Paddy

Surely this one is wrong? https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Queen-Victoria-Gothic-Florin-1864-773/232819051876?hash=item363518cd64:g:p5cAAOSwLmlbL8NM

Quite pleased with this one as an upgrade. I am now happy that I have all the 20th century pennies that are achievable in an acceptable grade for me. (Which means I can focus more on all the other upgrades I need to achieve!)

I may be under-estimating - it is a while since I bought one and the book I have is a few years old. In the end it is worth what someone will pay for it, regardless of what the book says. So based on the fact that you have just bought it for £100, that is what it is worth - today!

Pictures aren't great but it appears to be second bust - has the obvious tied queue behind William's head which is not visible on the first bust type. Also William has a far more obvious top bunch to his hair on the second type - but I may be wrong. (Based on the pictures in Spink "Coins of England".) First bust type is scarcer for this date. At UK grade of VF this is probably a £60 to £80 coin. Also, this is not strictly Maundy, as correctly attributed by your TPG. These coins were made for general circulation - it was 1816 I believe before a special Maundy issue was created.

I see the error, but I can't explain it, and I don't get the same when I try. Despite the error, it did find the lot required - it is the second picture that appears in your screen shots above.

This one looks very wrong to me: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Very-Rare-Oliver-Cromwell-Silver-Sixpence-Coin-C1658/263765617603?hash=item3d69a7ebc3:g:sJMAAOSw92RbKAWg

Feel free to add away! For my part, I have achieved my aim here for now in confirming which varieties of 1861 I have. (The two I had in my collection have both been amended too - I believe I now have six of the Freeman varieties for this year.) I have one more batch of Halfpennies due in the post - I will post any oddities amongst those once I have got them. As to the flaw on Victoria's head on number FOUR above - that is a recognised feature of obverse 5 according to Freeman occurring on "most" specimens...

I know what you mean! I have always worked on the basis of putting anything that ticks the box into the collection for now and then work on upgrades as the opportunity arises. It has served me alright so far and as they are in an album, I don't have to look at them every day. Thanks again for the review - that has cleared up the query for me. (And I am pleased I am beginning to get some of them right!)

@Peckris what is the error message? It seems likely you have some problem with the set-up of your computer as there have been other things you couldn't get to when others could. Do you have a friendly neighbourhood computer person to have a look at it for you? BTW I have emailied the auctioneer raising my concerns - be interesting to see how/if they respond.

Thanks @Rob that's what I need most - confirmation of the basic variety before we get into variations on variations!

Thanks @Rob the NGC site confirms the details but has no pictures. @Chris Perkins - are you interested in this sort of new variation for later reprints of Freeman (or otherwise)?

Who?

No idea! I presume if there is anyone hot on the topic, they will take note and maybe add it to a later publication. But as no one seems too interested in Half Pennies at the moment, I suspect there is no one to do it...

Wow, @DrLarry you have got your teeth into this one! Has anyone else noted this missing rock pile before? Thanks for all your help.

Yes - Lot number 754. Sorry - I thought the link would do it.

The door seems to be a good indicator for reverse G, which as I understand it should be the norm for 1862 unless it also has a very rare Die letter (A, B or C). So I would expect al to be reverse G - but there seems to be a reasonable proportion without the rocks - hence the query. Is it a different reverse, or just a blocked die on a normal G?

I suspect this is another of the high quality 1818 Half Crown fakes - what do others think? (Pictures are not great, but...) http://www.charterhouse-auction.com/antiques-sale-catalogue?inf_contact_key=34a4585adace5155122a0fd9e8ace0f58a64d420c0070b7843bcfb085c2f64f9

Thanks for that @DrLarry - I want to put these away in my collection but I want to be sure I have them right before I do so. Any comments welcome. It is long overdue for someone to do a thorough website on the Half Penny - I have neither the knowledge nor a good enough collection (yet).

... ah but by saying "may" they give themselves a let out cause. If it is in their interests to find a recording of the call, they will do. If it is in YOUR interest, then that call was conveniently not recorded. Murphy's law applies.

The replies usually start either "We value your custom..." or "We take customer service very seriously..." before going onto explain why they no longer value your custom or provide any customer service!

FIVE - I have this as 4+G - no incuse lines but too few leaves to be a 7, reverse with the door on the lighthouse:

FOUR - I have this as 5+E - fewer incuse lines on the leaves, also die fault on the forehead, and the same LCW on the reverse.

THREE - I have this as 6+E - 6 as before and E because it has the LCW above the date:

TWO - I have down as 6+G - 6 because most leaves have the double incuse lines, G as before because of the lighthouse door.

As mentioned in a different thread, I came across a bunch of reasonably decent Victorian Half Pennies recently, which I hope have provided me with some variety fillers and some upgrades. I think I have identified them all, but I hope one of you experts might be able to have a glance over the following 5 1861 coins and let me know if I have them right? ONE - I have this down as 7+G - 7 because no incuse lines in the leaves and the extra leaf present, G because of the lighthouse door: