Rob

Nobody should worry about the authenticity of most coins. The contemporary copies are much rarer than the genuine articles and would sell for a premium usually. Given the number of genuinely uncirculated coins out there, copies are likely a very tiny fraction of the total output for currency issues, so the numbers don't cause me or many others sleepless nights. Multiple examples are soon flagged up in any case. You could even say that all coins are bought because it appeals to the buyer, so if a copy looks better than the real deal, there is nothing fundamentally wrong in paying the same price as for a genuine coin. Authenticity concerns about general circulating currency seem to be mainly an American issue, presumably driven by the TPGs who use it as a selling point for their services. A complete triumph of marketing over relevance. If it doesn't cost much to acquire, you won't lose much if it's iffy. If you are betting the house on something's authenticity, then doing due diligence is a prerequisite for being a buyer in the first place, unless you are a gullible idiot with more money than sense. The pertinent information can be sourced by any buyer - if they can be arsed. Many issues have by now suffered a near total loss of the original mintage for a given year, so the occurrence of new die numbers for a particular year shouldn't come as a surprise. Think along the lines of 1838 sovereigns, where 100K out of a mintage of just over 2 million were melted from the Smithsonian bequest to name just one event. The number of shipwrecks in the 19th century one would assume offered a similar attritional rate to many years' populations given the gold was used for international business settlements. I only have one person actively seeking new die numbers and he is in the Crewe Society, but that doesn't include for each date and is really only a fun side project (AS COLLECTING SHOULD BE). Another used to go to Wakefield before we moved to Huddersfield, but I think he has stopped and sold up.

Does it exist. I'm on the side of a definite maybe. To explain my reasoning, if they can resurrect an 1841 halfpenny die to continue producing 1839 proof sets in the 1880s by changing the date, then I see no reason to not find an 1853 penny die hidden away somewhere that they decided to reuse after 5 years. Both types are ludicrously common and liable to have things coming out the woodwork many years later. After all, it is the cleanest modification you could use to change the date. 8/3 or even 3/inverted 3 with the correct font size/profile in the right position and at the perfect force applied level could also conceivably work, and as Jerry suggests, it could just be a case of wrong punch, wrong time. When all options are exhausted, even the impossible/irrational/unlikely etc. is possible. I guess the answer lies in contemporary evidence. But that needs a ouija board (and someone who believes in the alleged comminucations etc)

I expect so.. I don't have the individual die nos to hand, but all three die pairs have higher die numbers than 91.

earlier profile 72

earlier profile 71

earlier profile 70

and a 74 for comparison

It is probably confusing for the uninitiated, but the genuine 1775s have what looks like coarser hair strands than the 70-74 coins. End assumption? Looks different, so must be wrong. To clarify - the late coins have a virtually straight line from forehead to tip of nose, but the earlier ones have a distinct kink in the road.

No idea. I have a few bisected 8s in the pile here, but all low grade, so I usually put them in the trays at a tenner or thereabouts and hope someone buys them. Ultimately, they aren't that collectable except to the die nerds, which pennies of all ages seem to attract. It isn't obvious without a glass and specialists obviously want a mint sate example. Needless to say, if anyone pays silly money for an obscure variety at auction, then dealers will naturally follow suit. The attached sold for the princely sum of £8

The obverse is a bit messy in the legend, so it appears to be an overmark - Bell over E rather than a 5th issue marked die recycled. This due to double striking looking at the SINE part of the reading

Frankly, I couldn't give a damn. Value of a blocked die 5p to me? £1 or £2 if I had gone to the effort of putting it in a 2x2 and writing a label.

It may well have been Steve Lockett's. He collected sixpences and would likely have hoovered up the surplus from the frequent offerings of mint rolls that occur. I know Alex Anderson had a roll of 1905s. Beautiful coins, every single one and all came back with big numbers after slabbing.

Which pretty much makes the irrefutable case for a proper paper library. Worst case is the house burns down, but then, even so, most of the catalogues would be legible, if somewhat smelly. As it's the 25th anniversary of another paraphrase/quote by an earlier incoherent Republican US president than the present incumbent, 'Never misunderestimate the frequency with which the improbable happens'. Sorry Dubya. They also hold their value if stored in dry conditions, so the frequently heard complaint that £5 on a book is a waste of money is total bollocks. My bound volume of Montagu pts.1 to 3 cost £175 twenty years ago. That would go for closer to £1750 than 175 at auction. Think back to a St. James's sale a few years ago when 3 years of Seaby's WW2 bulletins bound in one sold for thousands. Can't remember the years specifically, but I bought the same date run from a well known deceased collector living in Wakefield and couldn't shift them for 12 months because I was unreasonably asking £15/year (Paid £10/yr). Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately in the right setting - Oscar was right. People know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

The problem with all lower grades is that it is subject to the degree of dishing to the flan. The dies always seem to have a more dished reverse (probably by design to see the date (as opposed to the monarch which is easily discernible from the profile. The less dishing, the more even the wear. Whatever, Fine for me too on the obverse, the reverse inevitably better - say good Fine or nVF.

