Sylvester

Without a doubt.

I agree with what you all said. In particular i agree with Tom. There was a time back in the days of me being a milled collector when i did place an emphasis on grade. When i say emphasis i don't mean that grade was the 'be and end all' of the coin for me, far from it, but grade did matter. Lets face it when you're staring at a group of 1920s sixpences or shillings you might as well get the BU rather than the VF if you could afford it. Although the more i think about it the more i wonder if even back then it was really about 'grade', i think grade was actually only the superficial exuse for what i was really buying on. I would by nice lustrous BU sixers because they looked nicer than the dull grey worn VF things sat next to them. Although it took me until hammered to realise that really to me grade for grade's sake didn't mean a great deal! I have to say even now i still like high grade hammered coins, but the sellers i deal with most often usually stick all their hammered coins in trays ungraded. I've found the grade is almost never stated (they expect you to know yourself). So often i'm buying higher grade coins (without generally taking much explicit notice of what grade the coin is, lets face it i'm too idle to grade), i generally buy coins where the detail is sharp, well struck, and it a nice tone. Basically i now collect by eye appeal. Which is what i've been doing all along really, but these days i rarely bother grading my purchases. With ancients and hammereds the grade can vary greatly from person to person, so i figured there wasn't much point.

I say no. I simply don't like slabs, the last thing i want to have to do is have to go through the process of having to crack every purchase out. Trust me i've had to crack two out in the past and it's a process that requires a g-clamp, a cloth and alot of patience. Especially when the coin is a 1786 Austrian ducat. Talk about being under pressure. I definately wouldn't want to have to crack out something like an Henry I penny, a series that is notorious for coins cracking in the post.

* Are you referring to population reports here? If so it's probably worth while me pointing out one small often overlooked point by even more experience collectors. In the US coins are slabbed and given population reports (i.e 12 grade as this 3 higher), however, they quickly become very unaccurate, firstly because coins submitted after that might be the same type and add a few more to the population report. However, simultaneously many coins are cracked out and resubmitted regularly! So How many have been added to that 12 since it was graded and how many lost from that 12 due to resubmissions. Which to me makes the whole pop. report a pretty useless measure. It's simply put there by slabbing companies as a selling gimmick.. kind of "look how rare this is!". ** Another small point which you'll no doubt encounter as you become more experienced, and it's worth holding in mind, "higher grade doesn't always mean better or nicer". Sometimes a coin in EF can look way better than another one in a higher grade. Be it differences in strike, tone, or whatever. Some coins simply have more eye appeal than others, and eye appeal has nothing to do with grading. Let no one try and convince you otherwise. It's an important point that's often overlooked. You will no doubt here colectors and dealers saying that AU58s often look far nicer than MS60s. MS60 might have the higher state of preservation but AU58 whilst a lower grade can often turn out nicer looking specimens.

Yep this forum is the mahogany cabinet fraternity.

Christianity has done some good in society. It's left some stunning architecture, nice paintings, some beautiful manuscripts and alot of entertaining history... beyond that though i'm going to keep my gob shut.

Slab/ornot varies from collector to collector. It all comes down to 'how they collect', 'what they collect' and 'why they collect'. Take for example these two coins; 1) Proof 1969 Kennedy half in MS67 Versus 2) A circulated Denarius of Trajan dating to the 2nd century CE. One has value in grade and condition which, if not encapsulated somehow (be it slab or airtite) many be prone to knocks or damage. The other has more value in history and archaeology than in grade. Big difference. As for my own personal preference i disagree with slabbing not so much on the fact that the coin is encapsulated (true i physically have to handle my coins to get any pleasure out of them), but more on the fact that emphasis is placed upon grade. There's more to coins than grade and i believe slabbing is making many collectors miss the bigger picture of the whole joy of numismatics, of which grade is only part. Secondly slabs infer "objective" grading, indeed this is misleading there is not such thing as 'objective' grading, all grading is in the eye of the beholder and thus 'subjective'. What i think is pretty might make Oli choke on his laurels.

