TomGoodheart

Does anyone else think these bidders look suspicious? lindah4786 burdale2 lucky anglo1948 to be so popular.....

Post script: Got out my big lens and decided it's not good enough for a proof - just a nice coin that's now been used as change. I am however still interested in if anyone else thinks there has been a recent influx of counterfeit quids into circulation?

Two questions, as this isn't quite my area! First - on proof coins people talk of 'mirror' like fields. Does this mean the field is flat? I have just been given a 1997 £1 coin with very shiny fields. However when I hold up the coin the reflection is distorted. The coin has been circulated and I'm just curious if it might be an escaped proof or just a specimen coin someone had liberated from its packaging? Sadly my scanner just can't show shine accurately! Second - I have just received my third counterfeit £1 in the same number of weeks. The E of ET is botched and the S of DECUS smaller than the rest of the lettering. The cross is off centre. Plus it's heavier than it should be. Anyone else find there seem to be more of the things around than there used to be?

Must have been good - no longer available for sale, so maybe someone bought it Hope it wasn't 50pjoe!!!

The coin is an example of the first milled (machine made) coins. The dies were made at the Scottish mint, under the direction of Sir John Falconer (the son-in-law of Nicholas Briot) athough the actual punches were made in London by Thomas Simon. Normally the coins were made so that when rotated the reverse is upside down with respect to the front. Some slipped out of this alignment and these 'unusual' die axes are worth a little more than regular coins. An interesting piece of numismatic history!

Charles I shilling

Thanks Rob - it does indeed look like the C has been restruck over an inverted R. Interestingly the R looks clear. I knew about coins with both the C and R inverted (and saw one a while ago but at a ridiculous price!) but this is a new one to me! Did you see on ebay recently a coin that looked as if the C and R were missing altogether? I did email the seller but I never got the better pics I requested and then was away on holiday so don't know for sure... One more to look out for perhaps?

Not sure about mule - in that condition it's more like a horse's a*se!

Ah! Well I did really mean Chas shillings, but as you know Geordie, I will occasionally have a go at other areas. I'll certainly be interested to hear any opinions on your coin as and when - it certainly beat me!!

No - I hadn't heard of that one Rob, so thanks. I shall add it to my records! In the meantime I am pleased to have tracked down another rarity. When Michael Sharp's paper was published he only listed the first of the 'Aberystwyth' style busts, privy mark Tun (and the only one of the series with a double arched crown) with a small mark of value. In 1990 an unusual coin with this bust but bearing the Anchor pm and a large mark of value came to light (there's an example in my bit of the Gallery section). I also heard of a coin with the 'original' Tun mark and the large mark of value, but had never seen one until now. I am however now pleased to be able to add a picture of a second example of this Tun coin that has come my way. Well clipped and a bit knackered but recognisable nevertheless! Quite why they were produced I doubt we'll ever know, but it keeps collectors like me on our toes! Of course if anyone else finds, or has coins like these, I will be most pleased to hear from them!

I'm sure he means the glider (!)

Predecimal.com, for coin identification, accessories and matchmaking! Hmm - could catch on! And now I'm going to bite my tongue before I get into real trouble with the other half!!!

Hi Anthony. Your coin is not a 1/2d - they feature a seated Britannia on the reverse. Besides the coin looks silver. If you think it's a halfpenny I'd guess a shilling, they are similar size. Both Shillings and Half-Crowns are silver. Half-Crowns measure 33mm diameter and weigh 14.9-15.1g - a bit under the weight of a £2 coin. Shillings 25-26mm and 5.7 to 6g - a bit under the weight of a 10p piece. Hope that helps.

Hi Adam. Not sure if you're asking for more information, values or what to do with these coins... Info - I don't know of a particular website but if you do a Google image search for 'commemorative crown' or 'Isle of Man crown' something will come up which will give you more info. Value - At a glance I'm afraid none of these coins is of great value. You have to remember commemoratives are produced in huge numbers and generally don't circulate so lots of people have them in pretty much mint condition. You'd possibly get a couple of quid for the crowns on ebay but dealers would give much less since they have overheads and you don't get much profit on selling a coin for £2. The Jersey coins and older US - value will depend heavily on condition. Again, no obvious money spinners I'm afraid. What to do? - I imagine most collectors, including myself, have a drawer somewhere with examples of such coins left over from their early days of the hobby. I keep them until I find someone who might appreciate one, occasionally ebay a nicer example for a quid or two when I'm bored, or show them to my daughter when she complains about how little pocket money she gets (Look! 25p used to be a lot of money in my day! Works every time - not!)

16 eh! I guess that entitles you to do some things legally now!! Of course, I'm too old to remember quite what but I think they include drinking alcohol and piloting a glider...... though not necessarily at the same time ! Happy Birthday!!! Doh! Bad enough double posting but double 'topic ing' .. It must be getting late!

