Peckris 2

It's a really interesting question, the general use of crowns. In the early milled period, few of the general population would have ever earned or saved enough to own a crown, so I'm guessing that - like guineas etc - they were used by aristocrats for gambling with, or by businessmen etc to settle bills at clothes/furniture/antiques/grocery shops etc. Once the population began to increase in the Industrial Revolution, there would have been a greater demand for copper and small silver but not crowns. The 1817-1820 issue was regarded as limited and special, though there was a brief period under GeoIV when they seem to have reappeared. Then they virtually disappear in the 19thC except for limited issues for Victoria, until 1887 when they reappear for nearly 15 years. Why? Was it the emergence of a suburban office-working middle class that could afford higher denominations? It has been suggested that even then they were of very limited popularity and after 1902 the Treasury stopped bothering with them altogether, as currency. Note that the mintage figures for halfcrowns in the period far exceeds those for crowns. They seem to have retained some measure of acceptance as commemoratives (which rarely circulated), until the early 1990s when the value was raised to £5 and they became a simple exercise in turning a profit for the Mint.

I'll let Chris know then. It's the same in Firefox and Chrome so there's definitely a bug. It was working fine up to a few days ago.

Here are a couple of screenshots anyway (this only shows 3 topics, but on a good day there could be a dozen so you can imagine the difference): I've had to create the Condensed view in Photoshop from the above, but it's pretty accurate I'd say:

Ok, every member of this forum is a coin collector. So here's a straw poll: Did anyone here ever see a wreath crown in their change at any time? My case is that there were only about 25,000 wreath crowns minted and the vast majority of those were 1927 which cost more than face value. So let's assume that a few kids raided their dad's collection, and knew what a crown was. They go down to their local shops and try to spend it. The shopkeeper takes one look, turns the thing over a few times, knows he has never seen one before and says "What's this then, son? Where did you get it?" or "On your bike, I'm not taking this", or something similar. I can say that I never saw ANY crown in change, not even a Churchill which were extremely common.

I'm talking about the Unread Content. There's two options there, Expanded and Condensed. Expanded shows the thread titles, the sub-titles, and the first line of the new post, taking up 5 or 6 lines. If there are - for example - 7 or 8 topics with new posts, that's a lot of scrolling down. Condensed gives you just the topic title and who posted, in a single line, so you can see more or less all Unread Content on one page, which is what I have always used. However, the Condensed button is borked, for me at any rate. Try it yourself and see if you see any difference between Ex'd and Cn'd. Let me know what you see. If you don't know what I'm talking about I'll have to use screenshots.

Any responses? Anyone seeing Condensed listings working since the day before yesterday?

I doubt it. I doubt wreath crowns circulated. There just weren't many of them, and most shops wouldn't have even known what they were. I think that some owners kept them - as you say - as pocket pieces, or rubbed them clean often. Their treatment would have been the same as 'circulated' but remaining with just one person.

Anyone else noticed this problem? I normally view Unread Content by Condensed listing, but starting today, it refuses to display that; everything is in Expanded form. Yes I can click Condensed, though it doesn't take effect, and next time it's reverted to Expanded.

Strange - my post has since disappeared. I simply said that The Mail has put the 1926ME and 1919KN pennies firmly in their place.

I go with the "genuine coins turn into fakes after 10 years" thesis. 😃

Sad news. Remember the Innes Book Of Records? 😥

No, quite right. VF+ = GVF. Intermediate grades - e.g. from F to VF - would be F / F+ or GF / NVF / AVF / VF. (N = nearly A = about). A wearing die versus a new die might be AEF / GEF. Where the obverse and reverse are different grades, they're given separately (obverse first) - e.g. VF/EF

Many would say EF - I just think parts of it are a little soft, but it could be a wearing die.

British coin grades are standard: UNC and BU EF VF F Fair or VG What varies is people's interpretations of grades. EF and VF aren’t as strict as they were 30 years ago (except as listed by Spink). F is more consistent though I've seen even reputable dealers use it for coins no better than Fair.

I agree, and thought that even before I saw your reply.

You've only posted the reverse, so this is qualified: it's slightly soft, so I'd rate it AEF with traces of lustre.

That may well be true. However, it's a fact that the changeover to bronze was delayed by the many difficulties the Mint encountered, so the 1860 output WAS rushed and may account for many of the strange features to be seen.

Hugh Grant was discovered getting a bl0w j0b in an LA taxi. He pleaded guilty to indecent behaviour in a public place, and asked for soixante-huit other offences to be taken into consideration.