On the subject of forgeries...

[Peckris 579]

I know absolutely zilch about Aussie coinage.. But the strong impression I'm getting is that that is a genuine coin, which someone has stamped 'REPLICA' onto. In other words, a fake replica!

Now you're just giving me a headache!

Sorry! I just meant it looks like a genuine coin that some individual has unofficially stamped REPLICA just for the hell of it.

[FosseWay 0]

yea fake 20ps

I'm quite surprised that anyone's gone to the trouble (albeit not much trouble, given the quality) of faking 20ps when £1s can't be that much more difficult but yield more profit. But then that's nothing new: in a bulk lot I acquired the other day was a lead 1908 1d forgery.

It's also not new for forgers to be ignorant of numismatic details, as they are with the numerous mismatches between date, reverse and edge inscription on forged £1s. I have an, er, object that appears to be trying to be a 5th issue Elizabeth I shilling. As well as clearly not being made of silver, it has a date (1578), which unless I've misread Seaby it shouldn't have.

[Red Riley 2]

yea fake 20ps

I'm quite surprised that anyone's gone to the trouble (albeit not much trouble, given the quality) of faking 20ps when £1s can't be that much more difficult but yield more profit. But then that's nothing new: in a bulk lot I acquired the other day was a lead 1908 1d forgery.

It's also not new for forgers to be ignorant of numismatic details, as they are with the numerous mismatches between date, reverse and edge inscription on forged £1s. I have an, er, object that appears to be trying to be a 5th issue Elizabeth I shilling. As well as clearly not being made of silver, it has a date (1578), which unless I've misread Seaby it shouldn't have.

Think we've discussed these before. If my memory serves me correctly, the finger pointed to a company in Dover that made this sort of thing not more than 20 years ago.

[FosseWay 0]

Think we've discussed these [fake Elizabeth shillings] before. If my memory serves me correctly, the finger pointed to a company in Dover that made this sort of thing not more than 20 years ago.

I may well be wrong, but the 'coin' I have has the feel of a contemporary forgery, not something done to fool collectors. For a start, someone forging to fool a collector would surely get blatantly obvious features right (wouldn't they?!). But in addition, the coin is in pretty bad condition. It's worn, creased to the extent that it will easily break in two if not handled carefully, and far from uniform in shape. In short, it's not in a condition that would particularly appeal to a collector for that series even if it were genuine. I'll try to remember to post a picture of it when I have time and I, the coin and the scanner are in the same place at the same time.

[FosseWay 0]

As promised, here is a scan of the 'shilling'. I have a 'sixpence' (dated 1593) made of the same very fragile metal and also with poor definition to the detail and a crease across it.

Edited July 9, 2010 by FosseWay

[TomGoodheart 373]

As promised, here is a scan of the 'shilling'. I have a 'sixpence' (dated 1593) made of the same very fragile metal and also with poor definition to the detail and a crease across it.

Um .. that seems to be a sixpence of 1572. Whether it's a contemporary fake isn't too clear. Certainly some Charles I fakes are very good, suggesting that some (?ex) mint workers turned their hand to counterfeiting.

If it wasn't for the fact that that issue (fourth) was in decent silver I'd say it has the look of a 'base' issue coin.

Anyone else any strong feelings about it?

[FosseWay 0]

Um .. that seems to be a sixpence of 1572. Whether it's a contemporary fake isn't too clear. Certainly some Charles I fakes are very good, suggesting that some (?ex) mint workers turned their hand to counterfeiting.

If it wasn't for the fact that that issue (fourth) was in decent silver I'd say it has the look of a 'base' issue coin.

I've attached what I hope is a clearer close-up of the date, in which the last digit to the naked eye looks like a flat-topped 8. I should also have mentioned its size -- it's 30 mm diameter, which AFAIK makes it more shilling-sized than sixpence-sized. It's also the same size more or less as yet another fake shilling I have, of James I, which has a mark of value to eliminate all doubt. Unfortunately I don't have a genuine Elizabeth I shilling to compare it to!

[Rob 3,001]

The flat topped 8 is normal for this reign. The diameter is a little on the large side, but there is in any case a degree of variation in this value. The 6d in the current Spink is 25mm diameter, but I have a woolpack 6d which is 27mm+ and just about has the outer circle on the diameter. The shillings go from 30ish to 34 or 35mm diameter, but the key is the diameter assuming you can see the outer circle fully. The obverse mark has stops either side which is noted in BCW as frequent for 1578. The mark is correct for the date. James I shillings are on the whole found slightly smaller in diameter than Elizabeth's with the outer circle not present even when full weight. The silver looks grotty, so it isn't easy to check the bust and other details, but it appears to have the correct shaped cross ends and bust from what I can see.

What is the weight?

