Nick

1889 shilling 2+C and 1898 sixpence 2+B.

I supplied them with a full list of varieties that I was aware of, with Davies numbers, but on the whole they chose not to use them. Hence the reason I have mentioned a number of them here.

Also in lot 488, is the scarcer 1893 sixpence with die pairing 2+A.

Just in case anybody was wondering, the rare variety of 1898 sixpence with the small date (1 of date to bead) is in lot 488 and not lot 487, even though it says small date for both.

And another is lot 486, an 1888 sixpence which is the 1 over 1 variety.

Another scarce sixpence variety that I neglected to mention is lot 477 an 1875 sixpence DN 71 die pairing 3+C, Davies 1085.

I have now counted and the the unrecorded reverse has approximately 20 more beads than the contemporary reverses.

Don't know the answer, hopefully 1887jubilee will. The 7 to bead indicates either a slightly different size of reverse or a different number of border beads (I haven't counted), but there are also a number of design differences in the crown (picture attached).

It is. The lot number is 355.

Many thanks for your input and for passing on the info to your friend. I don't think I have any other 1887 varieties of any great rarity, just the scarce R/V and JEB on truncation sixpences.

Here are the pictures (reduced in size) from VS:

Personal bugbears are: haitch rather than aitch could of rather than could have or could've tautologies such as various different another thing coming rather than another think coming Amongst many others...

It simply never crossed my mind to do that.

Sorry.😳

I simply ran out of funds. But even if that hadn't happened, I would have probably have stopped anyway due to the lack of availability of the rarities that I was missing.

https://www.dnw.co.uk/auctions/catalogue/results.php?auction_id=598 Lot numbers are spread around, but 1869 sixpence is 471. If you want a lot number for a particular coin just ask.

Thanks Eric. You might be interested in the 1869 sixpence that you liked when I posted it a long while ago.

I have finally given up on collecting and have sent my collection to auction at DNW for the next sale. There are some decent examples of most silver denominations, but generally the Victorian crowns and sixpences are amongst the better items, including some sixpences that are ex Alfred Bole. For the variety hunters, there will be some of interest, such as: 1887 double florin with die pairing 1+B 1887 halfcrown with unrecorded reverse design 1887 florins 1+A and 2+A 1888 florins 2+A (1887 obverse) and 3+A 1889 florins 3+B and 3+C 1890 florins 3+C and 3+D 1914 florins 2+C, 2+D and 2+E 1923 florin 2+E (mule) 1839 shilling proof is rarer en-medaille variety 1858 shilling 4+A NGC MS63 1880 shilling 7+C and 7+D 1884 shilling 7+D and 7+F 1888 shilling (not 8 over 7) 1889 shilling 2+C (never seen another) 1895 and 1896 shillings small rose 1921 shilling 3+D 1837 sixpence B over R in BRITANNIAR 1867 sixpences 2+A and 3+A 1879 sixpence DN 9 1880 sixpences 5+D and 6+D 1898 sixpence 2+B small date 1911 sixpences 1+A (March sale) and 2+A (April sale)

Here's the reverse, on behalf of VS.

Just read the description on your pattern on rascoins: 1951, similar to last but struck from unpolished dies, graffiti (Royal Mint, identification marks?) removed from obverse field, edge with polished finish and lettering of finer style, 27.97g., ESC-; L&S -, S.-, unlike the previous specimen this is fully struck, of the highest rarity, Ex. Rees-Jones (293, part). EF

I can't really see any difference in the design between your pattern and my 1951 proof (attached). I overlaid the pictures and nothing stands out. Is the reverse substantially different?

Here is mine:

Here's the original picture with a greater choice of "beauties". The only one that looks half decent is Gavin Williamson and I can't make up my mind about Dominic Raab.

But if the weight and dimensions are correct, it must be made from the correct metal composition. It does look cast though.

I'm sure its bark is worse than its byte.