Rob

In the earlier periods it was quite normal to make a composite digit or letter from a series of smaller punches. This could also lead to odd shapes. e.g. Go to the confirmed unlisted varieties section and look at the 1675/3/2 halfpenny. The 2 was normal, but the 3 & 5 were made up from odd curves.

Merry Christmas everyone

Let's approach this from a different direction. Given there is general acceptance that we will never be able to produce a volume that suits everyone, why not aim for a really basic volume on cheap loo-roll paper (as per Coincraft catalogues) that everyone and their dog can afford? I think that people are getting too hung up on varieties that are already too complex for many novices or would be collectors. Variety collecting is a bit like an Alice in Wonderland story where nothing is as it seems and requires a bit more than a quick look through a keyhole. A basic volume would cover every type with a life-size coin identifier, or at least a generic indicator for design and size. Milled coinage usually being done on reducing apparatus means that you can just show the basic designs with the diameters listed. All years would be included priced to the cheapest as per Spink now, with a note that varieties exist denoted by a mark of some form, the exact mark indicating which specialised reference contains the required information. Essentially it would be an overview of the contents of in-depth volumes of a given denomination or series. In reply to David's post above I can see the case for including the undated mule as it would be no different to a year change that is in regular currency and known to the public, but the 2p mule is not common knowledge to the public, nor are they encountered on a regular basis.

Yeh, right. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RARE-HENRY-VI-HAMMERED-SILVER-GROAT-/151193106712?pt=US_World_Coins&hash=item2333cfb918 Misdescribed in all departments.

Which is why we are back to the question of what to include or not. Essentially there will never be a volume to suit all, though there might be collectors who adjust to a specific volume. More likely is that everyone will have two or three preferred references. As you were chaps.

Looks like it.

A very merry Christmas to all. Father Christmas sent me an unsolicited bottle of Linkwood today by special delivery - top man! I may be a little incoherent tomorrow.

Thanks Nick, I obviously missed that one. No image though which doesn't help and partly explains why. It's unusual for a currency piece to be unique, so would have expected another to have surfaced in the interim given the numbers of coins typically produced from any one die - 30-50000 seems a reasonable minimum based on mintage figures known for Chas.II halfpennies, unless the die rapidly disintegrated? Survival rates are a bit of a stab in the dark, but given I've noted 7 examples of the 1738 V/S in GEORGIVS and 5 of the 1734/3, both of which are from a single die, I would have thought maybe up to a dozen ought to exist with at least one in VF or better.

One for Colin? http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1773-3773-NR-UK-Farthing-Certified-/171200145458?pt=US_World_Coins&hash=item27dc52e832

Rob isn't offended, merely commenting on the chances of it being a gold one. There are many different senses of humour on this forum. Correct

Do you win the lottery regularly?

No reason that I can think of unless it's a proof and it was sealed to protect the surfaces. From the images it doesn't look to be anything special. Alternatively, being the 1st year of issue, maybe he thought it might be worth something in the future.

I'm completely in the dark too.

Has anybody ever seen or heard of one? It's listed in Spink at about 2/3 the price of a 1734/3, which is acknowledged as rare. I have no records from catalogues, nor have I seen one. Does it exist?

I don't mind toning, and at £137 for a shilling in that grade because it was described as a sixpence I was quite happy. The shoulder armour gave it away. No video or photo. Sorry.

It's the area I've referred to in the past - the psychological limit for the masses. The limit of about £3K up to a few years ago which has increased to around the 5 or possibly 6K (hammer) mark now. It takes something rare or particularly exceptional to breach this level. Once it has however, it is a case of who blinks first.

Seeing as the other thread about mods has disappeared - here's Peck on his scooter.

The fifth coin looks like some of the silver I stored in pvc album pockets for nearly 40 years (not any more, I should add!), with a blue/green deposit caused by 'sweating'. It could just be the photos though. Accum, A quick dip in carbon Tet. will remove the green residue caused by polyvinyl sweating. Wear gloves though, it does not burn, but does absorb in the skin! If you can get hold of any. Wonderful solvent, but a no-no under H&S regs. It's fair to say that it's easier to list what it doesn't do.

Oh, the wonders of punctuation. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Metal-Detecting-Finds-Hammered-Gold-Coin-Very-Worn-Quarter-Angel-/380798888735?pt=UK_Antiquities&hash=item58a961eb1f The one thing that doesn't need the query is 'very worn'. Hammered gold coin? Maybe. Quarter Angel? Maybe.

For all the debate about toning and not, you do come up with some things from time to time that are genuine despite the initial disbelief. 6 or 7 years ago I acquired a 1731 shilling that was sealed in the bottom of a broken Georgian drinking vessel and which was contemporary. The only toning was a blackening to the outside of the reverse legend characters, which presumably was down to the heat applied when it was sealed in. In the end I cracked it out because of the sharp edges and the fact that it didn't sit in the trays very confortably, but wonder what would people think when you have a (genuinely) full lustre coin that's 280 years old without the knowledge of it having been hermetically sealed? Would they assume it had been dipped or otherwise cleaned? About the same time Michael Gouby had a 1750 shilling in a similar state and sealed in a glass bottom. The truth is we only have a short snapshot into a coin's history.

Someone who shall remain nameless paid £23K for the Durham House portcullis counterstamp in the last Spink sale. That was fine or slightly better.

Maybe they are just crap photographers. I can supply as many grotty images as you want that certainly don't look like the coin in hand.

Personally, I think people should avoid this as it is the 10 leaf version and not the 11. Therefore not extremely rare and not worth............ how much? He's avin a larf

And the BoE dollars. Verifiably so given there are examples with undertype dated at least as late as 1811.

As he is our society secretary I can confirm that Geoff's alive and well. He is just tied up with work most of the time.