DaveG38

Just looked up a 1683 fourpence in Cope and Raynor First Edition 1975, and glanced at the opposing page (p13) which is concerned with Charles II halfpennies. I notice that there is mention of a 1679 copper halfpenny, plus 1684 and 1685 tin halfpennies as well. I'm guessing this is a mistake especially as the 1684 is shown as 1654. What I find curious is that the page is titled 'HALFPENNIES (copper and tin)' which kind of suggested that there should be some tin halfpennies of Charles II. The second thing is that it may simply be that the halfpenny page is a copy of the farthing page and nobody noticed the error, but the rarities quoted for the tin farthings are not the same as those quoted for the tin halfpennies, and the date of the 1684 farthing is 1684, not 1654, suggesting that somebody did consider this when the book was written. I can't find reference to any tin halfpennies of Charles II in Peck, so does anybody know what the situation is? Was there a later edition of this book which corrected the errors, if that's what they are?

Have now spent far too much time analysing specimens of the new pound coins, and have established the following varieties: There are, so far, 10 obverses, 6 edge types and 15 reverse types. So far the combinations of these obverses, edges and reverses is as follows: Obv 1 Edge 1 Rev A Obv 2 Edge 2 Rev B Obv 3 Edge 3 Rev C Obv 4 Edge 4 Rev D Obv 5 Edge 4 Rev E Obv 6 Edge 3 Rev F Obv 6 Edge 3 Rev G Obv 6 Edge 5 Rev H Obv 5 Edge 5 Rev A Obv 6 Edge 3 Rev H Obv 7 Edge 5 Rev J Obv 8 Edge 3 Rev K Obv 9 Edge 6 Rev L Obv 9 Edge 3 Rev M Obv 9 Edge 3 Rev N Obv 8 Edge 2 Rev O Obv 9 Edge 3 Rev G Obv 10 Edge 5 Rev G Obv 9 Edge 5 Rev C Obv 4 Edge 2 Rev H Obv 8 Edge 2 Rev B Obv 4 Edge 2 Rev A Obv 7 Edge 2 Rev B The key obverse indicators are the position of the truncation, the position of the top of the diadem and the gap between the 'T' and the inner ring. For the reverse, the indicators are the right hand leaf of the thistle, the part of the rose centre which is cut by the inner ring, the position of the 'D' relative to the inner ring and the position of the small DP, again in relation to the inner ring. As far as the edges go, the type is indicated by whether the milling below the shield is to the left or right and where it actually starts from. I also have one specimen where the JC on the obverse is 'squashed' into the truncation, instead of being separated from it. Not sure how that happened. In addition, two specimens have a missing lower leg of the 'P' in 'DP'. All this from a relatively small sample of 2016 coins, which tends to suggest that the Mint's standards have slipped. It may well be that each of the types I have analysed has other indicators that further differentiate them. To be honest my brain hurts (and my eyes) with all this checking and cross checking. If anyone is interetsed, or is doing any research themselves, I'm happy to provide details of the indicators for each type I have found.

The smaller coin (penny I guess) has WRL clearly on show, so nobody should be fooled. The larger coin is overlapped by the smaller making me suspicious about what is underneath the overlap. My money would be another WRL.

No, those lines across the obverse are not typical of mint wiping, but suggest some kind of cleaning post mint.

Apologies if I have raised this question before - the old grey cells ain't waht they used to be. Does anybody know how to artificially tone dipped silver, so that it quickly tones back down to a dull grey? And for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not talking about rainbow toning using an oven. I'm asking because I'm reconstituting a maundy set and the 4d is blast white, whilst the rest are nicely and evenly toned. Yes, I know, why not just buy another better toned 4d and sell the dipped one. I might, but in the meantime does anyone have any recommendations?

Its not a bad imitation, but the giveaway is the price. Nobody would sell one of those for $35 on a buy it now.

