VickySilver

Hi all, I am trying to obtain a copy of the last edition of Marsh's work on half sovereigns and see it on UK Amazon but not over here. Anybody have a lead on a reasonably priced and usable edition (ie does not need to be pristine)?

LVII is one of the better Widow head crowns and worth quite a bit if in better condition (ie GEF & better).

Wow, that is very depressive & I have not ever tried to sell via ebay. Well, a pain but hopefully you are still up a few quid.

I believe there are unknown ingredients in these wipes that includes emulients and lubricants with unknown composition and therefore likely poorly studied long term effects on coin surfaces. You takes your chances...

Well, in that case I hope he makes a good profit....

That 1919KN linkified before on ebay (German seller) is at 300 pounds. I agree near EF but coin is cleaned and has that telltale pinkish cast as well!

Hey, I think we need to find some 1863s and a bit of saline plus a bathtub and create thin dates at home to sell on ebay for the bargain sum of 5k or so!LOL. Actually, these slender and narrow date buns in basal state are about as interesting IMO.

I would say "yes". Corrosion is quite odd in water and there may have been enhanced local elctrolytic action due to alloy just there andor the interaction with deposition salts, conglomerates, whatever...

Somewhere I believe I have one of these as well, and purchased from DNW some years ago. Even if rare, I counsel not getting too excited as it requires demand to bring price...

Ah well, guess nobody cares too much. Don't know if there are any collectors out there of Cayman proofs. If so, might they take a look at their sets of these dates (1986-1988) and see if there are any that have or do not have the FM mintmark/monogram matches with the 50c, dollar and 5 dollar coins? In other words, did the RM use any other dies or did all sets have coins that match these that I have noted?

Looks like water degradation on the more worn coin. I think it would be VERY hard to draw any conclusions from this piece. I have not noticed any lettering variants of significance in the 19H's I have seen but have not looked at too many of the "basal state" pieces either. I tend to agree with Rob however.

I still have not a bad "feel" about this coin as to it being a Royal Mint product, though the points are well taken. Lettering odd, and somehow I cannot accept it as solely due to the metal flow as there are areas pointed out that demonstrate the characteristic that should not be subjected to such movement. I love the toning and overall appearance. Is this coin slabbed?

Could be mint sport or experimentation. I don't have problems with the devices, though Rob certainly is a maestro on this. Lettering curious as well and not like any currency 6ds I have or have seen...2..8 gm is the correct weight.

Hey, wait you must bed a dealer-in-training holding coins like that; now all you have to do is learn how to drop them after sneezing on them.LOL!

I think they have a general scale to which the type is graded. 90 would be a very nice coin, as an example, but improvable.

that would likely be a die crack....

Does not look like my iv over iii. Sorry no photo capability yet.

OK, well this is an update: 1988 Cayman Island proofs of the 50c and $1 coins have no FM monogram/mintmark on the reverse. As you loyal readers will recall in an earlier post, I noted that the 1986 50c, $1 and $5 and the 1987 50c and $1 have these mintmarks. Evidently they (the RM) noted this and for this final year removed the mark - it was noted that during this time period the Franklin Mint was the subject of TV exposes like the American 60 min. show and had an aura of scandal about them, so a bit of a story even behind a seemingly insignificant mark...

I saw the Workman specimen and actually attractive obverse despite the lesser hair detail. That coin has NO circulation wear or lustre breaks and very nice indeed although not the best seen, certainly amongst the top 20% of uncirculated of this date I have seen - nice metal in fact. I am beginning to suspect that these dies were quite worn and NOT a soft strike for die preservation as has been sometimes stated. The reverse of this coin is very sharp as well.

I am fairly certain that is a typo in Krause as they are well versed in 19th C. general types and have not otherwise been far off given the volatile nature of the bun head series. Possibly the same could not be said for microtypes (who really cares anyway?).

Peck, if that 26ME is only VF in your book, please let me know when you have coins to sell. LOL. Seriously, though, look at the rim and ear, fields, etc...a lot of what may look like obv. wear is in the strike methinks and would like to have all of my VFs to look as nice.

As I had posted elsewhere, I think the Workman '19H was very nice and had an extremely well struck reverse albeit the mushy obverse. Did they reuse already tired '18H obverse dies? I have one that has unfortunate toning but has a well struck obverse. Ooops, did not mean to pirate the thread... I still like a nice red original '12H and even some of the London mint issues from years shortly afterwards when well struck...The worn bits, even including the 1922 rev. 1927 just do not do anything for me. What about the rest of you?