Red Riley

Not quite Christmas day yet, but since I'm just about to retire for the night, a Merry Christmas to one and all.

I was intending to refrain from commenting on gradings, at least until the book was published but this looks very close to EF in my opinion. Reverse - a little discernable wear on helmet and right breast, but the shoulder which usually receives wear early on looks pretty good to me. The give away as far as wear is concerned is, as you say, the fingers of the left hand which nonetheless are still clear and individual (I reckon that 9 out of 10 coins advertised as AU or UNC also show slight wear here). An oddity though is that the left forearm seems to be a little flattened which giving the generally light erosion elsewhere is probably a striking anomaly. Incidentally, the beading on these very early KG5 pennies was almost non-existent, so you are lucky to have anything there at all! Obverse - the photo is a little fuzzy but it is possible to discern wear on the upper ear and possibly on the eyebrow. Despite the slight ghosting, the pennies produced in the years immediately preceding the First World War were generally pretty well struck and this is no exception. All in all, I would say a reasonable investment for 99p.

I agree with Chris. This is what I would call a wacking great error, not just one letter inserted over another which is barely discernable, but an error brought about by the illiteracy of most of the mint's then employees. Suggest it should go to a major auction house (perhaps even Spinks' themselves) who would give it maximum pre-sale publicity. You might just make a profit on this one!

Well my 26 ME is 'I' to gap and ordinary effigy is 'I' to tooth. Not certain whether that helps or not.

I have an idea that launching and running a magazine is unbelievably complicated, risky and moreover extremely hard work. One of my other hobbies is classic cars which I have had some involvement with since 1988. In that time I have seen a number of magazines arrive, fade, close, get taken over and absorbed into larger publications. A particular case in point was one in which all articles were written by owners with very little editorial input (Real Classics I think it was called). Sounded a good idea on paper because using essentially amateur contributors would cut overheads to a minimum. It briefly made the shelves of W H Smith's, but it seems that they failed to renew the order and in a year or so, it was dead. Publishing books is risky enough, but succesfully launching a periodical must be a zillion times more so.

It wasn't so much of a throw-away line as it looked. I would buy Coin Monthly in the late sixties, early seventies and then when I got round (could afford) to collect again in the nineties, it had vanished. Just out of interest's sake, does anyone remember what happened to it, when it hit the buffers etc. Used to be a good read as I recall.

Knowing me, I would just have to try and improve it, I just couldn't live with a coin in that condition and the fact that it was so rare would annoy the hell out of me. I have a book entitled 'Cleaning and Restoring Coins and Artefacts' by Michael J Cuddeford. I have never found it that helpful in relation to copper/bronze restoration, but to be fair my goal has usually been restoration of tone rather than full restoration on the scale that you envisage. Borrow it if you like, read it and then make up your mind.

I agree with you Sergy. For me it just tries to cover too much ground. There must be room in the market for a magazine produced in Britain with the emphasis on old British coins. I know this sounds a little parochial, but it is where most of our interests lie. I seem to remember Coin Monthly (whatever happened to that) being far more my cup of tea. I just don't want to read about new issues of otherwise humdrum coins in 9 ct. gold issued by Brunei or wherever.

Have no idea who they are, so can't recommend. Does anyone else know them or live near Birmingham?

If it is a large collection, it would not be very practical to photograph them all and put them on this website. It would also not help much to simply say 'photograph the best ones' because as a non-collector you could not be expected to know what they were! What you really need is to speak to a dealer or auctioneer for their opinion. Obviously locality is important as it would not be very helpful to advise you to see a dealer in Manchester if you live in Plymouth. Several people on this site would probably be prepared to help you out, but it would be pot luck if you happened to live anywhere near them. Also, if the collection is as eclectic as you say, you may need to refer to more than one person. First stage therefore, some idea of where you live, and see who jumps!

Mmmm... Not convinced about this one. Looks like she's sucking a lemon.

A good move in my view. The reason why 'Check Your Change' sold so well in the 1960s was because theoretically, there was 150 years worth of coinage in circulation providing the (albeit remote) possibility that all sorts of rarities could turn up. Clearly there was little point in producing a similar book until a good many years had passed. Coins in circulation can now be anything up to 36 years old, and with the passing years, the demand for Check Your Change can only increase.

