Rob

Just English milled silver for me, maybe I'll have to pretend that it isn't a different 'type' ... Do you know what the shilling went for and if so are you allowed to say? £2750. ex Ashby 2448.

Congratulations, mine's a double . Time will tell for you to wish the 5lb 11oz catch had been a bass though.

Look in the local sellers' inventories if you want to buy non-US pieces. First of all the quality is likely to be better than on home turf and the quantities are also going to be greater. Very few items are found worldwide on auction sites, though the US is better served than most in this respect being the melting pot that it is. The lower grade material inevitably gravitates to ebay because most people don't have things that are worth considering for conventional auctions. At least in the US you are able to get mint state or thereabouts British coins with several sales coming up in the next week containing a good amount of qualtiy material. Greek and Roman are similarly widely traded, but beyond this you will need to look in the countries of origin. The US being geared towards slabbed coin sales means that only the higher grade pieces pass through the saleroom there. European countries have a reasonably diverse selection of material and you could do worse than explore this avenue. For most dealers, foreign coins tend to be a by-product of their own national currency which is what pays the bills. There are a few dealers in the US specialising in British material such as Allan Davisson in MN, but he tends to specialise in upmarket pieces which may be beyond your pocket. There are plenty of people on this site who would be able to offer British material if you were interested.

Not anything and everything. I am in truth a fairly selective magpie. As for worrying what is going to happen in the future, don't worry until the situation arises. All our collections are special to each of us, but very few will be first class and worthy of note. Those that have them will be aware of this and most will somewhere along the way have communicated the value to close relatives. Obviously, if you are collecting surreptitiously without the wife or family knowing, you are storing up a potential problem for the future, but if you share your enthusiasm with family members then they will grow to appreciate the collection too. I'm not saying they have to wholeheartedly embrace collecting, but forewarned is forearmed. I suppose I am saying, don't be the avaricious and secretive Gollum and be a bit more like the philanthropic members of past and present society - sharing your wealth by passing on the knowledge of what is in a decent collection will set them in good stead for the future and not result in throwing value away.

The box is that originally used for the 1953 proof set. If the coins are currency pieces that have been substituted, then treat them as currency. If proofs, but mis-described you would be on a winner at that price. Therein lies the beauty and one of many pitfalls with ebay. The seller may not know what they have or may be fully aware and has described it accurately, though the mint specimen sets were the plastic wallet pieces. The latter are frequently toned and unattractive as a result of spending the last 50+ years in a plastic wallet which has leached plasticiser over the coin surfaces. Ask him for better images of one or some of the coins. This should tell you whether the coins are proofs or not.

Not a problem at all if you can seal the the container adequately. It is probably only worth going to the hassle of this for quality (and probably expensive quality) though.

First of all, a Happy New Year to you and all the collecting fraternity. Formalities over, I too have had an interesting year viewing collections and seeing the various angles taken by collectors when deciding what to go for. Many seem to be restricting themselves to denominations, or a period within that. Ever the contrarian, I decided to migrate away from the denomination scene a few years ago when I found it increasingly difficult to acquire good examples to fill the gaps in the collection, of which there were many. I also found the ranks of similarly lustred halfpennies in particular a bit too consistent to provide continuing eye appeal. As a whole they were very nice to look at, but constituted a complete unit rather than a collection of many pieces, each with their own attractive features. This is one reason why I decided to refocus the collection, though couldn't bear to part with the George III patterns which were in a variety of metals and by extension, richly and variably toned with much resulting eye-appeal. The shillings were more varied due to the toning properties of silver which provided eye-appeal, but still had the uniformity of size. Without the constraints of a theme, the world is your oyster and so now the collection can have pieces ranging from a fraction of a centimeter across to a couple of inches, which in addition can sit next to each other in the trays. A point made to me by a discerning collector who accumulates rather than acquiring pieces based on a theme said this provides much more interest because you see each coin as an individual object in isolation rather than a small component of the whole - something I hadn't previously considered, but with which I wholeheartedly concur. You buy coins individually, yet end up looking at them as just one small piece in a tray of many. As I am attempting to build a collection encompassing the whole of British coinage with no constraints on diversity but at the same time trying to avoid duplication, you could argue that this is the 'theme'. I hope this will negate the feeling of despair when it seems impossible to add to the collection because this shouldn't happen when there are few or no constraints. I know of several collectors who stopped because they had effectively completed the task in hand or were unable to add to the collection. At this point you have to make a decision and for some it means the end because the individual's enthusiasm is tested to destruction. I don't want to go there.

