secret santa

Just checked my spares and I've got one of those doubled A's.

Ouch - first time I've been called a parasite.

Great work Ian........................but you really must get out more

Clearly a Chinese forgery - sea doesn't overlap linear circle, numerous other errors of design.

Spink sold a nice one in June 2014 for £3120.

Could it be a Y from a halfpenny die/punch ?

Really nice reverse on that one - not often you get to see Britannia's toes on Ed VII coins.

I don't imagine collectors will be very keen to supply sales data to dealers so that they can charge us the maximum ! We're all looking for bargains.

Matt, is there anything important beneath the black splodge top right (click on tools etc etc) ?

Thanks Matt

Only one per customer, I'm afraid, Terry

Magnificent...................

Can you download pics Pete ?

Yes that's fine - better than Spink and now on the website (example 15) Thanks R

Well done, Mike, nice addition. I'd quite like a photo for my website if you're happy - the Spink photo was down to their usual standard.

Terry's new Victoria obverse with 2 extra teeth got me pretty excited.

Whatever system is adopted, there will always need to be an "owner" to arbitrate on whether a proposed obverse or reverse type is, or is not, a uniquely defined type. For example, Freeman did not distinguish between the 2 obverses used for circulation and proof 1953 pennies, the only difference between them being a single additional border bead and thus a slightly different alignment of legend to beads. Gouby's Victoria reverse ja is so minutely different from reverse j that some may argue that they're essentially the same. Freeman's George VI obverses 1 and 2 differ by the minutest of legend to tooth alignments, so minute that Gouby calls them the same. Good luck (and thick skin) to whoever is prepared to take this on.

I don't think you'll ever get away from having to go back to the "manual" or whatever becomes the central repository of varieties. Unless the naming system contains a lot of free format to catch the particular nature of the uniqueness of the variety such as B over R in BRITT, first 6 over 8, top leaf missing etc etc, you'll never invent a system that immediately captures the nature of the variety. Even with Freeman number, there are so many 1874 variants that I always have to go back to the "manual" to check the die pairing. Gouby's system is not very intuitive when it comes to dates with many variants but at least it is expandable and can cope with new obverses such as the 145 tooth Victoria, and virtually any date width. The important thing is to have a single source of varieties, their names and descriptions, with photographs, with single point maintenance (and maybe a small committee to agree new varieties). Chris P has mentioned producing a "new" Freeman with updated numbers but, if that involves changing existing F numbers, it would be fraught with danger.

I think in an ideal world, Michael Gouby would be the person to maintain a definitive list/database of varieties with associated Freeman number where relevant (just as he does in his books), taking on the role of adjudicator and allocator of identification using his BPYYYYAB coding scheme. Whether he wants to is a different question.

In my opinion, Freeman number will always be the prime definition of variety detail but, because it will become increasingly out of date, it will have more and more omissions. Gouby tends to fill these gaps and his identification system is flexible enough to allow endless introductions and his Victorian penny book is the most exhaustive in terms of listing the different varieties which collectors would pursue and label their coins to. Other publications tend to take the difference in varieties to ever more esoteric and trivial (?) levels of detail but which do provide the collector with something to look out for during periods of coin drought. So, what do people collect ? My theory is that the more money one has to spend on one's collection, the more one concentrates on the "major" varieties, i.e. Freeman and Gouby's original Bronze Penny list (i.e. without the numerous minor date differences etc). The less affluent collector will tend to pursue the esoteric/trivial "varieties" because many of them go unnoticed and can be obtained at less expense. This is my opinion and I may be quite wrong. If I am right, them there won't be much money for the dealer in seeking out these varieties as they won't realise huge prices. I'm basically a Freeman man myself.

Pete If the cleaner struggles or doesn't make a good job of it, send them to me and I'll scan them, distribute copies and return the originals to you. Richard

And the feet of the 4s in the 2 coins are definitely different.

I've just been re-photographing my coins with a fixed aperture of f16 to get sharper focus and I've checked out my 2 1944 specimens. It does appear that the waves on the version with the 4 central to a wave does have more deeply engraved waves, although it may simply be a sharper strike. Certainly, Dave's pictures above do feature quite a worn specimen of the 4 to the left of a wave.

Pete I've messaged you my address and will be happy to send scans to interested parties. Regards Richard

I'd very much appreciate a copy or scan of this article. Richard