Rob

We still get the second post every day, usually round about 11am, however, they have cancelled the first post, which used to arrive about 8.00 - 8.30am. You were lucky. Our first post used to arrive any time up to 4 o'clock in the afternoon, though second post was usually here by mid-day. Apparently it was all due to the first post postman having to do two rounds, while the second post postman only had to do one round. Ah, the wonders and nonsense of job demarcation.

All 1887 sixpences are common. It would make no difference to the value if a character has been recut or if two distinctly separate cuts were made. This is just human error, but not on a big enough scale to be a collectable rarity.

Difficult to say. In 2001, DNW sold one for £732 including premium which was described as in brilliant mint state and one of only 4 known, but given that I had one of the 4 and have subsequently had 2 others (not previously recorded), combined with the other 3 listed in DNW and a few others that I know about the figure of 4 known is obviously adrift from reality which would reduce the value somewhat. Hazarding a guess on the total number of pieces out there, I would say we may be looking at less than 20, so R4 in ESC rarity terms but still a relatively scarce variety. There is obviously scope for reducing this rarity estimate depending on the number that come to light. Yours may be a previously recorded example. In terms of value, the large rim nick doesn't help, but it looks to be worth at least a couple hundred quid and assuming it hasn't been cleaned or polished, I would give you that now. Of the pieces I have seen to date, I had one struck from the same pair of dies to this (one of the original 4 known as described in the DNW sale) and another struck from the same reverse, but a different obverse die.

There isn't anything to suggest the 8 is over another character. The shape of the 6 is different for Victorian silver compared to the bronze coinage. The copper 6's are the same shape as the halfcrowns, but the bonze isn't and this would appear as an ascending line across the top loop, through and out the top if over a 6.

Forget the ESC rarity numbers as most are wildly out. There are several examples of R7 where there are approaching a dozen known, conversely I can think of an R3 where I am unable to locate a single recorded example. Similarly with another rated R. I suggest you take the rarity with a pinch of salt. Any chance you could give some examples? Thanks. The Roman 1 1825 shilling rated as R7 or 1 or 2 known is the most glaring example of an overrated rarity. I've seen at least half a dozen of them and know of others. The 1812 Bank Token ESC975 with small letters is also rated R7 but Baldwin have one in their winter list where it is noted as the 5th specimen they have seen available. There was another sold at London Coins this year. Regarding those where I am unable to find any recorded example, I think it would be prudent from my perspective to keep looking and obtain one if possible before divulging this information. Similarly, there are a large number of unrecorded examples where an unknown variety is known for the preceding or following year. This is obviously due to the dies being used until worn out rather than on a strict calender year basis.

Forget the ESC rarity numbers as most are wildly out. There are several examples of R7 where there are approaching a dozen known, conversely I can think of an R3 where I am unable to locate a single recorded example. Similarly with another rated R. I suggest you take the rarity with a pinch of salt.

I have the 1667/4s listed as Adams (1) which was in the sale, ex Lingford, Pearce and Hunt (fair to fine). Adams (2) sold at Spink the previous March which was ex Bonhams 5/6/1997 lot 77 (overgraded in that sale as fine) and the 3rd was in the Circular Sept.93 no.6197 (poor) at £850 where stated to be the second known at the time (presumably yours). Clearly this would make the Bonhams example the 3rd known as people were already aware of the Lingford and Pearce collections. Any details for the fourth would be welcome. Off the top of my head, Harry Manville had a 1669 1/- which was lot 628 in his sale, Spink 140 16/11/1999. Infuriatingly, the info on the 1666's isn't immediately to hand. Must tidy up!! The other 1667 I saw was on ebay about a year ago and was in Fair and somebody wanted £3K for it - don't think it sold. This MIGHT have been the Adams specimen but for some reason I thought it was a new one. Not sure if you can search ebay for all past sales of an item to check. There might of course be a 1667 in the BM. Interestingly Stephen Fenton told me at Coinex that there are some rare shillings for sale in his (St James) auction in November, including 1681 E&C, 1683 first type and 1666 guinea head. I won't be bidding as I have these but others might be interested! There was one on ebay about 2 years ago or so which was offered by john8150 or something like that priced at £2750 or £2800 initially I think. This was the Adams duplicate (ex-Bonhams) which sold for £2100ish at the sale.

