Peckris

Not just you - it's a beaut, much nicer than the rocking horse.

They only did these in Gold/Silver and Bronze. 200 Gold, 1500 Silver and 2000 Bronze, then the dies were apparently destroyed under supervision according to the little booklet that came with it Proof, if ever it were needed, that there is a God! Incidently, how did you manage to acquire the status 'not a God, just a man'? Are you in? When you are rated as a god you have god-like powers (actually you can change your title to whatever you want on your account page). Am I in? As in, in? or as in, in the masons/continent (think about it) etc? REALLY??? OMG I never knew that! [scurries off...] Wow, it's true! Well! Wish I'd known that earlier.. So now.you are OLD FART Peckris instead of the plain old Peckris? Can't you read? It clearly says JOCK-BAITING HAGGIS HURLING GRUMP

It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles. I'm absolutely certain it was listed in the other small pocket-sized price guide from the late 60s-early70s. Someone must remember it? The colour of the cover changed each year. I had an old copy until a few years ago but unfortunately had a clear out and it went I'm a bit of a student of coin prices and price guides from the 60s onwards. If you should find out what this other guide was, I'd love to know. (You're not thinking of COINS & MARKET VALUES, are you? That was an A5 size booklet with a glossy cover, published by Link House - it was once the COINS & MEDALS annual, but became an independent guide possibly in the early 70s. That came out each year, and its prices were always quite modest compared to Seaby/Spink.) If only I'd not thrown them away! This guide was slightly smaller than Check Your Change and about the same thickness. It was cheaper as only a single volume was needed, unlike CYC. I'm sure it was available in WH Smith. The two I owned had yellow and aquamarine covers with full colour coin photos on the front, but were monochrome inside. I had a feeling the name started with 'Know', as in Know your... money, change, coins, or whatever, though I may be wrong. Curioser and curioser. You could barely get smaller than CYC which was tiny! It must have been small indeed. But I'm intrigued to know it included the 1922 rarity - I'm almost tempted to wonder if the guide was put together by someone who actually had one and wanted to give it more publicity? As I say, I don't recall ANY of the late 60s guides featuring it. The 1970 Coins & Medals Annual had a "Varieties since 1816" survey - pretty comprehensive on the basis of what was known at that time (i.e., the 1915 "close TT" farthing isn't there, nor the 1923 florin, nor - in spite of 4 varieties that are included - is the 1921 shilling with the pre-1920 obverse; on the other hand there are FOUR varieties of 1957 calm sea halfpenny). The 1922 penny is not in that survey; if it had been known in 1970 it most certainly would have been. You are very likely correct about the inclusion of the 1922, due to the writer having found one! It appeared in VR Court's survey of 1972 (though he didn't find one) so was certainly known about then. I can actually picture the guide, which was genuinely pocket sized, a little taller, but narrower than a beermat. I've googled, but to no avail. Someone must remember? That's great! It ties its discovery down to between 1970 and 1972. That's progress. The first published reference I’m aware of for the 1922 rev of 1927 type penny is in David Sealy’s “Coin Varieties†column in the January 1970 issue of Coins, pages 32-33. It was David Sealy who wrote the varieties article in the 1970 Coins & Medals Annual (full title "BRITISH COIN VARIETIES 1816-1968 (BRONZE 1895-1967)"). However, the annual must have been prepared and published towards the end of 1969. That means the 1922 variety must have come to light in the few weeks between preparation of the Annual, and writing the article for January 1970 issue of Coins (which itself must have been prepared by December 1969 at the latest). I think that ties it down very closely indeed.

They only did these in Gold/Silver and Bronze. 200 Gold, 1500 Silver and 2000 Bronze, then the dies were apparently destroyed under supervision according to the little booklet that came with it Proof, if ever it were needed, that there is a God! Incidently, how did you manage to acquire the status 'not a God, just a man'? Are you in? When you are rated as a god you have god-like powers (actually you can change your title to whatever you want on your account page). Am I in? As in, in? or as in, in the masons/continent (think about it) etc? REALLY??? OMG I never knew that! [scurries off...] Wow, it's true! Well! Wish I'd known that earlier..

