Peckris 2
-
Posts
3,630 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
170
1 Follower
Peckris 2's Achievements
-
That presumably couldn't be enacted via Executive Order ... for obvious reasons!
-
Stuff to make us Laugh vers.2.0
Peckris 2 replied to blakeyboy's topic in Nothing whatsoever to do with coins area!
Ah, you're cultivating the orchid Fostersii Forexiae? -
Yes, it's the little envelope icon at the top, next to Notifications.
-
Yes, that's an attractive halfpenny, and a unique type (the first regal halfpenny since 1775, as there wasn't a cartwheel halfpenny in 1797 sadly; then there was a gap until 1806 when a new smaller design was issued). I've always liked that single year type too.
-
I know I've said it before, but the ratio of rare to common specimens has narrowed steadily since decimalisation, but the value guides don't really reflect this. The rarities are still rare but the common dates have become scarcer over such a long time.
-
What I mean is - if it's the same smaller size as other toy coins, then it wouldn't have been the Mint at the Great Exh. but probably Moore (presumably Heatons didn't strike toy coins?)
-
What size is it?
- 660 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- fitzwilliam cambridge
- moore
- (and 6 more)
-
That would place it around the time of the Great Exhibition of 1851. Fascinating to speculate it may have been struck there to demonstrate minting machinery, just as the 1951 crown was struck at the Festival of Britain.
-
The 1900 is the best grade - edging towards EF. The 1891 is at least F but perhaps a bit better The 1853 has too little hair detail to rate F but getting there The others are scrap I'm afraid
-
It may or may not attract enough interest to eventually be classed as a variety. Do some research, write an article, and who knows? Gouby listed the 1946 ONE' and claimed it was scarcer than the 1926ME. I used his note in my ultimately successful effort to get Spink to include it in the Standard Catalogue, which would have increased collector interest several times over.
-
I agree with all that. However I'd lay the blame not with Freeman but with Coin Monthly! I started collecting as a schoolboy in the late 60s and the very first issue I bought had a Beginners Page featuring (did they call them "varieties"? Can't remember..) three pennies, two of which have been mentioned here: the 1897 O.NE and the 1946 ONE' - plus a Vic copper penny though I don't recall which date or where the extra dot was. I think that as a result of that notoriety, those particular anomalies became accepted as varieties.
-
What is, and is not, a variety is something of a 'grey area'. Decades ago, 1961 halfcrowns without the engraver initials EF on the reverse were considered to be a variety. However as soon as it became clear that it was the result of a filled die, it disappeared from the list of varieties overnight. Only very rarely are such things classed as varieties, the exceptions being things like the 1946 ONE' penny. They are accidents of the minting process rather than design changes and therefore only collected by a small group of people.
-
Photography advice please
Peckris 2 replied to Paddy's topic in Nothing whatsoever to do with coins area!
I have an iPhone 15 Pro Max and it's now my main camera. -
Stuff to make us Laugh vers.2.0
Peckris 2 replied to blakeyboy's topic in Nothing whatsoever to do with coins area!
Were they the band that had a big hit with Carabao D'Amour? -
It looks to me like a repunched R (not extreme). The underlying letter looks offset to the left and a bit lower, and I can certainly see the traces of the right leg of the R