Yes Aidan we are aware of the many different types of spam on this forum. Oh and hi JMD nice to see you around again!

Ah the perpetual 'to slab' or 'not to slab' debate... that goes around.

Hey i missed it! I'm quite a fan of James II, i dunno why but i always have this uncanny habit of backing the Catholic side of an argument. I had no idea Aidan was a bible person, if he doesn't like homosexuals, then what's his take on pagans? Hmm i read recently that it was actually 616 that was the number of the beast. Now 13 is a good number! I love 13.

That's different that's accent/dialect. I think regional diversity and accents should be promoted. So it doeasn't bother me when i hear someone speaking like that. Nor would it bother me so much if they spelt like that either. I think the standardisation of the language in the late 18th century was a very bad move. Spoken discourse changes with each generation, it always has (and every previous generation frowns at it!).* The written discourse prior to standardisation wasn't far behind with the adaptation. When you standardise you're in danger of doing a Latin. That said English isn't bad in that respect. The French well they are their own worst enemies. The crux for me is not whether it's 'proper grammar', but rather is it understandable? If it's understandable then has it not served it's purpose? I knew what you meant though. *In the 1967 there was a big uproar about the degradation of the English Language. The catalyst was, wait for it... Star Trek. William Shatner's uttering at the beginning; "to boldly go where no one has gone before" didn't go down too well. Back then it was a sin to split the infinitive. Today no one thinks twice about it. Fings change t'otherwise we'd be using the medial 's', þ, ð and à still, to say nothing of connexion and shewn.

I'm not arguing against that Rob, i think it has it's uses as far as that goes. Why i said it was pointless is because universities just don't recognise it like they do other A-Levels. It all depends why you do A-Levels, if you are doing them for their own sake and you don't intend to go further (and what with the new University fees i can see this becoming more popular), then general studies is fine. If you do A0Levels as a passport to university, like i did, then general studies is almost on a level with key skills. Do it for fun (or torture where key skills is concerned), but don't expect it to go anywhere.

Ah General Studies well... that figures! Every year people complain about how pointless that subject is, most universities don't take it as a qualification either. Yes critical thinking, rather you than me, i went to an open day on that and came out totally baffled. Not my strongpoint at all.

I agree five is too much, but for Geoff's example i'd be willing to pay it. It's the perfect example of everything being wrong. Other than that i don't actually intend to buy (or attempt to depending upon his answer) any more fakes, as i'm gonna harvest them from change.

Congrats Oli! 6 AS Levels? Jeeze... that's alot of AS levels. Back in my day we did four. Although actually my day and yourday is still the same, because i was in the first year to take these new A-Levels. Experimental batch you might say. I didn't find them particularly easy, regardless of what people say about exams dumbing down 6 AS must have been tough timewise! How many are you taking through to A2? Four i presume?

In that case you'd love mine. It's dated 1995, but the reverse, instead of the Welsh dragon, has the Scottish thistle, and the edge inscription is the English "Decus et Tutamen". Or least that's what they were attempting, because what it says, in crude and uneven letters, is "DECUS EE L TUTAMEN". On top of these blunders, the reverse is totally out of alignment with the obverse and both sides have a dent in the centre where the surface metal has worn away to show the (lead based?) alloy underneath. A real beaut! Geoff

Actually i thought there were alot less fakes in circulation than there used to be. 2001-2 was the period when fakes were here, there and everywhere. As it stands i'm actually putting together a date set of fake £1 coins, currently i have 2004, 2002, 1994 and 1988. I haven't seen any others in a few months though. The 1988 one came as a surprise, i thought that was the only design to have escaped it as of yet! Unfortunately they are all 'correct' forgeries, i haven't seen any wrong reverse for year, or wrong edge inscription for design ones in some time. I've still yet to find one with all three wrong, but one day perhaps!

Kuhli you're da man! I never thought of looking there! Thanks.

Okay chaps we all know that the small 10p coins debuted in 1992. The question that i can't seem to find an answer for though is what month did they arrive? Presumably some time between April and September? Anyone know?