It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles. I'm absolutely certain it was listed in the other small pocket-sized price guide from the late 60s-early70s. Someone must remember it? The colour of the cover changed each year. I had an old copy until a few years ago but unfortunately had a clear out and it went I'm a bit of a student of coin prices and price guides from the 60s onwards. If you should find out what this other guide was, I'd love to know. (You're not thinking of COINS & MARKET VALUES, are you? That was an A5 size booklet with a glossy cover, published by Link House - it was once the COINS & MEDALS annual, but became an independent guide possibly in the early 70s. That came out each year, and its prices were always quite modest compared to Seaby/Spink.) If only I'd not thrown them away! This guide was slightly smaller than Check Your Change and about the same thickness. It was cheaper as only a single volume was needed, unlike CYC. I'm sure it was available in WH Smith. The two I owned had yellow and aquamarine covers with full colour coin photos on the front, but were monochrome inside. I had a feeling the name started with 'Know', as in Know your... money, change, coins, or whatever, though I may be wrong. Curioser and curioser. You could barely get smaller than CYC which was tiny! It must have been small indeed. But I'm intrigued to know it included the 1922 rarity - I'm almost tempted to wonder if the guide was put together by someone who actually had one and wanted to give it more publicity? As I say, I don't recall ANY of the late 60s guides featuring it. The 1970 Coins & Medals Annual had a "Varieties since 1816" survey - pretty comprehensive on the basis of what was known at that time (i.e., the 1915 "close TT" farthing isn't there, nor the 1923 florin, nor - in spite of 4 varieties that are included - is the 1921 shilling with the pre-1920 obverse; on the other hand there are FOUR varieties of 1957 calm sea halfpenny). The 1922 penny is not in that survey; if it had been known in 1970 it most certainly would have been. You are very likely correct about the inclusion of the 1922, due to the writer having found one! It appeared in VR Court's survey of 1972 (though he didn't find one) so was certainly known about then. I can actually picture the guide, which was genuinely pocket sized, a little taller, but narrower than a beermat. I've googled, but to no avail. Someone must remember? That's great! It ties its discovery down to between 1970 and 1972. That's progress.

alles gute zum Geburtstag Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum Geburtstag Hope you manage to find an Englischer pub!

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values. I wish I'd not had a clear out of old books a few years back! While I'm not sure that 'Check your Change' (when it was 4" x 3" approx. in size and had a chessboard pattern on the front) listed it in the late 60's - early 70s, I do know that it was included in the competing pocket guide, whose name I have completely forgotten! Someone must have an old copy of this? Interestingly, from memory, it was the only variety of penny listed for the 20th century other than the H's and KN's. Strange I know. The guide was issued annually as a single volume, had a colour cover and was slightly smaller in size. It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles. I'm absolutely certain it was listed in the other small pocket-sized price guide from the late 60s-early70s. Someone must remember it? The colour of the cover changed each year. I had an old copy until a few years ago but unfortunately had a clear out and it went I'm a bit of a student of coin prices and price guides from the 60s onwards. If you should find out what this other guide was, I'd love to know. (You're not thinking of COINS & MARKET VALUES, are you? That was an A5 size booklet with a glossy cover, published by Link House - it was once the COINS & MEDALS annual, but became an independent guide possibly in the early 70s. That came out each year, and its prices were always quite modest compared to Seaby/Spink.) If only I'd not thrown them away! This guide was slightly smaller than Check Your Change and about the same thickness. It was cheaper as only a single volume was needed, unlike CYC. I'm sure it was available in WH Smith. The two I owned had yellow and aquamarine covers with full colour coin photos on the front, but were monochrome inside. I had a feeling the name started with 'Know', as in Know your... money, change, coins, or whatever, though I may be wrong. Curioser and curioser. You could barely get smaller than CYC which was tiny! It must have been small indeed. But I'm intrigued to know it included the 1922 rarity - I'm almost tempted to wonder if the guide was put together by someone who actually had one and wanted to give it more publicity? As I say, I don't recall ANY of the late 60s guides featuring it. The 1970 Coins & Medals Annual had a "Varieties since 1816" survey - pretty comprehensive on the basis of what was known at that time (i.e., the 1915 "close TT" farthing isn't there, nor the 1923 florin, nor - in spite of 4 varieties that are included - is the 1921 shilling with the pre-1920 obverse; on the other hand there are FOUR varieties of 1957 calm sea halfpenny). The 1922 penny is not in that survey; if it had been known in 1970 it most certainly would have been.