Counterfeits quite often feel different. If you rub one between thumb and finger they seem slick by comparison with the genuine article - some people describe it as 'soapy'. Poor edge graining is also common. I have read an estimate that 1% of £1 coins are counterfeit. I'm not sure if there's an easy test - I know nickel is slightly magnetic but when I tried this with a counterfeit £1 coin which I know is made of lead, it too is magnetic - presumably they just mixed some iron filings in the metal before casting. No doubt there's a way of distinguishing brass (from which most counterfeit coins are made) and CuNi, but I can't remember enough chemistry to come up with a test you can do at home!!

The gold standard was partially restored in 1925 and the Bank was again obliged to exchange its notes for gold, but only in multiples of 400 ounces or more. Britain finally left the gold standard in 1931 and the note issue became entirely fiduciary, that is wholly backed by securities instead of gold

I do find the degree of interest in this topic very reassuring! Like, I supect, most of you I prefer my coins to look 'natural'. Collecting hammered as I do, that generally means either shiny bright, since it has been recovered from the ground and had to be cleaned, or 'tarnished' through age, as silver will do if left exposed to the air. In some cases this tarnishing is really quite attractive. In other cases it's kinda dull. As to the cleaned coins - given the choice, I'd rather not have those bright shiny faces gleaming at me from the tray! I can't say I haven't been tempted to speed up the natural process of time and dull them down. I admit, the logical thing is to say, ok - if you don't like the look of a coin, don't buy. With 'modern' coins one may have the choice to pass on a particular specimen and buy a 'nicer' one later. Unfortunately with some hammered this isn't an option. Pass up a coin and you may never see another! There is however, in my view at least, a difference between keeping a coin in an old manilla envelope in the hope that it will dull down a bit and creating a quite frankly 'cosmetic' look. Maybe I'm wrong? Apart from the artificiality of it all, there is another point. Now I may be wrong but I gathered that the US system is geared to giving the highest relative value to coins that most closely match the condition that they would have had at the point of striking (or at least, leaving the mint). I cannot see how such 'rainbow' specimens could possibly meet this criteria. They strike me as a fad, rather like enamelling coins. Unfortunately I worry that, like many things American, the trend may yet get a foothold over here. But I hope not!

YeeeuK! "Never seen like this" says the listing - and a good job too I think! Violet purple and blue - like a bruise and definitely artificial! I know there are some people out there who like such extreme 'toning' but I kinda wish they'd keep it to themselves!

Now that's one I haven't seen before Rob! Most 'abbreviations' tend to cut three letters down to two - very curious and on a fairly scarce coin. Thanks for that! I did have a later 'Aberystwyth' style coin (an F3/1 rather than an F1/1) which read RX instead of REX which I sold on. I guess die sinkers have off days like anyone else! Hmm - I'm sure there must be a way to thumbnail a pic but.....

I am aware that most Members here collect milled coinage and those that do dabble in hammered don't specialise to the extent that I do. I therefore thought it might be nice to spread the knowledge a bit. On the other hand, I don't want to clog up the forum with a topic that few people will find of use. While this may be restating the obvious, I have therefore decided that if anyone is interested in discussing Charles I shillings I am quite happy for you to PM or email me. If you have, or know of, a variety or type that is unpublished (by which I generally mean that doesn't appear in the Brooker Collection record (SCBI 33) or in Michael Sharp's BNJ article of 1978) I would be most interested to hear about it! If on the other hand you are curious about coins that have come to light in recent years or have something you can't identify, I'll do my best to answer any questions. If anyone disagrees and wants this topic to receive a wider airing on the forum I guess Sylvester or Chris will have to decide on which Forum/Thread is most appropriate.

I've never heard of courses in grading. But then it isn't a precise science. Even grading services have been known to 'revise' grades when the same coin is resubmitted. I'm afraid there's nothing like experience! I have been surprised at times even here, on this forum, at members' grading views - and I tend to think we have a very erudite bunch indeed! But then, the coins I've been surprised at aren't the ones I specialise in and consequently have less experience of that area! The bottom line is that you can (I think) only accurately grade a coin when you know what the very best existing example is like. With modern and milled, you have other great coins as a sort of benchmark. The earlier milled and hammered; that gets more difficult. Hammered is especially difficult. Particulalrly where the flan is not of even thickness. The lettering is therefore as crisp as you please (almost that so-sharp-you-could-cut-yourself 'proof' quality) but the bust - which is generally most people's focus - is so weak it looks worn. Ultimately I think learning to grade is one of the things that we all have to learn along with our subject area. ps - don't knock MK bob - that's my neck of the woods too!

If you bought it you'd just have to replace the current saddle wouldn't you???!

I think I'll list this beauty! You can really see the details don't you think! AND it's extremely rare (in this condition)!!

Looks good Chris but... any chance of a quick look at the index? Thanks, Richard