|
|
The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com |
|
|
Coinpublications.com
Predecimal.com
Mr T
-
Content Count
1,045 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by Mr T
-
-
I don't really track US coins but yeah probably the high mintage would be part of it.
I'd assume that collectors are very much divided (like here) into classic (1960s or earlier) and modern (alphabet sets/state quarters) and maybe these sets fall in between.
-
Looking forward to hearing what comes of it.
It's good that the Royal Mint still do look into things like this - the Royal Australian Mint stopped years ago I believe.
-
Two to three production runs makes sense.
Maybe - I think there are some modern mules that are too good to be true. This one seems plausible given the similarity between dies at least.
-
I assume they weren't all made in one run (the regular ones anyway). How does it work? I assume the coins are for sale for a year or so, during which the Royal Mint will keep producing them as long as they keep selling.
-
Hard to say - I don't know of any study of die markers.
I do have in my notes that Dracott says it also exists as a circulated coin, but now I don't remember where that's from. If it's not in his July 2004 article, maybe his more recent article - November 2021 I think.
-
I think it's A#? The date is wider and Britannia has short hair.
-
1
-
-
Ah nice thank you.
-
1
-
-
On 7/11/2023 at 10:59 AM, BottleCapDave said:Does anyone here know anything about this relatively new listing for English Silver Coinage 30th Anniversary edition by P Alan Rayner? Published 15/03/2023. According to the description, I believe it is a update of the 5th revision with variety additions using the original Seaby numbering system and updated photos? This is not listed on the spinkbooks.com website which seems weird to me as it is a Spink published book. I guess it is time to send an email.
https://www.foyles.co.uk/book/english-silver-coinage-original/p-alan-rayner/9781912667765
Any information about this will be gladly received, TIA.
I was looking at this the other day and it says release date September 2024 - was that there before? I didn't see it as in stock anywhere last time I went looking either.
-
Looks like it's the browser - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66348773/this-form-is-not-secure-autofill-has-been-turned-off-only-in-chrome
The forums isn't served with HTTPS which is why you're getting the error, but I'm a bit confused as to why it's not happening for everyone.
-
There was no picture of the coin in the article and no NGC holder number was given. I don't think you can get the image from NGC without the holder number.
-
1
-
-
This got a mention in the last issue of Coin News I think but there were no pictures.
I don't normally keep track of decimal stuff but it looks like a 2022 five pound was struck with a two pound obverse. Only one known so far.
-
1
-
-
On 8/9/2023 at 9:50 PM, Rob said:Rationalising what people need, I realised that any reference cannot be logically organised on a 1, 2, 3, 4 etc numbering system, however simple this might be because of the above problem. A better alternative would be a longer reference along the lines of Gouby's numbering, starting with the date as the root, and finding a logical numbering system for an extension to this to account for the various varieties as they come to light. Just considering Davies and ESC, the former doesn't assign a different number to currency, proof, edge or off-metal strikes of a given denomination and date, whilst the latter is now just a mess, given the issues with proof-like being assigned a different number, despite being a regular currency coin and the obvious lack of proof-reading which has now consigned to print a large number of glaring inconsistencies. Both leave no room for later inclusions. A date ordered system would necessarily lead to long reference numbers, hence the need for intuitive extension references, but I do think it would appeal to the completist mentality inherent in most of us. It would not solve the problem of what some consider varieties such as the listing of various dots on pennies whilst others don't for example. Whatever system is adopted, it will have its critics.
Given the complication involved, anything along the lines of the above would probably be best served as a number of publications, each done for a specific denomination. Some would be large, others a single page. The next issue would then be how too deal with undated coins in a systematic way.
A disadvantage of any comprehensive detailed reference is the limited number of people to which it would appeal. Collectors are a diverse bunch, with relatively few interested in any particular sphere, even allowing for the disproportionate number of penny collectors on this forum. Any printed published reference has to have sufficient prospective buyers to justify the costs, though obviously a digital database is infinitely updatable.
I don't disagree - the individual numbers are handy but don't offer much room for growth (neither do die numbers but it seems to be less messy there).
With Australian halfpennies and pennies the die numbers/letters has worked reasonably well but there have been no new die discoveries either.
-
Iain Dracott's article just says some reverse G have missing rocks, mainly from 1861 to 1863. More research required I guess.
-
1
-
-
Ah yeah I checked Mal Lewendon's photos and he notes a reverse G with no rocks, but doesn't give much more detail than that I think.
-
Looking forward to hearing what comes of it.
-
Same here in Australia - some reporter sees something on TikTok or the like and runs yet another story on the same coin that they ran a couple of years back.
-
Hm is it die fill? I dug up some pictures of reverse G and it looks like the rocks can be quite weak.
-
Reverse G is 1861 to 1873 - I think there's a small rock but I guess it's the "no rocks" reverse?
-
Okay I finally got around to doing it and it looks like the 7 at denticle is a normal 1887 sixpence, besides the date difference. It has 119 rim denticles like Davies 1160 and the leaves and berries all appear the same to me.
-
On 7/11/2023 at 2:22 AM, BottleCapDave said:I have spent some time creating major variety lists per reign using Google sheets. Nothing sophisticated, just reference numbers, dies id's and their descriptions etc. I will say Groom has been helpful with higher quality images and more detailed descriptions of Davies' varieties. As a newbie I have yet to pick up Rayner's book, does he include any major die varieties not listed in Davies?
The 1837 mule sixpence is one that's missing from Davies, but the coverage in Davies is generally better.
-
1
-
-
On 7/14/2023 at 6:07 AM, Michael-Roo said:Same design as the old halfpenny trial dies. I have the 1957 one.
Predecimal halfpenny trial?
-
Yes coin collecting has seen a rise in my opinion but for the decimal stuff more so.
-
On 6/22/2023 at 2:29 PM, VickySilver said:I think it may be a true rarity and ought to be written up in Coin News or similar - very interesting.
I'm surprised it wasn't at the time (or maybe it was - I can't remember when I started subscribing).
-
Hm, working now.
The noses do look a bit different for sure.
Confirmation of Dies Please
in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Posted
And a little bit of an update to this - I haven't done a in-depth study of the G with rock/G with no rock from 1861 to 1873, but I have had a brief look.
From 1863 to 1873, the pictures I have at hand all seem to show a rock (though a bit faint at times).
More interestingly, the 1862 with A to left of lighthouse has no rocks while the 1862 with A to right of lighthouse has a rock, at least from the handful of images I've looked at (https://www.baldwin.co.uk/product/victoria-1837-1901-halfpenny-1862-die-letter-a-rrr/, https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=124&searchlot=555&searchtype=2, https://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=162&searchlot=2355&searchtype=2).