Rob

Buck 173 was one of these with Whitton dies 28/12a. This is from different dies. They are scarce rather than rare.

The problem is, during that period they did use cast blanks alongside properly rolled sheet metal, so not necessarily wrong. Finding a second example with identical features would be useful.

You have called a Pinecone-Mascle die a Leaf. It's a mule of S1875/1836.

In the case of earlier coins, I think an overlay programme is easier because you have no 'standard' grid to work with in the first place. All you have to do is reference it to your chosen standard die (the best struck high grade example you can find) and then look for variations to build the database. If you have an overlaid triangle, you still need to rotate this to the correct position, so you may as well rotate the superimposed coin. That program can be bought off the shelf. For many hammered coins, a simple line from two opposing points in the legend which passes through an identifiable feature on the bust or other central design feature is often adequate due to the wide variations from die to die. In the case of later milled coinage, the pointings to teeth are easier to work with once established, as they do not have the same level of variation.

It's not only the wear to the hair, head, breast and knee, but also the large scratch over the bottom half of the obverse. On any other occasion it would get a details label.

I was going to say no because I can't see the diagonal running down from the end of the 5

It looks unbarred. As the A crossbar was added after the V had been punched in, this error can occur on any A in the legend. Whether a particular missing crossbar is documented is hit and miss. Also, they can be very weak, so any crud or corrosion, and the variety cannot be easily confirmed.

It's a bit of a curate's egg. The wear, or lack of it to the reverse suggests better than the last coin, with the weakness in the top crowns a striking issue. The 'silicone' could be something deposited in cleaning. The colour makes it a bit difficult to decide, and doesn't help the aesthetics. Given the state of the reverse, you might be right about the obverse die being worn.

I can't usually find the energy to moan about TPGs, but this is so wrong I couldn't help myself. How the hell does this get a 65 label, or did they have excessive stocks of them that needed using up? Have my suspicions about the consignor influencing the grade been confirmed? https://coins.ha.com/itm/great-britain/world-coins/great-britain-george-iii-soho-penny-1797-soho-ms65-brown-ngc-/a/3067-31649.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515

It depends on how well it was struck. Seeing things in hand is always easier to make an assessment.

Is that more plentiful in Oz, or worldwide? I would have said they were slightly more common than the 35 coins, but possibly a reasonable number of 36s were set aside following the King's death?

Could be a bit better than that. The lions' faces are good and there only appears to be wear to one laurel leaf. Not sure what the swirls are on the obverse though - could have been wiped to remove something.

Expensive. No bargains to be had.

Something to keep Madness amused for a while - 1513. Tournai groat struck in the name of Henry VIII.

I think you will struggle to get this one going. Most of us will be able to put a piece of music to a composer, but there's not a hope in hell that we will be able to guess the year it was written. Even with modern music, the release date for a single or album isn't necessarily the year in which it was written.

That sounds like a question for the Royal Mint, as on the face of it, both are possible. Do we know of any overdates with the same die & number? This would shed a light on whether the die number was exclusive to the die and not the year, but does rely on the die being flawed to confirm its reuse.

Given the current direction of your collecting, for the first time I would say these are not very useful books, though all three are useful resources for any expansion in your collecting habits and for general reading around the question of what coins are available. You have already identified the coins you need, so any articles you can find about coins or coin types on your list would be of more use - such as the BNJ article you have on 1787 shillings and sixpences.

I can't see anything in the illustrations to resemble a JH that is dated correctly. Plenty of veiled head things dated 1894 though. The diademed bust by Minton is paired with 1862/5/70 reverses, though if my conversation a few months ago with Graham Dyer applies, then they could have been made at any time, and in any case appear not to have been made before 1870. There is a pattern sovereign dated 1883 in the Royal Mint Collection (Hocking 2198) which has a diadem and veil, illustrated in W&R, no. 327. The dozen known 1884 pattern halfcrowns by Boehm all had a JH style crown, so the closest datewise to the JH issue we have without crown is the 1888 pattern (5/-)crown with the bust shown here, which was paired with a regular 1888 G&D reverse.

It might be a TB/BB mule if you send it to PCGS. Those of us a bit longer in the tooth on this forum will remember they have past form with this attribution.

I'm thinking about it

Hello Stranger. Doesn't look silver to me, more plated. Should have taken the £100 there and then.

Was there an auctioneer? There might have been someone overseeing the auction, but I'm not convinced there was anybody on the rostrum because all the speech was computer generated.

Realised $75069

Thanks. It would help if they put them in chronological order!.

I couldn't find the sale. When I go to Heritage Auctions, the only current sale I get is one of Americana & Political - so won't be bidding. Heritage stopped sending me catalogues after I didn't buy anything in consecutive sales a few years back. I find their site impossible to navigate, so don't bid.