Rob

And the reverse. Pity about the marks on the leg.

A KH4 halfpenny in silver (P-). The appearance of a P1039 in the next Spink sale reminded me of this, as it was originally described thus, but has rust spots on Britannia's knee, something that my KH2 (P1042 in copper) is missing. As this came out of Baldwins basement about 9 years ago, it is one that Peck genuinely missed as he must have visited the dungeon a few times whilst compiling his tome.

I think the basic problem is the number of dies that were made. Unless you have a definitive study of the coinage, then there will always be differences which you have to try an differentiate between kosher and suspect. The shilling jewels just looked too bulky for my liking. This however, may be a timing difference because the Spink plate and OP coins are 1554, whereas the one I posted is 1555. Also, copies tend not to embellish detail. The P&M was from DNW 10 or 12 years ago but I don't have anything before that. The surfaces weren't very nice in any case - it had clearly been dug. I don't have this any more as I couldn't live with the scratch etc. The weight was ok. The testoon was ex Noble sale 1973 and one of Ras' lists. As you said, ideally you need them in hand.

Shilling doesn't look very good either with reference to the jewels on the crown cushion and Mary's necklace.

I would have my doubts about the Testoon. My main concerns are the stops, which seem too bulky and the obverse has what appears to be a crack. The fact it is not fully formed and effectively filled in makes me suspicious. FWIW, I've only got a grotty pellet in annulet testoon, but the stops are much clearer, and even if worn down would not have the same size footprint. Not looked at the P&M yet. Do that later.

Happy birthday for yesterday.

I guess the best thing would be to contact Coincraft. Joe Bispham is your man, but I don't have any contact details for him. They must have listed it on someone's recommendation, almost certainly Joe's given he wrote the BNJ article in 1985 and much has come to light in the past 30 years.

Ah. See what you mean. Joe's article has obverse 5 with the EDWARD legend, so that ties in, although the bust looks larger on your coin, but I can't see anything for a Durham House reverse with TIMOR. Is the reverse mark definitely a bow? If not it could be a muled mark after the dies had transferred to the Tower/Southwark, wherever they went. Looking at what you can see of the shield garnishing, it looks more like a non Durham House style. Guarantee they will have been used somewhere given the financial constraints of the time.

S2472 with bust as 2466, Edward VI etc on the obverse and INIMICOS rev.

Post mint damage. The options are either done in a vice, or two coins coming together in the coining press leaving the imprint of one on the other

It might be a mistrike. Can't tell whether it is PM or not from the image.

Don't think so. It looks like the colon after Britt points to between teeth and the G of GRA isn't sloping.

Not to be confused with die polishing lines which are raised on the coin (incuse on the die). They are alright.

It happens all the time. I had an order, one of which I had sold and not removed. I told the buyer and he pointed out that I still had something listed he bought 6 months before. Problem was I had 2 similar things which both sold inside a day and after removing one, I thought in my mind that I had removed both. If you don't have a fully automated shop with stock control you are always going to fall foul of this at some point.

Don't think so, but it's difficult to tell. The lighthouse top looks to be the wrong shape and the 'C' has a straight back which would also be wrong. http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=128&searchlot=1456&searchtype=2 Here's a clear example.

Even a scanner is likely to be better than a mobile phone image unless you can hold it steady enough

New dies it is. Not helped by the dotted e!

There are so many varieites that you need to make sure you are comparing the right things. Best recommendation is to do a lot of reading, anywhere and everywhere.

Could be Lion and Lis. That is usually found on Class 13, 14 & 15 though at Durham. A picture of the coin would help.

And I would happily take out such a policy, subject to a solvency test to make sure you can pay out.

I think it almost a given that at least one more 1954 will come to light. If they made a couple hundred, then I can't believe only one got out.

Both look dipped

An incuse die crack is usually called a scratch, unless there was a piece of metal stuck to the die which also left an impression.

The question of not paying over the odds is rather nebulous. On that basis you should never have bought your second coin because the market probably moved perceptibly up in the interim and the books hadn't caught up. Far better to accept that you will overpay for some, but pick up others cheaply, both alongside the coins that cost the 'right amount'. This also requires a defined 'correct price'. If I were you I would buy something if it was within say 20-25% of my mental ballpark figure. You will never get it right 100% of the time, nor will you consistently pay too much. Bargains were to be had at DNW today for example. All collections are a mixture of over and underpaids.

Get stuck in at DNW right now. Bob Lyall's collection is going through as I write.