My guess would be M R

1763 accoring to Wikpedia. Are there any coins with 000's (hugs) on? 1763 rules that theory out then. 000

A mixture of the two perhaps? The two farthings, though on the scarce side are by no means especially rare, the two halfpennies aren't scarce at all, while among those penny rarities, the 1872 is not. It could be that the collector was looking for top of the tree examples, which hadn't turned up yet (with commoner types it can happen especially when you set your standard for those very high), while the rarities speak for themselves?

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values. I wish I'd not had a clear out of old books a few years back! While I'm not sure that 'Check your Change' (when it was 4" x 3" approx. in size and had a chessboard pattern on the front) listed it in the late 60's - early 70s, I do know that it was included in the competing pocket guide, whose name I have completely forgotten! Someone must have an old copy of this? Interestingly, from memory, it was the only variety of penny listed for the 20th century other than the H's and KN's. Strange I know. The guide was issued annually as a single volume, had a colour cover and was slightly smaller in size. It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles. I'm absolutely certain it was listed in the other small pocket-sized price guide from the late 60s-early70s. Someone must remember it? The colour of the cover changed each year. I had an old copy until a few years ago but unfortunately had a clear out and it went I'm a bit of a student of coin prices and price guides from the 60s onwards. If you should find out what this other guide was, I'd love to know. (You're not thinking of COINS & MARKET VALUES, are you? That was an A5 size booklet with a glossy cover, published by Link House - it was once the COINS & MEDALS annual, but became an independent guide possibly in the early 70s. That came out each year, and its prices were always quite modest compared to Seaby/Spink.)

I wonder how far back the use of 'X' as a kiss goes? Quite seriously, that may be all it signifies - a love token.

Interestingly, I'd forgotten that my 1672 crown is marked in a similar way. I've had to enhance the brightness and contrast artificially so it shows up, but you should be able to see them above the portrait. So it's clearly not just a hammered phenomenon. However, the date may give a clue as to when this might have been a practice?

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values. I wish I'd not had a clear out of old books a few years back! While I'm not sure that 'Check your Change' (when it was 4" x 3" approx. in size and had a chessboard pattern on the front) listed it in the late 60's - early 70s, I do know that it was included in the competing pocket guide, whose name I have completely forgotten! Someone must have an old copy of this? Interestingly, from memory, it was the only variety of penny listed for the 20th century other than the H's and KN's. Strange I know. The guide was issued annually as a single volume, had a colour cover and was slightly smaller in size. It definitely wasn't in C.Y.C. - that listed almost no varieties at all, except the H KN and ME (from memory). I'm not sure what the other guide is you refer to; I do have a 1968 colour booklet with prices, but it contains some terrible inaccuracies, the most notable of which is a failure to differentiate the copper and bronze issues of 1860!!! and it doesn't include the 1922. But I'm not sure the 1922 variety was widely known in the late 60s? As I say, it didn't feature in the main guides and catalogues of the time and wasn't mentioned in adverts, nor in Coin Monthly articles.

Most of the time, but there are exceptions, and if a cross must be assumed to be deliberate which would help the accounting theory. My only difficulty with the accounting theory is I can't see what accounting purpose it would serve, unlike the marking of a pile of BoE notes that are bound together! I suppose that if done for accounting purposes you would expect to see multiple crosses too. The earliest I have seen a cross is on Edward VI fine coinage, which immediately post-dates the debased period and could be a hangover from this period. Could it be that crossed coins were those that failed the recoinage test in 1696? I've just made a quick check on those coins with a cross that I have weights for and the closest any came to full weight was a James I 3rd bust shilling at 5.87g with the next at 5.75g. The lightest was 5.39g. I also have an Elizabeth I shilling with a star mark at 5.92g. We also have to bear in mind that some marks could be graffiti and completely unrelated to the underlying reason for the majority of marks. At the recoinage, those coins of full weight were punched through the centre to signify they were of full weight (and therefore value) and could be used for transactions for a limited time. In the event of discovering a pierced coin was underweight, the person who tendered the coin was liable to make up the difference in value. Do we have any other weights for crossed coins which would back up this theory? i.e. does anyone have crossed coins that are full weight and if so how many? Marking the field makes the cross obvious, so one would assume that it was done as a means of identification. Yes, I speculated (above) that it may have been something to do with the Recoinage. I think it is the most convincing explanation.