[FosseWay 0]

The flat topped 8 is normal for this reign. The diameter is a little on the large side, but there is in any case a degree of variation in this value. The 6d in the current Spink is 25mm diameter, but I have a woolpack 6d which is 27mm+ and just about has the outer circle on the diameter. The shillings go from 30ish to 34 or 35mm diameter, but the key is the diameter assuming you can see the outer circle fully. The obverse mark has stops either side which is noted in BCW as frequent for 1578. The mark is correct for the date. James I shillings are on the whole found slightly smaller in diameter than Elizabeth's with the outer circle not present even when full weight. The silver looks grotty, so it isn't easy to check the bust and other details, but it appears to have the correct shaped cross ends and bust from what I can see.

What is the weight?

Interesting about the size. I'd presumed it was a shilling as it's considerably bigger than any of the Elizabeth 6ds I've got, both genuine and potentially fake. But it's true that the coin I've scanned above is on a reasonably complete flan while some of the definite 6ds have bits missing round the edge. To avoid comparison with clipped coins, I've measured the diameter of the inner circle: on this coin, it's 21.5 mm, while on the supposedly fake 1593 6d it's 18 mm and on a definitely genuine 1565 6d, 17 mm. I realise these are all different issues, but would the 6d die vary so much in its design dimensions, rather than the dimensions of the flan?

Weight -- unfortunately I have nothing accurate enough to weigh it.

I'm far from convinced about the metal though. It's very friable and brittle (that crack across the middle could split at any time), and it's a brighter, yellower colour than the usual silver grey of 400+-year-old silver in not very good condition. It also makes a completely different noise when tapped.

[Rob 3,001]

The flat topped 8 is normal for this reign. The diameter is a little on the large side, but there is in any case a degree of variation in this value. The 6d in the current Spink is 25mm diameter, but I have a woolpack 6d which is 27mm+ and just about has the outer circle on the diameter. The shillings go from 30ish to 34 or 35mm diameter, but the key is the diameter assuming you can see the outer circle fully. The obverse mark has stops either side which is noted in BCW as frequent for 1578. The mark is correct for the date. James I shillings are on the whole found slightly smaller in diameter than Elizabeth's with the outer circle not present even when full weight. The silver looks grotty, so it isn't easy to check the bust and other details, but it appears to have the correct shaped cross ends and bust from what I can see.

What is the weight?

Interesting about the size. I'd presumed it was a shilling as it's considerably bigger than any of the Elizabeth 6ds I've got, both genuine and potentially fake. But it's true that the coin I've scanned above is on a reasonably complete flan while some of the definite 6ds have bits missing round the edge. To avoid comparison with clipped coins, I've measured the diameter of the inner circle: on this coin, it's 21.5 mm, while on the supposedly fake 1593 6d it's 18 mm and on a definitely genuine 1565 6d, 17 mm. I realise these are all different issues, but would the 6d die vary so much in its design dimensions, rather than the dimensions of the flan?

Weight -- unfortunately I have nothing accurate enough to weigh it.

I'm far from convinced about the metal though. It's very friable and brittle (that crack across the middle could split at any time), and it's a brighter, yellower colour than the usual silver grey of 400+-year-old silver in not very good condition. It also makes a completely different noise when tapped.

21.5mm is the correct inner circle diameter for a shilling, so let's assume for the moment it is supposed to be a shilling even thought the reverse says it is a 6d. You can get an approximate idea of weight if you have a ruler handy. Balance it on a sharp edge and place your known good 6d at a finite distance from the balance point. Place this piece so that it balances again and measure the distance from the centre point. If both are the same weight they should be equidistant from the fulcrum. It is unlikely that they will be exactly the same weight, but with a shilling weighing twice that of a sixpence nominally, you should be able to see if the piece in question balances the 6d at about half the distance from the fulcrum. A foot ruler with the 6d on one end should balance a shilling at about 3" if close to full weight. Actual distances can be used to give a rough idea of the true weight. The weight of a coin determined its intrinsic value in this period and not its physical size.

The crack means it would give a different ring to a coin in good metal, so this isn't helpful. A yellowish colour would suggest it is a forgery, probably made from brass, but it would not be logical to produce forgeries of a lower denomination (designated by the rose in the obverse field) on a flan for a larger denomination which in any case wasn't produced for the date in question.

[FosseWay 0]

21.5mm is the correct inner circle diameter for a shilling, so let's assume for the moment it is supposed to be a shilling even thought the reverse says it is a 6d. You can get an approximate idea of weight if you have a ruler handy. Balance it on a sharp edge and place your known good 6d at a finite distance from the balance point. Place this piece so that it balances again and measure the distance from the centre point. If both are the same weight they should be equidistant from the fulcrum. It is unlikely that they will be exactly the same weight, but with a shilling weighing twice that of a sixpence nominally, you should be able to see if the piece in question balances the 6d at about half the distance from the fulcrum. A foot ruler with the 6d on one end should balance a shilling at about 3" if close to full weight. Actual distances can be used to give a rough idea of the true weight. The weight of a coin determined its intrinsic value in this period and not its physical size.

