of both commoner pieces and also the rarities. Being the best pieces available to collectors, a sort of guarantee of a certain standard together with a "certificate of authenticity" is obtained. There can only be one best example at any time and the current best may have come to light after the famous collection has been sold, so in time it is not unreasonable to expect a slip down the quality pecking order, but generally if a coin was pictured in an old major sale catalogue it was guaranteed to be up there in terms of quality. Montagu, Murdoch, Lockett, Lingford etc tended to only buy the best available. Due to inflated prices, the extensive quality collections of old are unlikely ever to be repeated. It is very unlikely anybody will care anything about my collection or anyone else's on this forum in the future because of the minimal number of top grade rarities within, but a check through any named sale catalogue in the first 50 or 60 years of the last century will confirm that this was not always so. Collections with literally page after page of coins that fetch thousands of pounds each today, fills you with awe. A few illustrated pages of mint state hammered Edward VI gold and base silver for example is a sobering thought, particularly the latter. There is also the question of the interesting history. Anecdotally, just over a year ago I acquired a bound copy of the first three sales of Montagu. The various notes against some of the pieces such as “better than mineâ€, “same as mineâ€, “Good, my coinâ€, “can’t see any difference†etc not only proved the provenance of the catalogue’s original owner (Murdoch), but also gave a contemporary insight into the true quality of the coin because these two were continually trying to outdo each other in terms of quality. A useful thing given the pictures in the early catalogues were taken from casts and are less reliable than photos. Chasing provenances is a fun thing to do and it gives you a good feeling of satisfaction when you trace the sales that your coins have passed through. Bragging rights don't apply in most cases as the provenance is usually only made public at the point of sale and many named sales are deceased collectors. If in doubt or the grades are not too dissimilar, go for the good provenance every time.

Sorry, that should be the next but one volume, but everything has to be there by the end of this year.

I now know the 1807 die was produced from the KH37 obverse die. As a result of purchasing the 1807 proof halfpenny at this week's auction at Baldwins which is another later intermediate piece, I now need any images of 1807 proof halfpennies from anyone who has one or knows someone who has one. There is a reasonable degree of urgency as I have written an article which will be in the next volume (77) of the BNJ but which now needs to be updated in light of the above. Help please.

With the exception of the 1806 they are all poor to fair condition and not worth much. The 1806 is considerably better and if it has some original colour remaining as it appears to in the scan is probably worth £5-10 and I would grade it as VF with the reverse a bit better and approaching good VF. If the copper colour is as a result of it being cleaned then it is not going to be worth much as these are common, even in high grade. There are two varieties of 1806 halfpennies, one without berries on the olive branch as this one and one with. The with berries version is scarcer. The berries if present can be found as follows. 2 on the left hand side of the branch, one opposite the hand and the second below the top two leaves. The other is on the right side half way up the olive branch.

Nor any VIP proofs I should add.

Can't be. There aren't any 1860 copper 1/4ds for a start and I can't believe he didn't have a proof 1953 of either variety. Where are they?

I can see that, but where there should be a vertical line to the end of the bottom of a C approximately in line with the end of the top serif there isn't and this bit looks more like a rotated G because it has a horizontal top. If it were a reworked die (which given the die flaw, missing or weak serifs to a few letters and less than perfect border teeth in a couple places suggests an old die), there is no reason to assume that the letter punch must have the same precise shape which it would be if done as part of the same punching . It is well documented that you have different shaped Ds on the widow head halfcrowns for example.

I'm struggling reconciling the shape with that of a C if it's the same C punch used in VICTORIA. It looks more like a slightly clockwise rotated G to me or am I missing something?

Post a picture. The 1787 shilling and sixpence both have a stop above the head in most instances, although neither is rare, a no obverse stops shilling excepted and which from your description clearly doesn't apply.