University Challenge tonight contained a round on Benedetto Pistrucci. The questions were pretty easy, and good general knowledge/reasonable guesswork would have got you the right answers, but I don't remember anything even remotely connected with numismatics on telly before (excepting perhaps the hoards of Roman Coins that turn up un Time Team).

Just a casual observation Chris, by your own admission you seem to be selling more this year than you thought, so what happens if the reprint comes to more than 2000 books? Will you want my halfpenny back?

I know that at one point he was looking into the theory that a whole lot of 1869 pennies were in the process of being transported to the colonies when the ship sank. I don't know whether this got beyond the hypothesis stage, but it would go some way to explaining the shortage of these coins.

I think it is worth noting that many 1953 coins were issued in little platic folders; in fact I believe 1953 pennies were only issued this way, ergo they virtually all still survive. As far as the 1954 florin is concerned, 13 million is a very small mintage by modern standards, and few were being hoarded by any other than genuine collectors. Regarding the 1915 halfcrown, it is quite possible that many of the coins issued in 1915 were actually dated 1914 (as the official mintage just shows how many coins of a particular denomination left the mint's gates in that year, not what the coins themselves were dated. This changed at some point but I'm not sure exactly when). This accounts for such comparative rarities as the 1869 penny where the official mintage of 2,580,480 is reckoned to exaggerate by a factor of five, the number of coins bearing that date. The final point is that in certain years, the whole production was sent to a far flung part of the empire where collectors were few and hence the coin itself may not be that rare but almost none are in decent condition (e.g. 1927 penny). This can however work the other way as in the case of the 1951 penny where virtually every coin was sent to the West Indies. This was established early, and once the word got around, the coins were speedily removed from circulation. I have only mentioned pennies, as that is my area of 'expertise' but am sure similar reasons can be used to explain price variations in other denominations. Having said al that of course, there is a rump of coins where the price pattern defies all logic.

True, but just look at the history! Marcus Aurelias was somthing of a philosopher and some of his writings still survive. That's what I love about Roman coins, you get not only a portrait of a guy who died 1850 years ago, but tap his name into the internet and you can find out what he thought about a variety of subjects. But, as you say, in hard cash terms it's worth two-thirds of b*ggerall. Something wrong surely?

I have never learnt the actual points to prove that a coin is, or is not an ME, but one glance is normally enough; the whole portrait is just much softer and less angular. Unmistakable. In this case, is it ignorance or artifice?

This is good stuff and very interesting. Whiled away a good half hour.

I tried to post something on this last night, but for some reason the software wouldn't play ball. Although the scan is rather dark, I believe it to be obverse 6, reverse D aka F29, although to be fair I wouldn't stake my life on it (especially since the lower part of the reverse is almost entirely dark). This is one of the more common varieties in what was an abundant year. You are however correct in saying that the coin is approximately Fine.

The mint's motives behind this coin strike me as thoroughly curious. I can understand the reason for a later date being engraved on an earlier die (although personally I wouldn't bother...) but why put an earlier date on a later die. I just can't follow the logic. Do we have an explanation as to why they did it?

Long live the Republic!

That is a rare boogger, ignoring the references, early obverse, narrow date, not minted in Birmingham and if I'd known it was on there, I would have bid for it myself. Huss is right, it is not the uselessness of your book as for 98-99 coins out of a hundred it will be reasonably accurate. Pennies are among the most popular coins to collect, and as a result these sub-varieties can be quite sought after, some actually worth into the thousands. The whole issue of varieties can be quite contentious as some are 'adopted' and attain a substantial premium whereas others are virtually ignored and worth little more than the standard item, often for no apparent reason. How far you take it is entirely up to you.

Okay, let's get our thinking caps on. Obverse - queen wearing baseball cap with a stud in her ear, mouth hanging open in typical vacant fashion. Reverse - Vauxhall Nova with wide wheels, spoiler and go-faster stripe. There that ought to do it!