Rob

Can of worms here. Pictures can be purchased, however the cost will probably put you off. When I wanted images of their Weyl patterns in 2009 I was offered a picture of each side at £50 a pop. The collection holds 7 coins, so understandably I didn't bother spending £700 on a few images when those for the other 85 coins I had pictures of came for free. I offered to take the images and let them have a copy to save someone doing the job, but that wasn't acceptable as they were trying to raise money to do the job I offered to do for free. This all stemmed from the fact that I had acquired an 1860 Weyl penny in 'aluminium' at the Adams sale, but it weighed over 10g, which was 3 times too much. I was able to book an appointment to view their examples, but not just turn up on the day. They were a lot twitchy because I wanted to take my coin in for comparison with theirs. However, we negotiated a compromise, but someone was watching over at all times like a hawk. It really feels like the collection is saved from rather than for the public. Until a few years ago there were more coin images uploaded, but it appears that a lot of these have been removed. To summarise, the person responsible should should not have been. After Brady, I was trying to establish the pecking order for the remaining available Ed. VI profile groats. A quick perusal of the museum collection informed me that they had a couple hundred Ed.VI groats - from a surviving population of a dozen or so. Somebody had listed all the Ed.IV facing bust groats as Ed.VI!! Anyway, to cap it off, when I did finally extract the few profile groats from the 10 pages or so of Ed.IV it also transpired that the accession details were screwed up too. They had managed to allocate the image for the Montagu coin to a later date. The Clarke-Thornhill bequest (1935) coin was given the Montagu accession details (1896). I pointed out that the 'Montagu' referenced coin was illustrated in the Huth catalogue (1927), so their online info was crap. I went through the images and gave them a list of what the provenances should read together with those listed as Ed.VI which were in fact Ed.IV, but no thanks were forthcoming. Nor were they willing to give me an image (even a scan) of their Oxford 1644 F-2 groat (the other known example to the one I have) as a thank you. On the plus side, the BM did at least answer my enquiry as to how many they had in their possession, unlike the 6 or 7 other museums that didn't even bother replying. They must hate the public. Good luck.

It could also be due to silver dip. I have seen fairly rapid toning build up on some dipped coins over a period of a few years, which I have assumed was due to residual chemical deposits on the surface. This is noteworthy because the TPGs don't seem to view dipping as cleaning, but there is no reason to assume that encapsulation would inhibit the reaction.

He could be innocent if he doesn't know his coins. Could have bought it from Saxbys, which would provide a match for the description and coin.

Not necesarily, it might reflect the significance/usefulness of his Johnson. Could be past its sell by date. At least the tat can be resold.

post mint

We've got an open border between Lancashire and Yorkshire.

And there was me wishing I had thought of that one.

The whole saga is rising to a crescendo of scaremongering again, or so it seems. There is much talk of the potential cost of leaving arising from our liabilities - maybe 20bn, or even 40. The point they don't make is that if these are liabilities, then it is money we will have to spend whether in or out. i.e we are b******d either way. It isn't money we would pay in and get back again, it is committed spending which we would lose in any case. Turkey might vote for Christmas, but turkies don't. Same as with the MPs in the commons complaining that they demand a vote on Brexit - we had one on June 23rd. If they missed it because they were too complacent or arrogant to take it seriously, that is not my fault. Unlike the politicians, the average man in the street took the debate very seriously, ignored the diarrhoeic diatribe emanating from the political parties and made his mind up 4 months ago.

At the risk of stating the obvious - if these are not any use to you, then why do you keep acquiring them?

Both? There are 4 catalogues and 3 vols of M&R

He had some coins in that sale and also in sales10/4/74 and 24/3/76, but the main collection was sold at Glens on 8/11/1978. The first ref was noted on a dealer's catalogue as being his. You need Manville and Robertson

More likely corrosion. Any sign of copper with a silver wash, as counterfeiting wasn't very normal in debased silver? And the weight? The 3a3 issue was not the best in terms of quality.

If anyone has a copy of Dowle and Finn's Irish book, please could they scan the pages for the Henry VIII posthumous issues of Ed.VI through to Philip and Mary and send them over. Thanks in advance.

Can't - the defining feature for KH5 is the rusted obverse die which is only known for this die pair. There isn't anything obvious on the reverse to differentiate from other varieties. Anyway, for lewd coin displays you need the nude Britannia reverse.

Not for the first time tact isn't my strongest point. Oops. My idea of stunning is by comparison with its peers.

Shouldn't be the same punch as the Soho punches remained there until they were sold off in the 1848 auction where Taylor acquired them. i.e, the 1825s would have to be restrikes to use the same punches as the mint was already using in house punches.

I'm not belittling anybody. As Azda said, it is a case of taking what is available, even if not perfect. I've even got a badly corroded aluminium specimen of one type because it's probably the only one in existence. The same went for a guy on the PCGS forum who took a P940 slabbed 61. normally he wouldn't look at it being a number chaser, but it is the only one he is likely to encounter. Again, it was another variety that hadn't appeared in a sale over the past half-century. I've never seen one other than that coin. Most patterns come up in really good grade at some point, so patience is the name of the game, but occasionally it is Hobson's Choice.

No it's not. It's probably the worst of the bunch as it has a large thumbprint on the obverse which is something that would normally be a reason for rejection, but given the last example I have recorded is in the Circular for September 1968 (CC4134) given as aEF and Mick Martin couldn't find any examples in the period from 1970 to 2008, buying was a no-brainer. Peck's own example went to Birmingham, and the BM has one (ex-Cuff 1854). That leaves only the Brice/Montagu coin as the other reference I have. Any of the aforementioned may be the same coin, but I can't be certain. The late Soho types KH3 onwards, say P1043 to 1048 are decidedly rare. I only have this one and the silver KH4 (not in Peck). I threw out the P1044 which I couldn't live with, but these aside I've not seen any examples of the others.

Somewhat ironically, it probably is a genuine rarity if the mintage figures of 100K or 200K for the real thing are to be believed. The Chinese will make them to order, and I suspect that levels have not yet reached the 100K mark.

Sorted then. I've only kept three. This sixpence plus the two shillings.

That'll see him quaking at the knees, not. Is anybody aware of an instance in which eBay actually backed up their rhetoric with action? Or is this just a malicious rumour spread about by their script writers?

Most people go for a year of birth collection at some point and seem to keep it irrespective of where they end up with the main collection.

It isn't rare. For that sort of money you would need to be looking at a French arms at date

That has to be shilled. It's a 200-300 coin with the scratch on the nose, or maybe that's the rare variety

At least you didn't try putting them in the meter