Haha - the awful 1973 sets! The £100 price would be for an UNtoned set, of course. That really is a notorious year for the proof set - it may be due to something in the red dye used for the foam insert. The weird thing is that some sets have survived with no toning at all, and I'm hanging on to mine! Or with some still seemingly untarnished, could it be an issue with the cases used in 1973 ~ maybe non airtight ? That's a thought. Though quite why some exposure to air would cause such ugly toning is a mystery - many proofs live out of sealed cases and never get toned. Well, here's a theory, which may well be wide of the mark, but here goes. Suppose it was a combination of the red dye, and not properly sealed cases. Where the cases are properly sealed, there is no reaction. Like your set. Possible ? Just as a matter of interest, how long did it take for the 1973 sets to get so badly toned ? I mean, they can't have been like that when they were first bought. I'm given to understand this was 1976, as opposed to 1973. I'm no chemist Mike, but I guess that's as good a theory as any. I never saw a '73 set until the 90s (only had the '70, '71, '72, and '77 sets before that), and that's when I picked up a horribly toned one from an auction lot. I then found out it wasn't rare by any means. But no, they wouldn't have been sold in that state - you're right, it was around 1976. The '73 sets may have been minted a bit before the '74/'75/'76 sets which were issued together. I'm thinking the '73 set may have been a bit earlier because of the commem 50p.

Really? I'd not realised that was even known about pre-1971. Put it this way, I never saw it listed in a price guide until either the 80s or 90s. It wasn't in Seaby, or the "blue pages", or Coins & Market Values.

Oh believe me, they do! You should have seen the 10p and 5p I took from a 1973 set I'd bought in an auction lot - I only got rid them by selling them at face value to buyers of other proofs. They were absolutely hideous. Yup this whole set has vile collectable toning......okay special offer one day only £50 scurries off to find Monopoly set...

Oh believe me, they do! You should have seen the 10p and 5p I took from a 1973 set I'd bought in an auction lot - I only got rid them by selling them at face value to buyers of other proofs. They were absolutely hideous.

Oh I don't know. I could have been like Jensen Button, but no good at motor racing, just living in Monaco on a fancy yacht and pretending I had any money left

I'd started a new school for 6th form, in a different part of the country. I was just walking one evening from school to the bus, when I passed an antiques shop. They had a small bowl of coins in the window and I saw the date on one was 1672. To me that was unimaginably ancient! so I went in and it turned out it cost only 6d so I got it. A worn copper, but I could see on one side it said CAROLVS A CAROLO. I assumed this was a European monarch. Then it hit me - Charles son of Charles - Charles II. From there I started collecting pennies out of my change, one of each date, and from there I never looked back. Mind you, I struggled for ages to find the elusive gaps for 1923, 1924, 1925, 1941, 1942, and 1943. I'm still looking! My avatar picture shows my own favourite coin. I was at a Warwick & Warwick auction in the 90s and as usual I was conferring with Peter Viola in his shop beforehand. There was a nice 1797 2d in the auction - GEF with lustre. Peter had one in the same grade but with barely any lustre. He said if I didn't get the one in the auction, he'd knock a third off the price of his, I didn't, and he did. I was happy

Secret dealers...........We KNOW your secrets Peter I've got a bath full of Baked beans and mushy peas to dive into later...Mrs Peter is on a leash. You're Roger Daltrey in disguise? WHO? Very clever And very cold! Apparently Daltrey got a severe chill from that photoshoot.

Haha - the awful 1973 sets! The £100 price would be for an UNtoned set, of course. That really is a notorious year for the proof set - it may be due to something in the red dye used for the foam insert. The weird thing is that some sets have survived with no toning at all, and I'm hanging on to mine! Or with some still seemingly untarnished, could it be an issue with the cases used in 1973 ~ maybe non airtight ? That's a thought. Though quite why some exposure to air would cause such ugly toning is a mystery - many proofs live out of sealed cases and never get toned.

Is that the same Fridericus Goodwinus that was a member of the Equestrian Order until he was expelled? Cathedra homo of Civilis Occidens Ripam? Or was it the Regius Ripam Caledoniae?

Haha - the awful 1973 sets! The £100 price would be for an UNtoned set, of course. That really is a notorious year for the proof set - it may be due to something in the red dye used for the foam insert. The weird thing is that some sets have survived with no toning at all, and I'm hanging on to mine!