Rob

Shouldn't laugh given the fatalities, but it looks like someone in marketing had a sense of black humour. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42401707

Some of Boulton & Watt's original dies were as said acquired by Taylor in 1848. Boulton's grandson, Matthew Piers Watt Boulton had a large stake in the restrikes as indicated by appendix 10e in Peck (p.616). He outlived Taylor by a good 20 years plus. According to Henry, he stated that the dies were destroyed, but it is possible that MPWB retained the odd one after Taylor's death in 1885, as the dies would only be destroyed after 1885 and by Boulton, not Taylor, because up to that point the latter was making restrikes for commercial gain. Unfortunately I don't have a copy of MPWB's sale catalogue from 1912 to check if any were offered then. There were no dies sold by the Watt family at Morton & Eden in 2002. The Boulton family collection was dispersed privately through Tim Millett a few years later, so I don't know if any were within this collection.

Not very often I post something here, but this one is complete b******s. Silver, unlikely. Genuine, absolutely not. All Wulfhere stycas have his title. And in any case the lettering should frighten anyone away, so unsurprisingly, it's a private listing. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Anglo-Saxon-AR-Sceat-King-of-Northumbria-Wulfhere-c-850-900-AD-475/272977189693?hash=item3f8eb55b3d:g:~oQAAOSwGPxaLWv7

If a £1 coin is worth £3K and the Daily Mail costs 65p (surely something wrong!), then pro-rata, that's about right. I wouldn't value a copy of the Mail any higher than the implied 0.0216666p price. In fact I'd probably still feel ripped off.

I recommend the FT. No tabloid gossip, hyped up crap for effect or sport. In short, a newspaper that has the temerity to write informative accurate articles. Costs multiples of the tabloids and would be cheap at double the price.

COA is certificate of authenticity. Surprisingly they still do a pyx trial to this day. In the days of hammered coins, even though standards were laid down, it was accepted that this constituted an average of what was capable of being produced, so the standard also allowed for a deviation in weight from it within reason and as specified. That is why a small number of coins from each batch were put into a sealed box, then at the time of changeover to the new initial mark, some coins were taken from the box, weighed and assayed. The mint master being held responsible for any failure to follow the standard. This was done to dissuade the workers at the mint from striking coin light and pocketing the difference. The reports are very useful as they specify what denominations were present at the trial, and hence we know what was issued at any particular time.

The ESC update was a bit of a disaster in my opinion as the previous rarity values were taken verbatim as far as I can see. There are a few things added such as prooflike examples of an otherwise standard coin, which in my view is just an early strike from better polished dies. It doesn't make it a proof and therefore is not worthy of cataloguing as a separate variety. Adding in a few of these and not proof reading properly means there is a disagreement in the concordance with the previous ESC numbering. This catches up at Ed.VII by leaving a few gaps in the numbering, which asks the question why was it not done properly in the first place. There are more varieties in the 6th edition compared to the 5th, but a corrected ESC would be preferable. And it falls apart easily based on my sample of 1 book.

Davies has more 'errors' in it than ESC, though neither are comprehensive because people are continually finding unrecorded varieties. Error lists are usually compiled by the collector and gradually find their way into published references if they have engraving origins such as corrected letters. The problem with errors is that they can be striking errors which may or may not be one-offs and not intentional, such as brockages, off-centre strikes, out of collar strikes etc. These will never get a comprehensive listing.

It's easier to say which bronze halfpennies don't have a I for a 1. I don't know of any as this was standard in the Victorian bronze. You see a range of fonts and sizes across the different denominations and issues, so what is normal for one is not necessarily the same as was used for the next. The only thing that stands out in this regard is where you get an Arabic 1 over an inverted Arabic 1, resulting in what appears to be a Roman I such as the first digit in the date below. The same thing occurs on the not so rare Roman 1 1825 shilling.

Just seen this line. 'Unless specifically noted, all of the pictures in my catalog are actual historical coins I use as models for my work.' Which would suggest that what you see is not what you get. Certainly from the gallery there is nothing to worry about as they are obvious copies.

Ok, the Civil War pieces are more realistic (didn't see those). An Elizabeth I 6th coinage groat doesn't exist, though it does look suspiciously like a shilling. I was going off the gallery pictures which are all obviously wrong. The images with a partial picture won't load for me when I click on them - just keeps cycling? The links above do however. I agree, I don't like the El.1 2d as it is too realistic.

I don't think there is much to worry about given they don't resemble the real thing. Most people running their own enterprise exude self-confidence. Nothing new in that. when was the last time you saw someone advertise themselves as not the best, just a typical person providing a decent service/product. Everybody positions themselves as expert/specialists - but can't all be the best.

I see a hand dividing R F (French?)

It's on the British Numismatic Society website. Someone else will have to provide a link. I find it easier to get the book out, as it takes less time to read than it does to download.

Schneider covers these in the 1959 section of his BNJ article on Tower gold (vol. 29 p.382-403). Up to and including Tun (period ends 8th May1638), the predominant type was that with a wire line inner circle ( as per yours), though others with both a beaded inner circle and no inner circle were also known. After Tun, i.e. Anchor onwards, all subsequent issues had a beaded inner circle.

And the problem is? NGC have correctly identified it as a penny.

No Minton.

It sold for £8, but I don't have the buyer noted for that lot. Given it went to Bliss, it is highly likely that he bought it at the sale, probably through Spink. Have you just bought it?

Which one? They all started at lot 1.

Looks like an antique silver dealer that has assumed it is a genuine crown and knows they will go for more than the starting price in that condition.

The one on the left is from the same reverse die as the coin above, not sure about the obverse though it looks a pretty good match. There is more than one punch in use for a given character and the design is entered by hand as seen by the legend alignment. I can't see a problem with it.

I doubt it. Just looks like a die flaw.

'not much of a freebie if only half the dealers there - one even bought his coins but had no price list so I was stuck staring at coins i could not buy - might as well have gone to a museum' At the large fairs there isn't enough time to look at every table, so the larger space combined with less to look at made the whole day more relaxing - nobody elbowing their way in and shunting people sideways. Also, less is more, as a surfeit of choice usually results in prevarication with most potential customers continually drifting from one table to the next and never making their mind up. Fewer things available tempts people to spend longer considering the options, and usually brings a positive result. I always do better at the smaller ones. Nearly a hundred dealers only gives people a few minutes per table at the most to look at what is on offer, and if they stop to buy, that gives even less time to look at the rest.

It was ok. Up at 5, left for the Midland at half 5, so no sign of snow until past Crewe and it only took 20 minutes longer than usual to get to the museum. And it was a good day to boot. Maybe a third or so of the dealers appeared and probably not many more than that number of visitors - but having made it to the fair, everybody had plenty of space for a relaxing look around the tables and good money was spent. All those who didn't go also missed the free entry.

In Tudor times it was illegal for Irish coinage to circulate in England and Wales because the coinage was struck to a lower standard. Consequently English coins traded at a premium to Irish in Ireland.