That's disappointing. I'd somehow convinced myself he'd take a few back issues of the SNC and a bag of jelly beans for it, but now you've made me think I'll have to increase my offer ... Try a few Kinder eggs with a do it yourself early Saxon penny kit in each one - then you might have a chance.

Of course there's a better one. The coin used to illustrate the type in Spink and petitioncrown's current avatar for a start. Mind you, you might not be granted the opportunity to get it. The Spink and Petitoncrown's coins are both G2's with eye mark, I think Tom is highlighting the G1 with this mark which can prove to be tough to find, I don't know of any in near decent grade? I always think it's well worth picking up a coin with a bit of rarity especially if it's going cheep!! But I agree the general run of the mill coins are better of waiting for from a good collection, so same resolution for me!! Sorry, my fault, you are right, his is a G1. I was blinded by the quality of Tom's coin and not concentrating. The coins I was referring to are one and the same.

Of course there's a better one. The coin used to illustrate the type in Spink and petitioncrown's current avatar for a start. Mind you, you might not be granted the opportunity to get it.

Mine is to tick some more boxes taking the opportunity to acquire the rarities before the common options unless the common one is unusually good for the issue. Getting a Truro crown and an Exeter Tower/EX crown would help as I could then forget about those two mints. Ticking off some more rare mints along the way would also be good. Actually, any gap filled with an appropriately graded piece would be good - so it's as you were.

I must have 30 of the blighters left from NEF to UNC after buying a job lot years ago.These sell for 99p on Ebay so I can't be bothered to list. graffiti on coins is the same as on everything else... Want to sell me one Peter ? paypal ?, if so throw me a price all in will you. Take a deep breath and save up. I was an underbidder on the two numbered pennies in the Adams sale in 2003 and they hammered at 600 and 920 respectively. My halfpenny cost me £650 in 2007 and is numbered 138/405. Some have sold for over £1K. The numbers in the fields refer to the quantity of that denomination struck and the total bronze respectively (see Graham Dyer's article in the 1982 BNJ (vol.52) p.234-240. Obviously there is no duplication of number combinations. They appear to be some sort of mint control or record. How they escaped into the collecting fraternity isn't certain, but they seem to have appeared in the 1940-50s. I am not 100% sure how, so will not speculate. Thank you Rob. I can't access that yet though, or find it online. So are you saying that they struck 138,000 or merely a 138 copper and 405 Bronze. i know others will understand this off the bat, but I am a bit slower I am afraid, and as it is a bit special I thought I would be the daft sod to ask about it for other beginners who wandered across it but didn't want to look daft asking here ( looking daft is a family trait, so I'm not bothered ). I thought it had to do with how many 000's before the die was knackered !. Oh well. That would be 138 tons of halfpennies and 405 tons of bronze in total by 1866. The one on Gouby's site is 139 and 406, so possibly they were sampled every complete ton struck.

I must have 30 of the blighters left from NEF to UNC after buying a job lot years ago.These sell for 99p on Ebay so I can't be bothered to list. graffiti on coins is the same as on everything else... Want to sell me one Peter ? paypal ?, if so throw me a price all in will you. Take a deep breath and save up. I was an underbidder on the two numbered pennies in the Adams sale in 2003 and they hammered at 600 and 920 respectively. My halfpenny cost me £650 in 2007 and is numbered 138/405. Some have sold for over £1K. The numbers in the fields refer to the quantity of that denomination struck and the total bronze respectively (see Graham Dyer's article in the 1982 BNJ (vol.52) p.234-240. Obviously there is no duplication of number combinations. They appear to be some sort of mint control or record. How they escaped into the collecting fraternity isn't certain, but they seem to have appeared in the 1940-50s. I am not 100% sure how, so will not speculate.

I concur. Unfortunately my powers of forgetfulness are not all they could be.

82 for me this year, though in mitigation, 29 of those were the Olympic 50p set because they had 26 new designers. There were also another 2 pieces of modern decimal c**p for the attributed designers section, so only about 50 in reality.

The 1967s will be worth scrap value as will be most others if not in pristine condition. The world is awash with 20th century material, so unless you have won the lottery, which by definition is unlikely, then most are likely to be worth pence and not pounds.