The crack means it would give a different ring to a coin in good metal, so this isn't helpful. A yellowish colour would suggest it is a forgery, probably made from brass, but it would not be logical to produce forgeries of a lower denomination (designated by the rose in the obverse field) on a flan for a larger denomination which in any case wasn't produced for the date in question.

I tried the ruler test -- thanks for that idea. The putative shilling comes out at notably heavier than the genuine sixpence, but not quite twice the weight (2 and a bit inches rather than 3).

[pies 33]

just bumping to read tomorrow

[copper123 1,352]

The funny thing is that people actually think that scottish / northern irish notes are legal tender in the uk.

Legally you are not bound to accept them just because they say "pounds sterling" on them.

Only uk notes are legal tender in the england and wales and if you get someone to accept your "foreign" notes they are actually doing you a favor.

Personally I don't like them at all but will accept up to £100 in these notes .

The reason? pure and simple , I don't handle them that often and cannot spot a forgery that easy

Edited July 11, 2012 by copper123

[copper123 1,352]

By the way If you really want loads of forged pound coins just get in touch with me i could sell you 40 a week .

i would charge £1 each , i suspect 5% of all pound coins are fake these days

[copper123 1,352]

By the way If you really want loads of forged pound coins just get in touch with me i could sell you 40 a week .

i would charge £1 each , i suspect 5% of all pound coins are fake these days

[Peckris 579]

The funny thing is that people actually think that scottish / northern irish notes are legal tender in the uk.

Legally you are not bound to accept them just because they say "pounds sterling" on them.

Only uk notes are legal tender in the england and wales and if you get someone to accept your "foreign" notes they are actually doing you a favor.

Personally I don't like them at all but will accept up to £100 in these notes .

The reason? pure and simple , I don't handle them that often and cannot spot a forgery that easy

Last time I looked Scotland were in the UK. I know the Scots would rather it were different, but there you are.

[copper123 1,352]

The funny thing is that people actually think that scottish / northern irish notes are legal tender in the uk.

Legally you are not bound to accept them just because they say "pounds sterling" on them.

Only uk notes are legal tender in the england and wales and if you get someone to accept your "foreign" notes they are actually doing you a favor.

Personally I don't like them at all but will accept up to £100 in these notes .

The reason? pure and simple , I don't handle them that often and cannot spot a forgery that easy

Last time I looked Scotland were in the UK. I know the Scots would rather it were different, but there you are.

[1949threepence 3,366]

By the way If you really want loads of forged pound coins just get in touch with me i could sell you 40 a week .

i would charge £1 each , i suspect 5% of all pound coins are fake these days

I'm going to start keeping a record of how many £1.00 coins I end the day with, and every time I get a fake £1 coin, make a note of it. That way, I might be able to reasonably approximate the types and percentages of fakes in circulation after a couple of years or so.

[copper123 1,352]

This might be worthwhile yes - it should give you a good idea after six months of notes.

Remember however you are far more likely to get forgeries in certain places than others - ie pubs , betting shops and the local corner shop , also taxi drivers tend not to check their pounds as well.

[azda 973]

The funny thing is that people actually think that scottish / northern irish notes are legal tender in the uk.

Legally you are not bound to accept them just because they say "pounds sterling" on them.

Only uk notes are legal tender in the england and wales and if you get someone to accept your "foreign" notes they are actually doing you a favor.

Personally I don't like them at all but will accept up to £100 in these notes .

The reason? pure and simple , I don't handle them that often and cannot spot a forgery that easy

Last time I looked Scotland were in the UK. I know the Scots would rather it were different, but there you are.

Yes scotland is actually in the UK and when i lived in England and went back with scottish notes they refused them which i find is akin to racism. Our notes are legal tender in the UK. There's places in London that accept €s yet not their own currency, its discrimination pure and simple. English pound coins are faked to death yet they'll still accept them, so why not scottish notes.????

[TomGoodheart 373]

Our notes are legal tender in the UK. There's places in London that accept €s yet not their own currency, its discrimination pure and simple. English pound coins are faked to death yet they'll still accept them, so why not scottish notes.????

Actually, no. They aren't. In fact, they have never officially been made legal tender in Scotland! However they are accepted as promisory notes, other words, traders are entitled (and do) to accept them if they wish. In the same way they accept euros, dollars, cheques and plastic cards, none of which are actual legal tender.

The only legal notes anywhere in the UK are those issued by the Bank of England. Consequently, the further south you go, the less likely people are to accept your Scots notes. An odd situation, but there you go. In fact, because of the law, only BoE £1 notes were legal tender in Scotland. With the withdrawal of notes for pound coins there is now no paper legal tender there at all!

All a bit splitting hairs, I know, but interesting all the same I think!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_pound_sterling

Edited July 16, 2012 by TomGoodheart