It will probably be a reworked 1717 reverse die. I wrote about mine on p.806 of the acquisition thread and another point where we had quite a lengthy discussion involving brg658 about this. More than one die may be involved, but it looks conclusive on the two coins mentioned in that discussion. There are at least a few die pairs, but haven't had time to pursue the maximum number I can identify.

Probably like that because they are maundy and therefore rarely used for payment, even though legal tender at the time. If that 1840 was a regular groat, you would feel far more comfortable with it.

If it is as you say, the obvious candidate would be Gilpatrick at Pembroke, the mint being written, PAN or PAIN. Have you tried searching the EMC database at the Fitzwilliam? If it was found by a detectorist it should be recorded with the PAS and the details will be uploaded to the corpus. An auction would not necessarily be recorded there unless found under the treasure rules. Where did you get it?

You can also get this year's Standard Catalogue of British Coins, otherwise known as Coins of England (COE) 2026, the title now owned by Sovereign Rarities, but before that Spink and before that Seaby's to avoid confusion down the line. All or any could could be used depending on the age of the person writing. It comes out every year in 2 parts and you need the decimal section (the cheaper one) which is £25(?) this year. The bigger volume covers British Celtic coins through to 1970 when we changed from imperial to metric money on 15th February 1971 (the other D-Day). Less informative volumes and therefore cheaper year books can be bought from Chris (Collectors Coins) here, or Token Publishing (Coin Yearbook), or Coin Market Values. None agree on prices, but given no two coins are the same, it is no surprise,

Again, I can only recommend Galata's excellent tome on the pennies of the Edwards. Real research has been done there. All Paul and Bente's writing is of the highest quality by a pair who know their stuff, and as references will struggle to be equalled. Go for it. Splash the cash. You won't regret it. Incidentally, I also have a set of North, vols. 1 & 2, both new. £40 per volume or £70 the pair pus postage. PM me if interested. Thanks.

If that is mm spacing then a farthing. Makes sense given the weights. Old sterling pennies were 1.4g down to 1g ish, so 1/4g =1/4 penny. Do you have any reference books? Just wondering because by Eliz.1 the penny was about 0.5g, but that had declined over a long period. Coin values are determined by the diameter of the inner circle because the outer one is too susceptible to spreading when struck. Rules for the future: 1. Get a Withers small change book. 2. Get a Withers small change book. 3. Get a Withers small change book. 4. Get a Withers small change book. 5. Get a Withers small change book. The surplus suggestions are to cover the 4 periods contained within the volume set, and allow me to book some copy and paste replies without having to make any other contributions. They cover Ed1 - Ed.2; Ed.3-R1; Henry 4-6;Ed.4 - Henry 7 and Henry 8-Commonwealth. You don't have to buy every one at the same time unless they are offering a discount to clear some stock. It is the best reference available and is regularly updated. Worse advise (sic) is available on ebay from some aspiring millionaire who found this in granny's change the other day, conveniently overlooking the moneyer Grunal. Hint. This is Dave Greenhalgh's name for coins he has made, (legitimately for the purpose of demonstrating hammered minting techniques).

ditto

I often scan my pictures in at 350 and the quality is adequate for a 500k maximum size. Even when I have a 1200dpi scan, the image quality is only an issue if you want to keep the original at that level. By the time you have cropped it to the required size, the image often seems to have reduced to a smaller footprint than originally anticipated.

Copy the pictures and post the reduced size image, or alternatively stick them in a zip file. Don't know how to do the latter, but it might help. Feels strange that someone with a 'Help for the digitally challenged thread' should be giving advice.

Yes. It looks like a cud, where a piece of metal has become trapped between the dies when struck, hence the excess metal. It could have been a flaw flaw which was the source of the metal or something external, but it ain't right. I suggested the latter because of the mess underneath the top of the F too. 3-D pictures required to be certain.

I think we should all be able to make our own and spend them in the shops with our names on, as with tokens in the past few hundred years. Personally I think the average person on the street has more credibility for financial responsibility than any politicians, who are trying to steer a sinking ship to a relatively safe grounding point. The average person has a moral compass and believes in paying his dues. One day the world will wake up to the fact that we are all living beyond our means, being unwilling to reconcile the cost of luxury with the actual cost. I include luxuries in the areas of general public services that are provided whether you use them or not. For a sustainable existence you have to make it just as easy to produce offspring as it is to get rid of the old. Nature, left to it own devices will always find a balance between supply and demand, but that is essentially based on the food supply. We don't have the luxury of natural balance, being obsessed with the concept of eternal life and have worked continuously since our brains developed to further our success. If we run short of food, we make a conscious decision to bugger someone/something else in life. We shouldn't have that right, or at least provide a quid pro quo to our ability to determine every possible outcome.