I have the 1667/4s listed as Adams (1) which was in the sale, ex Lingford, Pearce and Hunt (fair to fine). Adams (2) sold at Spink the previous March which was ex Bonhams 5/6/1997 lot 77 (overgraded in that sale as fine) and the 3rd was in the Circular Sept.93 no.6197 (poor) at £850 where stated to be the second known at the time (presumably yours). Clearly this would make the Bonhams example the 3rd known as people were already aware of the Lingford and Pearce collections. Any details for the fourth would be welcome. Off the top of my head, Harry Manville had a 1669 1/- which was lot 628 in his sale, Spink 140 16/11/1999. Infuriatingly, the info on the 1666's isn't immediately to hand. Must tidy up!! How do these compare to 1937 Edward 8th brass 3ds in price and (lack of) availability? The Edward VIII 3ds are more common, but the popularity of anything to do with Edward VIII means that the price for them rockets. Mark Rasmussen had one advertised for sale at £27500 in his list 7 (Winter 2004/5) and Baldwin's sale no. 48 in Sept. 2006 had one (lot 5041) estimated at £22-26K which realised £19K. i.e way over the cost of anything else discussed with the exception of the Dorrien & Magens shilling which has always been highly prized and priced accordingly. £20-22K seems to be about the going rate for an Edward VIII 3d.

I have the 1667/4s listed as Adams (1) which was in the sale, ex Lingford, Pearce and Hunt (fair to fine). Adams (2) sold at Spink the previous March which was ex Bonhams 5/6/1997 lot 77 (overgraded in that sale as fine) and the 3rd was in the Circular Sept.93 no.6197 (poor) at £850 where stated to be the second known at the time (presumably yours). Clearly this would make the Bonhams example the 3rd known as people were already aware of the Lingford and Pearce collections. Any details for the fourth would be welcome. Off the top of my head, Harry Manville had a 1669 1/- which was lot 628 in his sale, Spink 140 16/11/1999. Infuriatingly, the info on the 1666's isn't immediately to hand. Must tidy up!!

Fine is about right and should only cost a pound or two. It is common enough to not buy it and pay a little bit more for a good one.

It is a Swedish 1 ore coin in copper. There are several types depending on the edge which can be either plain (ie. flat), with lozenges or milled. In this grade due to the corrosion none are worth very much. The Krause references are 239.1, 239.2 or 239.3 respectively.

Of the coins you list, all are rare with the 1841 being the commonest. The rarest of the list is clearly the 1667/4 of which there are 3 known examples. There was one listed in the Spink sale of March 2005 which was with other duplicates from the Adams collection prior to his whole collection being sold in the December of that year and which contained a second, slightly better example. Having been offered the duplicate prior to auction, I have to confess that neither was particularly appealing given their low grade! There is one particularly good example of the 1726 which Spink sold around 10 or 12 years(?) ago. This is way above the rest and particularly choice. All of the above crop up from time to time, you just have to keep your eyes open. Relative rarities will usually reflect the requirements for coinage at the time. That is why no halfpennies were struck during Anne's reign for example following the huge issues of William III.

There is a note on page 121 of Seaby's "Copper Coins and Tokens of the British Isles" (1949) which may be pertinent to this thread. There it states that the earliest 19th century tokens were worn Geo.II and Geo.III halfpennies (many of them forgeries) and 18th century private tokens which were privately re-issued with a countermark stamped with the name (and presumably also initials) of the new issuer. This was in the first few years of the century before the metal bashers in Birmingham got seriously involved.

If I recall correctly, you stick it on the gas ring... Correct in the case of the blue, and the red comes from Brasso or similar.

It depends on how much less than fine. There was a lot of rubbish in that sale which was seriously overgraded. The virtually complete run of florins graded as UNC or thereabouts were all no better than EF. A few lots were accurately graded, but not many. Compared to other sales where prices have been close to book, this sale appeared to have bids in line with or just below description rather than reality. So I would think Fair should be around the £150 mark given it is not a particularly common coin. It's rare enough for there to be not too much difference in price between Fair and Fine because most examples are varyingly dire, but a huge premium would be payable for a quality example.

Lot 368 in Warwick & Warwick's sale on 9/4/08 was an example listed as Fine which sold for £220 hammer. A bit short of this IMHO, so £300 is probably about right given that over the top money was paid in this sale for mostly overgraded lots.

So it's likely that both aren't right. It's very rare to find an oddball piece such as these in a proper coin auction, but ebay has dozens during the year. That should tell you something.....

Wonder if they do teas... Nah, tarts. He comes from Bakewell.

