Rob

Yes, a misprunt. Bull illustrated the date on p.153.

Do you mean the 1669 W3 shilling? If so, the last to come to market was probably the one on Ras' list in 2016, which was the ex Raynes 582 and Lord Hamilton 228 example.

The cut-off date was 1908. As of 1909 you could no longer order sets from the mint. That's why the price jumps a hundred quid for 1909 & 1910. The boxes were made for Spink as far as I am aware and possibly a few other businesses. Unfortunately the supply of dealer lists for the likes of Ready, Lincoln and Verity are not particularly common, and I don't have any to see if cases were advertised.

Thanks chaps. Looks like I am not the only person having issues.

Help. My Adblocker icon has disappeared with Firefox claiming it doesn't allow it to be used. This has unleashed a whole world of crap that I didn't know existed and now I do know, wished it didn't. Surely they realise that people visit sites for the purpose of visiting useful content and that nobody in their right mind searches for adverts? Does anyone have a safe workaround for this? Any advert free equivalent available? Ta. PS. Suggestion for Admin. Even this site suffers to the extent that Amazon have managed to put something at the bottom of this page. That ought to be stopped too.

Same address but I'm certain it's a different name. It rings no bells at all, so possibly neither name is/was correct. However, if it is a room used by hotel porters living in, then any name could appear.

Anything to do with 'to ten'?

It could be 2 different hands from the same dealership. I did consider the ticket could be say an S&B as they used tickets with a line at the top, albeit usually on yellow tickets. But their stock items were usually coded with either an E, G or M prefix.

I would go for the two tickets are from the same dealer with the letters and B numbers added as a reference. Maybe cabinet B with a position reference? The letters TTR and MN could be cost codes, because if the 300 and 95 were ticket prices, there is no guarantee that was the price paid. That might fall down given the T would therefore be a 2 if it represents the cost. 225 might be too big a discount, but R could be 5. N could then be 0 and M either 8 or 9. If it helps, I also bought a lot with RB on the reverse of the ticket and a price of £60 on the other side. That would tie in with R=5 if the price paid was 50 something. This ticket was a completely different style, so presumably from different dealer. .

What?! Elucidate please.

Depends if you left one lying around.

I do have a selection of bronze pennies in the collection, but only about a dozen. I am still looking for a couple of bronze patterns plus a KN. Most of my pennies wouldn't appeal to a majority of members here being either hammered or Maundy. Thanks Pete.

You don't understand that I don't understand. However, a picture tells more than words, so now it makes sense. I lost the will to live long before I got to page 86.

Precisely. I rest my case.

This was the Adams coin. Crappy image, but all I have. 1845 5 over 3.doc

It happens all the time. A lot of auction houses turn up the contrast on their images.

The colours in DNW pictures are always a bit washed out. The halfcrown I posted a month ago is completely different to the image on the DNW site. Compare the listing with my image which is a fairly accurate reflection of how it is in hand. i.e. The toning is much darker than their image https://www.dnw.co.uk/auction-archive/lot-archive/lot.php?department=Coins&lot_id=329731

Agreed

Davies says it uses the ME punch, which presumably excludes the legend or else there would be no variation in the position of letters to discriminate between dies within a type.

I'll go for 'tell me two random numbers'.

I think the dark points on the reverse could be where a thin coating has worn off. If the spots were areas where cleaning was ineffective they would be in the recesses, not the high points. The general blandness of the surfaces would support a coating too.

Could be silver plated on a genuine coin to improve an undesirable example.

It's difficult to say because the number of small bit punches used for the repair confuses the situation. I think on balance I would incline to say not an underlying 3 because the angle of the diagonal is wrong. If you look at a regular 1843 halfcrown, the angled upper section has a shallower gradient and the top bar of the 3 on the above is too short. I would speculate that I would not expect to see more than one or possibly two dies with this overdate because the 1844 dated coins are so prolific, that any reworking for reuse of existing 1843 dies is mostly likely to have happened in 1844. However, anything is possible. https://www.dnw.co.uk/auction-archive/lot-archive/lot.php?department=Coins&lot_id=292713 https://www.dnw.co.uk/auction-archive/lot-archive/lot.php?department=Coins&lot_id=234494

This is documented and is ESC 392 (47B) in the latest revision by Maurice Bull. I have an example in stock too. The edge was applied using the Castaing edging machine, where the blank was rolled on its edge.