Me three... oh wait - 60s?! Umm... more like early naughties I was given a 2002 Unc set for a birthday present (in retrospect - 18th... hadn't realised that before - too busy enjoying the couple of bottles of vodka I also got I guess!) It was mentioned in passing 'ooo that might be worth something one day' which tweaked my imagination. Sadly, I dont think it will ever be worth much more than the £3.88 in contains, but the comment did push me to reveal the whole predecimal world! I was captivated by the artistry of the viccy silver in particular, as well as anything earlier than that. I subsequently had the opportunity to do 6months(!) work experience at DNW under the wing of Michael Sharp and PPM - during which I handled the Bamford Collection, most of the Mass Collection and the James Hall Collection... All I can say is WOW! The medals side was quite fun as well! As for now, I pretty much collect anything that takes my fancy, with a leaning towards oddities, mis-stikes and errors! Now Mr Cerbera, what was a person like you doing bidding £99 on the coin below in August 2006? Rather a change from 2002 unc sets, non? For some bizarre reason, only myself, the shill bidder (who bought it in the Baldwins sale with me as underbidder) and another forum member(?) who reads a lot but never posts, bid over £100 on it that day. This probably after I mentioned on the forum I was playing around with a shill bidder and would happily bid to just under what it sold for in Baldwins given his bid was above what I went to previously. Ex Hoblyn 196, Bousfield 414, Parsons 668, Peck, Noble 59 and Baldwins 44 lot 516 for the record and the subject of a typo error in Peck.

I haven't a clue how many were made other than the figures in Spink which say 1500 in gold, 3500 piedfort (double thickness) in silver and 40000 silver proofs including those in sets. 40000 cupro-nickel (not silver) proof sets were issued and you say 50000 specimens in a presentation folder. No figure is given for regular currency, but it will be more than the special issues. Not rare, but can probably be found on ebay listed as unique.

Thanks Rob, was this a private pattern, or one by the royal mint in anticipation of the move to a decimal currency? I can imagine the outrage of the likes of the Daily Mail if the RM were now to mint a coin bearing the word EURO or FRANC David It was an RM pattern by L C Wyon. Hocking lists two pieces in the RM museum collection (nos. 2300 & 2301). I suspect there may have been lip service only to decimalisation by this point in time as the lobbying for decimalisation was greater in the 1840s and 50s. There was definitely an attempt to create an international coinage however, as the RM also made a 1 Ducat/100 pence piece dated 1867 and a Double Florin/5 Francs International with both plain and milled edges in 1868 - these three pieces were in gold. These two designs are also Hobson's Choice pieces.

It is on my wants list as a Hobson's Choice piece and is not displeasing to my eyes. It is ESC1476 which Rayner gave as R3. They trickle through occasionally and I would guesstimate there are probably somewhere between 10 and 20 out there, which in Rayner-speak is R4. A lot of patterns are given as R3 or R2, but the numbers appearing down the years would suggest they are rarer than that.

I've got more than 10 available too. That doesn't mean to say the one you get will be mark free though. The one in the picture isn't, and the other side isn't shown. The picture may or may not be the coin you receive.

Peter, this may come as a surprise, but I too will have to acquire a Churchill crown to fill the Oscar Nemon slot in the attributed designers section of the collection. I'm still looking for one with minimal bagmarks though. I can't bring myself to pay nearly £1K for a satin proof, but will stretch to a fiver(!) for a bagmark free one. My appointment with a man in a white coat is at 2 o'clock.

It looks almost as if the coin was picked out of a very shallow solution almost the consistency of treacle and then left without any attempt to dry it off by hand. The interesting thing is that it only appears (or at least I have only seen it) on this particular type, suggesting a deviation from the normal method. Usually the bronzing is even on the Soho pieces with the possible exception of some early pieces. Taylor's bronzing by comparison was very patchy and so many of his products exhibit irregular tones across the flan.

Could be that was the contact point at the bottom of the vessel in which the coin was being toned. Possible, but it looks as if the coin is more bronzed at the ring which contradicts the assumptions I would make for contacting surfaces where I would expect less bronzing action to occur. A possibility is that it's due to contact with a concentrated area of bronzing chemical. It isn't due to contact with the vessel rim containing the chemical because the bronzing continues outside the ring. A useful starting point would be knowing how the process is physically carried out.

That's silly. The whole set of 29 costs less than £100 from the RM. I can't believe that he has sold 29 partial sets.