50 Years of RotographicRotographic.com Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Rotographic on Facebook for offers and updates.

Rotographic on Facebook


The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on rotographic.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.


Expert Grader
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,134 Excellent


About Rob

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

26,393 profile views
  1. pure speculation 2017

    It will throw a spanner in the works for a lot of people if we do. Most collectors go to fairs armed with a wad of cash. I wonder if this is historical and a reflection on the time required to bank a cheque and receive funds, as it's only during the last 10 years or so that mobile payments have been feasible. Any bookie will suffer big time. Can you imagine using chip and pin at Royal Ascot?
  2. Johnshan

    I think it is badly mixed metal. Silver in purified form has to be alloyed to reduce it to the correct fineness (92.5% is sterling silver). The normal metal added would be copper. I have noticed a far greater tendency for silver to suffer from haymarking than gold. I think this is due to the difference in melting points between the three metals. Silver melts at 100 degrees below the melting point of copper, so the pot needs to be heated far beyond the point that liquid silver forms in order to melt any added copper. Failure to melt the copper would result in specks of sold copper remaining as it is likely the lighter particles would be in suspension. Gold on the other hand melts within 20 degrees of copper and so there is less chance of the copper failing to melt. Time allowed for melting is another factor. Once poured and cooled, any copper will react with the air to make copper (II) oxide, which is black.
  3. 1652 over 1 Half Crown

    I threw the question of filling and recutting into the mix as a possibility, but without any proof either way. It could be partly rubbed down and recut. The evidence from some coins dating to the civil war shows underlying detail that can be identified as being from a particular (different) die. This only predating your coin by a few years suggests that it was standard practice at the time. Pre-Civil War, I have a type 4 halfcrown with a star mark overlying an anchor. Anchor is unknown on a type 4. Similarly there was a type 3 halfcrown went through Lockdales in the past year or so with an underlying Portcullis, used on type 2 coins of that denomination. Engraving the dies on the end of a piece of hand-held bar for hammered coins is more flexible than dies used for mechanical presses where the surfaces need to be more consistently parallel given the mechanical alignment of the press. A seriously undulating die face in the latter case would produce inferior coins.
  4. It's also worth bearing in mind that the coins advertised will be skewed, with those getting a higher grade than one might expect being advertised for sale with the number made prominent, whereas those the owner feels to be undergraded are more likely to disappear into the collection - particularly those slabbed in the 63-65 region. Below that it is less likely to be an issue unless rare.
  5. 1652 over 1 Half Crown

    There is evidence from only 20 years later on from the milled coinage that dies were also filled and recut with the new date - e.g. see the 1675/3/2 halfpenny in the unlisted thread. This method was definitely used until the 19th century. I don't know whether any hammered dies were so treated, but given the short intervening period it must be a possibility. As for whether dies were ground down and the new feature entered, I would say it happened on occasion. Sometimes it was only necessary to add an arc for example, so I guess the action would depend on the outcome required.
  6. The obverse looks a lot worse on the 1916 compared to the 1917
  7. 1723 Penny

    The other alternative is an R. I suppose the F could be a filed down E.
  8. Better strike on the second's reverse.
  9. 1723 Penny

    Sorry, that should be B after M and not R. Faulty operative.
  10. Acquired Ed III Quarter Nobel

    My thoughts were that it is water worn or ground corrosion. Same alloy component involved (copper) and same effect whether it is silver or gold.
  11. Silver two pence

    You will need a greater accuracy than that obtained with kitchen scales. A couple of decimal places is required.
  12. Silver two pence

    So a blank that missed the plating process in that case.
  13. Silver two pence

    Is it magnetic? An unclad blank would be, a Cu-Ni flan for something else not.
  14. Help deciphering a mint - Tealby Penny

    You're the second person to ask what the mint is.