Flemish coins would come as no surprise to me from this period. Bearing in mind the English wool trade was the staple export commerce of England during the period and the place we usually dealt with was Antwerp. France wouldn't come as much of a surprise either because the mid-fifteenth century was the back end of the Hundred Years war, and we still held Calais (until 1558), and thus French coinage would enevitably find it's way in. Spanish coinage surprises me a little. Where did you find it Mark? (Near a port/sea town?) Which is what i'd expect. Or somewhere on a trade route. Obviously if you say somewhere landlocked like i dunno Leicester i'd be even more surprised.

I'm cringing at that thought. I've never tried to grade one of those yet. I dunno if i dare. With hammered i gave up with grading. I figured it's alot simpler to buy on eye appeal. That takes me straight back to a Queen Anne Shilling, MS63... never believe everything you read on the packet. The coin was a bog standard EF. (Which in the slack US grading should be AU/MS60)

You hit the nail on the head there. What really irks me is two things; 1) Know it all collectors that can distinguish between NT (Natural toning) and AT (Artificial toning). The question is, the difference is very shady indeed. Point in case, a coin that was in a collection say 80 years ago was stored in a sulphur envelope. It has developed colourful toning, this would be regarded as natural. I can see why, it was not intended. But yet modern day collectors purposely putting coins into these envelopes now to get the desired effect and it's still considered natural! I would say that's Artificial because they know what the results will be if they store them in Sulphur containing envelopes and they're doing it on purpose. It doesn't matter how long it takes! In my mind it's the 'motive' of doing something, toning to increase value/eye appeal, that is the benchmark between NT and AT, not 'length of time taken' as everyone else seems to measure it by, which frankly is ludicrous. How anyone can tell the difference between AT and NT is therefore a mystery to me. It would have to have a provence of over 50 years in that toned condition before i would class it as natural. Still makes it ugly in my opinion though. 2) The thing that really annoys the hell out of me is the hypocrisy of it all. There seems to be an implicit understanding that 'toning' a coin or putting it somewhere where it will tone 'naturally' like in a high sulphur envelope in a warm attic for ten years is instantly preferable and completely 'natural' and yet different from 'cleaning' a coin which people should be shot for. Unless of course they are only dipping it to remove unwanted unattractive tones and dirt which is undesirable and is affecting the eye appeal, so they can then retone it to more current tastes. And yet these people are the same people that often bash newbies for cleaning coins saying "coins should never be altered! Originality is paramount!" Now this seems like a very flawed ideology to me, is that not Orwellian doublethink in action there? It's against something (cleaning/AT), for something similar (dipping/'NT') and yet not standing for either at the same time (retaining originality at all costs). And they wonder why i have a problem with it, there's just no logic in it. And they say i'm mad!

Yep i was 19, that was a while back. There are alot of coin folks birthday around this time indeed, i had noticed that. May-August seems to be the buzz period. Anyhow thanks guys i had a lovely day down in Winchester, i've been meaning to pay it a visit for several years, finally i got the chance. The cathedral's particularly interesting, a bit weird though being stood in the same building where the physical remains of kings; Egbert, Ethelwulf, Eadmund, Eadred, Edwy, Canute, Harthacnut and William II are! Not to mention Emma of Normandy, and former Bishops of Winchester; Stephen Gardiner (who married Mary Tudor and Phillip II of Spain, incidentally in the same building), Richard Fox (who worked for Henry's VII/VIII) and of course my old favourite Henry of Blois. Word has it that Jane Austin is lurking there too but i missed that one. Although Alfred the Great was buried there he went missing. So yeah it was a weird day packed full of actually 'meeting', or rather sharing the same building space as a whole ton of dead people i've spent years reading about and studying.

Thanks Coppers! Just to treat myself i'm off on a day trip to the deep south of England, so whether i'll be back on before tomorrow who knows?

I was speaking generically there, i didn't mean every single American collector. I knew a few who don't care for it. Conversly i know some British collectors that like it.