Sylvester

DEI GRA [DEI GRATIA] = By the Grace of God BRITT OMN [bRITTANIARUM OMNIS]= Of all the British (possesions) REX = King (as you said) FID DEF [FIDEI DEFENSOR] = Defender of the faith IND IMP [iNDIAE (Spelling?), IMPERATOR] = Emperor of India So basically translates as; George V by the grace of God, King of all the British possesions, defender of the faith and Emperor of India. Hope this helps Sylvester.

I do think that the Churchill Crown is ugly, but i do have another contender/s... The last ornamental shield guineas of George III 1774-1786 with the obverse by Thomas Pingo, that obverse is naff! (So to speak), The Spade reverse of 1787-1799 is also somewhat unappealing, very flat, very basic...very 'drawn with a pair of compasses and a ruler' (Coincraft's opinion of the coin), i agree. Sylvester.

Greek i thought, not a 100% sure on that though. Sylvester.

I think they'd just Latinicise them anyhow... Darren - Darius Colin - Colinus Nigel - Nigelus (actually sounds pretty Roman that one) Kevin - Kevinius/Kevius/Kevus As for Wayne well that could prove interesting! Waynius? Wayno? I'll stop now :-) Sylvestius

I can't wait to see what happens regarding William... Gulielmus V (The amount of people on Ebay who think that means George is amazing!) Sylvester.

What i really want to know regarding the coinage is will Charles' coins call him Charles III or the proper version Carolus III?

Oh yes...i'm glad it's not just me. I really struggle to grade these coins, with the obverse of nearly every Edward VII coin that i've graded coming out as a FINE, even when the coin is much better. The reverses are somewhat better, but i always find it annoying how on the Florins the last digit of the date, (the important one!) is always the first to go...so is that 1906? 1905?, 1903? or perhaps 1908? The other coins that i find hard to grade are the George V obverses, especially the early ones, and the 1953 first issue of Queen Elizabeth II where the striking is somewhat flat and it caused a great deal of trouble at the mint so much so that in 1954 the obverse dies had to be recut to gain the sharper strike of the latter issues. I also find the fourth portrait of QE2 used from 1998 onwards somewhat challenging due to the low relief. Sylvester.

Keeping them like i did with all those George VI Florins in 1993! You ask whether they'd be worth anything in the lower grades, well possibly not due to the fact that modern mintage figures are so high and there are alot of uncirculated and proof years sets out there. Here is something to get you thinking though, coins such as the dreaded Churchill Crown (which is one of the few coins that actually looks much better as the condition gets worse!) could actually be pretty rare in bottom condition as the majority of them would be in average condition and upwards as they were not intended for circulation. I doubt very much whether anyone would pay extra money for a lower graded specimen but i bet it would make an original approach to collecting, e.g attempting to get a full set of crowns from 1951-1981 (the cupronickel ones) in the worst possible conditions would be a real challenge! Sylvester.

Another comment i feel i really must add... I'm glad that you picked up on the age doesn't = price issue, although many non collectors often believe that the older the coin is the more valuable it is, this is simply not the case, a good example of this is a Roman coin from centuries ago can sell for a few pounds, whereas a 1953 sovereign for example sells for thousands of pounds, the short answer is supply and demand, as mentioned in the previous post. Another thing, and the thing i wanted to add is the grade of the coin determines the price, this is why there is soooo much emphasis on learning how to grade properly, the better preserved the coin is the more money it will sell for. And of course the number one rule, (this is almost like one of those rules from physics E=MC2 for instance), well in coin collecting the main rule is... *When you clean a coin, not only do you remove the dirt and history of the coin but also the value. Cleaning a coin is the equivalent of folding up a crisp white fiver, you add creases on a note thus devaluing it, well cleaning adds scratches on a coin devaluing it. Many beginners equate clean shiny bright coins to be worth more than 'dirty' or toned coins. What surprises most novices is that attractively toned coins often sell for a slight premium! Sylvester.

I'll answer this question...better late than never i suppose; This is a very difficult question to answer, because everyone likes different things, some like hammered coins, in which case i'd suggest starting on Edward I pennies. Others like Roman coins, many choose to start with milled coins. Because milled coins tend to be what the majority of people are most likely to come across then it is no surprise that this is the most common area for beginners to start in. The milled series is divided into 3 different areas for the most part, early milled 1662-1815, modern milled 1816-1970, and decimal 1968-present, since the latter is technically out of the scope of this group i'll leave it out. The early milled series is rather expensive and far more complex than the modern milled post 1816 coins. Most beginners start with the post 1816 stuff therefore, which i would recommend as a good place to start. Then comes the choice of gold, silver (cupronickel too) or copper/bronze coins. Gold coins being the most expensive of the three probably puts most people off on a limited budget. Copper/Bronze coins are a good place to start, farthings, halfpennies or pennies. I would suggest that the best approach would be to collect in stages, (be ambitious but don't go beyond your means or capabilities), for example a good place to start would be Elizabeth II farthings all EF+ condition, cheap to assemble a full set dated 1953-56 inclusive, the next step would then be to progress to George VI farthings, and as you gain more confidence and experience go further back to the more expensive coins. Silver Coins...which are my favourite, in short i'd say low grade Edward VII Florins, but shillings are always popular as are halfcrowns. The important thing is to start cheap and work your way up, every coin collector makes mistakes during the first few years of the hobby (and if you're anything like me, you still make mistakes after 10 years or more), remember the more expensive the coin, the more expensive the mistake's going to be, until you get used to such things as grading, how to spot a cleaned coin etc. Hope this helps. Sylvester. (Brass threepences are also a good place to start issued from 1937-1967 and a proof issue in 1970, most of which are easy to aquire in top grades...i attempted this myself but found myself distracted by other coins, the hardest lesson of all is realising you can't buy every coin and of course deciding what to specialise in!)

This is a bit of a long shot, but does anyone have access to any mintage figures for Early Milled coins (1662-1815) especially sixpences (also half guineas, especially James II ones) because i have been unable to find any at all. Most mintage figures that i have come across have been either for Elephant and Castle Guineas (unfortunately not much good to me because i don't collect them!), and post 1816 mintage figures, but i've shifted away from these coins over the last few years to the earlier stuff, so they aren't much good to me either. Any help (even mintage figures for any date from 1674-1787 not a comprehensive list of them all, would be a start) Thanks in advance Sylvester.

Just my department as it happens... regarding 1697 6ds without obverse stops, i must admit that i have not come across one. The very fact that you mention that it is a York mint issue though doesn't surprise me. The provincial mints often employed people who couldn't even spell the king's name in some cases. The 1696 issues can be found without obverse stops so it might be possible that the wrong obverse die was used (a 1696) obverse die, with a 1697 reverse die (since 1696 and some of 1697 share obverse 1, I would imagine that if the die was fairly new during the transition period from one date to another they'd just change the reverse die to the newer date). I've never come across this before but i should imagine there would be a slight premium over an issue with stops, as the 1696 issue without stops trades at a slightly higher level than those with. (Usually about £10 more for one without stops...as for the one you have who knows since it's unrecorded?). Hope this helps... Sylvester.