It looks real enough. A 1723 SSC shilling is quite common even in high grade (which this isn't) so there is no incentive for people to make forgeries, and I don't think any of the usual culprits make a copy of this type. Its grade is Fine, and its value is about £20. It is a one year type with 3 varieties of reverse. Yours is the common one and the others are with C struck over SS in the 3rd quarter (not as rare as ESC indicates and in fact is fairly common) whilst the third is with the French Arms in the shield by the date. This is scarce in any grade and extremely rare in top grade. It is made from silver supplied by the South Sea Company hence the initials SS and C in the angles on the reverse.

BANS link. This would be a means of contacting your local numismatic society if there is one in your area.

1739/7 appears to always have the A partly covering the bust, but I don't know if it only occurs with the small garter rev on a straight 1739. The 1739/7s that I have seen have all had stops in the correct places so it may be that the absence of a stop or stops is due to a filled die. If there is even a hint of a stop then it would suggest they are the same die (and at the same time would put a chronological sequence to die use). Please post an image of the shilling if possible as it is a distinctive obverse die which should be easy to tie into known examples. Re the 1663 crown - I haven't a clue. The 1848/6 halfcrown isn't common, but I don't have a feel for absolute rarity. Not a lot have been listed in auctions, but that is not necessarily an indication of rarity if nobody is selling the coin as such and it is not picked up by the cataloguer. Most modern varieties are unlikely to be very valuable in the foreseeable future because of the potential number of pieces available. To go back to your initial enquiry, an indication of the mammoth task a complete listing of all known varieties would entail is given by the lists I have compiled. I collect shillings and halfpennies by relatively major variety (legend variations, bust variety and die combinations of these etc. but not whether there is a flaw in the field or a double cut letter for example) and have made lists of these with about 2200 halfpennies and 1500 shillings. Another list I have has about 1350 halfcrown varieties with even the double florin having about 30 including the Huth patterns etc. None of these lists will be complete as unlisted varieties are always coming to light - e.g. I have acquired two unlisted legend varieties this past month. Extend that list of denominations to include pennies (many thousands given the 1000 year striking period), farthings, groats, halfgroats, sixpences, hammered gold, milled gold, decimals etc and you can see why it hasn't been done.

I don't think there is one. Collectors who specialise in varieties tend to generate their own lists because there is no comprehensive varieties reference. At the end of the day all references are going to be incomplete due to ongoing discoveries & taken to its logical conclusion a varieties site would have to list every die combination of every coin type known because some references are sufficiently detailed. The time/cost of doing this would make it a labour of love because no one would pay for the service. Couple this with the fact that most people can only afford to collect a couple of denominations in great detail because acquisition costs are prohibitive, so most will buy books relevant to their chosen types and hence it is easy to see why it is not available.

It is unlikely to appreciate in time as it is simply a sales gimmick. The world is awash with pre-decimal pennies, any or all of which could be similarly gold plated as required based on demand. Alternatively you could get a 1967 penny costing a few pence, some gold, and coat it yourself. The knowledge acquired and the satisfaction derived by making it yourself is likely to outweigh the pleasure from purchasing what amounts to a trinket.

Thanks Bob, No it was advertised as gold by the dealer on VCoins. I emailed him to see if it was gilted, but he said it was struck in solid (22k) gold and not gilted. I'll have to weigh it when it arrives. I just liked the design and it seemed like a good price for what it is reported to be. If its gold it should obviously weigh more than the standard pieces. I'm just trying to find out more about it. I guess I should email the seller to see if he has any more background information on it. Regards, Hus Why should it be struck in 22 carat gold and not another mixture? If he knows that, it raises suspicions. If solid gold, it should be somewhere between 2.2 & 2.3 times the weight of the brass one assuming the thickness is the same.

I think the top end will remain solid because there are a lot of people about with surplus cash and if times get really bad it is much easier to sell quality closer to book. Top end buyers tend to spend cash that doesn't have another use and is not borrowed. In some respect, this bit of the market is relatively immune to the economy although there might be a bit less froth. I think that the bottom end will soften to the extent that it will align itself with ebay prices if things get difficult for any length of time. Given the tendency of most things in average condition on ebay to gravitate towards 99p I think the problem is likely to be in the expensive middle grade items which are not high enough in grade to attract top dollar, but are likely to exceed the spending capacity of those of more modest means. Prices could plummet as they did in about 1982 when prices dropped 30-40% for some items, but I think this unlikely because you are now in a world market given the net. For everyone who is struggling, there is always another doing well somewhere else in the world. It may be that a few more bargains will crop up, but I don't think a wholesale meltdown is in the offing.