1949threepence

Thanks Neil.

Although I contributed to this thread back in 2012, I have literally only just read the fantastic response from Michael Freeman above. As Pete would say "hat off". I refer to Mr Freeman's book literally on a daily basis. Obviously over time - a very protracted period of time - some of his estimates will be questioned and revised. But for the overwhelming most part, they are considered pretty much as accurate today as they were when first compiled back in the 1960's. That is some feat, and testament to his skill and dedication. Thank you MIchael.

Too bad if we in the UK wanted to buy any of his items. Says he doesn't ship to the United KIngdom.

Pareidolia is the phenemenon of seeing an image of something, from an otherwise completely random arrangement. For example seeing faces in clouds. Here is an example of pareidolia in wood. You can see a dog's face, ears and front legs, which has been created unintentionally by the random arrangement of the grain. Incidentally, the Welsh for pareidoila is also pareidolia. Some religious people think they've seen Jesus Christ !!!

It's not so much the lack of lustre, it's actually to do with the wear. For a coin to be classed as UNC there has to be no detectable wear. In this case, there is light but obvious wear on Britannia's right leg, as well as in the topmost points of the KIng's hair. It's not much, but it is enough to take the coin down from UNC status, in my opinion. Compare it with your 1927, which is UNC, and you'll see the differences.

EF for me, maybe GEF at a stretch. .

I thought it might have been that infernal predictive text on your phone or tablet, David. I've turned mine off now, it's so damned irritating.

It was touted as between £50 and £55, but went for £500 !!! Here it is:-

If you're not familar with them, some of the 1861 varieties can be quite tricky to ID. Not a 5 minute job learning the subtle variations either, as I can testify.

I'd say a/UNC.

Well played, Voynov. That's two incredibly rare coins you've turned up Not sure what the odds against that are, but they must be pretty long.

Slightly off topic I know, but talking about Churchill and the new five pound note, I reckon a better quote than "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat", would be "we shall never surrender". More inspiring?

Probably >10. Five of whatever the total number in existence is, can be seen here, on Richard's rarest penny site. Yours isn't amongst them. So that makes a minimum of 6.

Had me slightly flummoxed for a minute, as the second and third figures in, bear an uncanny resemblance toi Edward VII and George V.

Merci, M. Poirot I shall take a look at his website

From what I've seen, they mostly tend to be modern decimal or foreign coins.

I've never seen anything on there worth buying.

He did indeed, Richard. I missed that bit.

Hmmm, possibly. Even if he meant Gouby obverse G, that is a special designation which applies exclusively to1861. Maybe he can clarify - and hopefully sign up as a full member.

With regard to 1874, do you mean Freeman's 69 and 76, reverse I? By the way, here's an UNC (or very near so) 1879 narrow date. Another one was sold at the Workman auction in 2010. But you're right, they are extremely rare in UNC, although not that difficult in grades up to VF.

Which just proves, Bob, exactly how subjective, grading is. One expert person's opinion can easily differ from another expert person's opinion, and probably the same expert person's opinion can differ from one day to the next, affected by mood, perception, concentration, whether interrupted etc - a mass of variables can influence the final decision. On the Sheldon scale that could mean +/- up to maybe 2 points.

Not FDC, but still very nice.

Impossible to tell, but I wouldn't mind betting that if you built up a big enough collection of Victorian shillings, for example, you might see a trend towards some die no's having been used much more than others. No idea whether that's ever been tried.

No, but it would obviously be better if it was.

That's what I was thinking.