Peckris

It will be 1818 - a rather grimy VF (or possibly AVF) if you're being strict. The original coin would have been Fair without that damage to the centre reverse - you'd have to rate it Poor with that damage (graffiti scratched out?).

If you use ancestry.co.uk, then whatever you do, stop using your mother's maiden name as a security 'clincher' on other sites e.g. banking - someone could break your security very very easily. Seriously.

Like Dave, I've done quite a lot of genealogical research over the years. There's a fair amount to go with on the certificate. Lord Cecil Douglas was probably just employed as a figurehead to give the business 'legitimacy' (I mean that in the marketing sense, not in any way inferring that such a business wasn't legitimate!). He apparently died in the 1980s and was a member of the Marquess of Queensbury's family (famous for the rules of boxing). As mentioned in a previous thread, the National Archive (formerly the PRO - Public Record Office) at Kew holds some records relating to the company. You should follow up on those. Lots to get your teeth into! ..and infamous in connection with Oscar Wilde.

For most of coin history, the coin axis was ↑↓, which means if you rotate it horizontally, the reverse is upside down in relation to the obverse. From some point in the 19th Century it changed to ↑↑ (i.e. the same way up). Severely out of alignment = a misstrike and used to mean potentially collectable. Nowadays it just points up the shoddy workmanship of the Royal Mint. I personally wouldn't get excited about such things.

Oh, you know... turkey dinner.. cold turkey with salad.. turkey curry.. turkey risotto.. turkey stir fry.. turkey sandwiches.. turkey broth.. Coronation Street, Dr Who, Sherlock.. what's new?

I'd rate it VF+ though I'm a bit bothered by the tone (it might just be the photo).

Good luck with your search. Unfortunately, the two people who posted in this ancient topic are no longer around in this forum.

Baldrick leaving you alone

I just messaged her telling her she was wasting MY time and everybody else's, and if she got a bid it would be off someone in a padded cell with no bank account.

I didn't say WHERE we had breakfast

BUT..................its pewterhttp://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/171194365394?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_sacat%3D0%26_from%3DR40%26_nkw%3D171194365394%26_rdc%3D1 Home-made punches, so I'm guessing so! I think the explanation as to why the legend was shortened is the best bit of all! I have emailed! A Queen Mary groat of 1953-54? Now that WOULD be worth having! I wonder if it's the Mary Gillick portrait.

TThere' a strange thing above the E of REGINA (a bit hard to concentrate when the pictures are dissolving every few seconds in a slide show). But it looks ok to me. £35 was probably about right for it. I've seen that charged for more worn specimens than yours.

No way. Mrs Peter told me only this morning at breakfast she would never allow this

The big clue is the gap between the top of Victoria's bust and the linear circle - as you can see, it's almost twice as wide on obverse 2 as on obverse 6.

you were correct Peck - Legend in corrupted Greek script: BACIΛEYC BACIΛEWN CWTHP MEΓAC OOHMO KAΔΦICHC ("Basileus Basileon Sotir Megas Ooimo Kadphisis"): "King of Kings Vima Kadphises the Great Saviour" This forum is superb for the range of expertise we can call on - this morning all I had was the Ebay seller's description "Old Coin" - quite pleased for £9.38 plus £1 postage Interesting - "BASILEOS (king, or chief) SAUTEIROS (saviour, or health/safety-bringer)" is also on the reverse of a Philip tetradrachm I own.

Do you have pictures? (See the Sticky in the Beginners Forum about posting pictures here).

I was thinking 'Greek', but of course Russian and Greek alphabets are related. It certainly isn't any recognisable Greek type I've ever seen.

Very nice. Judging from Rob's valuable guide on toning he posted yesterday, it would appear from its colour to be a Taylor restrike. I have absolutely no idea as to value, but I wouldn't mind owning one. If Peck rates it as VS though, it can't be THAT rare, surely? ETA: tsk. That'll teach me to read down first: Rob has already confirmed the details I raised.

You are, right from the start! We all are time-limited in being able to edit posts : it's around half an hour, give or take 15 minutes - after that, what you post is there in perpetuity: typos, sleaze, embarrassing revelations, traded insults, and all...

£13.55 for a coin with a legal face value of £20! Now that's good business... for the buyer.

I hope you've made a mental deduction for the reverse wear and the slight scuffing?

I'm always amazed at the number of people out there who will spend a decent amount of money on a coin, who so obviously know nothing at all about the series they are buying! And this is about as easy a spot as you will ever see too!Coin News should have an eBay warning list in every issue. #1 on it should be "Beware any seller using the words: I dont no much about coins". Big know-know!

I take it you're a Euroseptic then, Rob? Europe is septic. I personally, am a eurosceptic. Hook line and sinker, Rob

I take it you're a Euroseptic then, Rob?

I think you may be right about this, and it could be thanks to the humble hobby of philately... coins were always collected for their beauty and historic value, whereas stamps were always prone to the odd printer error. So stamp 'misprints' were eagerly sought after for the rarities they were and I suppose that attitude filtered through into numismatics too? It definitely does seem recent though - I can't remember that such things were regarded as being of particular interest in the late 60s.