christoph

I've got a 1964 sixpence in AUnc condition. Instead of 'GRATIA' on the obverse, it reads 'GRAT A'. I have looked at it under magnification and there's no sign of it being tampered with. The letter 'I' is completely missing, not a trace of it. It looks like a filled die. If this was bigger than a sixpence it would be a dramatic variety but it's a very small coin so you almost have to look twice to notice it. Anyone else seen, got, or heard of, this variety?

Copies of Freeman are now fetching the same as Peck, i.e. about £100 at auction! I'm hanging on to my first edition though the 2nd ed. is more accurate and therefore more expensive. I am fascinated by the difference between all the price guides. Spink is basically a definitive catalogue, i.e. every coin type gets its own defined unique number - the prices are what they would sell the coins for if they had them. Coincraft used to beat Spink on prices but not last time I looked - is there another one due out sometime? The Blue Pages (Yearbook) is now the one I trust the least. They don't even feature basic varieties like 1957 calm sea halfpennies! and I don't think the listings of what coins they include have changed since the days of Coin Monthly who used to publish it. Coins and Market Values, and the Rotographic guides, always used to be lower than the others but they've caught up recently. Rotographic is best for varieties but Spink aren't far behind now. What beats me is, why are there so many differences between them?

One thing is for sure - the pennies were in actual circulation for many years more than than the twopences. The twopences almost never turn up so worn that the design is a flattened silhouette, whereas the pennies are often found like this. The twopences were extremely unpopular, not surprising considering their weight. The total mintage for them is much lower than the pennies which were minted for several years, possibly near to 1806 when they were replaced. It's likely that cartwheels were recalled by the Mint for their copper content, or else hoarded for same - the reason 1806 and later coins are smaller is that price of copper went up. There's a lot of copper in them thar cartwheels!

I spoke to Colin Cooke a few years ago and he told me was working on the farthings edition of what was to be a 3-volume replacement for Peck. I don't what state it's in, but that's what he told me!

I'd never heard that story... how do you tell Taylor's restrikes from the originals? Is it obvious? Or maybe he made so few they're not on the market... They do appear on the market but are more expensive (usually) than the normal issue. You have to consult Peck's book to tell them apart, but there are lots of very minor differences. One reason is that Taylor got a load of proof dies, and used those, often without matching with the right reverse, though you wouldn't know unless you looked close. Also, the dies weren't in the best condition when Taylor got them, so there are raised rust spots on some strikes, where there was slight pitting on the die. Some dies he sanded down, and you can tell them as well. Also, he retooled one or two - the clues are there, but you need to be virtually an academic to sort them all out! When it comes to the Soho Mint, I'm only a beginner myself...

Not strictly true - there is a minor variety of this (and same for 1915), where the king's ear looks kind of recessed as if it's been pushed back a bit. It may have been an early attempt to cure the 'ghosting' problem on the reverse, if so it was a bit of a failure! They're scarce but not rare, and very few dealers offer them for sale separately so it's worth checking all 1916s you see, if you want one.

If you can get to a library, have a look at a the reference copy of CW Peck's meisterwork, "English Copper Tin and Bronze Coins in the British Museums". You should soon see that this is arguably the most intricate subject for study in UK coins. Not just the importance of them as the first machined currency coins, and all the patterns proofs etc. There's also the endlessly fascinating story of Taylor - the chap who bought the Soho dies when they were sold off in the Victorian era - and proceeded to restrike many of the coins, mixing up different obverses and reverses in the process. I also think it's the best-looking coin of all, but it's all subjective I suppose.

If it's the really big one (larger than a crown) it's worth about £85 in top grade. The small one (bit larger than an old florin) is worth about £30. Someone just asked me about these, so I had to look them up. I got the big one at an auction last year. It's a handsome coin, and the toning (acquired? contemporary? anyone know?) is superb.

I have an unrecorded variety of 1887 Jubilee Head sixpence with wreath reverse. The differences are all in the date area, apart from a slightly thinner rim and smaller, better defined edge teeth. The first 8 is struck over another 8 the top loop of which is still visible, almost touching the oak stem. The 7 is twice as far from the second 8 as on the normal issue. There are three incuse lines on the oak stems, missing on the normal issue. The tie ribbons are a little narrower. I mentioned this to Spinks and got the reply "there are lots of minor varieties on Victorian coins - we would not be interested in this". I believe this reply is inaccurate. Changes to die production and automation from 1883 means that after that date, varieties are much less common, and each one is significant. There are NO varieties of significance on bun pennies after then, and there are very few varieties within the Jubilee Head silver series. Has anyone else seen one of these? I'm hoping someone has, as mine will be worthless if it's the only one - paradoxical but true!