Apparently this is a 'nice coin'. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Great-Britain-Victoria-Halfpenny-1-2d-1866-nice-coin-R35573-/142416620926?hash=item2128b12d7e:g:rOQAAOSwYvFZHBsm

I hope so. Back in the mid 1980s, a friend of mine owned a sports car garage and to my disappoinment at the time sold a soft top Aston Martin V8 for around £17K. Fantastic car. A couple of years later he was moaning that if he'd held onto it he could have got £80k for it. Another few years on and prices had again dropped well back. Much the same has happened to classic car prices since the crash of 2008. My own Volvo P1800S has increased in value, but nothing like the increases seen for some more exotic (and not so exotic) types. I'm personally hoping for a price easing in the future so that I can obtain something a little more exotic than the Volvo. Probably not an Aston, but maybe a Jensen.

Ridiculous price - I dropped out at £600 and even that was too much in my view. One in much better grade went on ebay recently for around £500.

Your dad is quite right. I worked for J Lyons teashops in my school holidays and on occasions I was trusted to work the till at the end of the counter. Bun pennies, usually very worn (clear date) were easily found, as were widow head coins in around fine. I never once saw a Victorian halfpenny of any kind, and even Edward VII ones were rare and very worn. The best Victorian penny I ever found was a 1892 in GVF, which I still have. Otherwise, the only other notably decent coin was a 1866 one thirteenth of a shilling from Jersey in EF. The coin is absolutely jet black and has a commonwealth style bust, which is probably the reason it got spent - the owner I would guess thought he was fiddling me with a foreign coin by passing it on. Again, I still have it. It is probably the fact that interesting coins could be found in change which set me on the path of collecting. I put together an album in the late 1960s/early 70s, and was inspired to pick up the interest again in the early 1990s, and the rest as they say is history.

His website isn't active.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Queen-Elizabeth-I-silver-hammered-sixpence-1st-coin-/232341544915?hash=item3618a29fd3:g:tOAAAOSwlY1ZI0nu Here's another one - the classic 1562 sixpence. Reported for what it is worth.

May, and previous governments sold arms to a legitimate government, who were asked to aid another government against terrorist insurgents. Lets get a bit of honesty please. People may not like Saudi, but its position in this case is internationally sound, whether we like them or not.

Not William III, but the third design of bust used for strking. For what it is worth, I sold one a little poorer for wear, but with rather nastier scratches for £15 on ebay recently.

When I was a teenager (I can still vaguely remember this experience) I worked at a J Lyons teashop in Brighton, and occasionally relieved the cashier on the ground floor till. In those days a cup of tea was 6d, and one day a customer came along the counter with his tea and handed me a coin. I took one look and asked what it was, and was told a shilling. I'd never seen one like this before, but I took it anyway and gave him the change. I swapped the coin out for a shilling of mine and took the coin home, and some time later discovered that it was indeed a shilling of George IV dated 1826 and in GVF grade. Goodness knows why the customer had spent this coin, which was certainly worth a few pounds back then, but he did. How it came to be in such good grade I've no idea. Either way, It's still in my collection and although I could easily obtain a better grade example this one has special place because its the coin that started me off collecting. I've no intention of swapping it out.

There was one on ebay a few months back. I was all set to go for it and some barsteward made a preemptive offer for it, and it was taken of the site. So much for sticking to the rules!!

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1723-SHILLING-GEORGE-I-BRITISH-SILVER-COIN-/322515523260?hash=item4b176c56bc:g:cygAAOSwmgJY740Y A rather worn 1723 SSC Shilling, with French Arms at the date. Nothing special, if a little over priced in that grade for £50. The interesting bit is the description in the small print which reads 'My coin is very close to the condition in the picture' presumably meaning that it isn't the one shown. If so, that makes quite a difference to the price.

Good point. I'd forgotten about him. However, the description is an apt one.

Is he anybody's favourite guy? If so who is this idiot? There surely can't be more than one.

Or to put it another way, socialists are very good at spending other people's money.

Just checked mine again. None have the reeding to the left, but one has the reeding mostly to the right, but with 3 lines into the left hand side. This is paired with the reverse that has almost all of the thistle leaf in the brass ring and the legend touching the inner ring. i.e. appears to be struck slighly off centre.

I doubt that there's a whole batch of these errors. As has been suggested already, this is almost certainly a die clash, where the two punches struck each other without a blank between them, leading to elements of the two sides imprinted on the other. It seems to me that it wouldn't be very long before a customer of the Royal Mint went through the personal striking process, and then almost immediately examined their coin, discovered the apparently poor quality of the coin and drew this to the attention of the RM staff. RM staff would almost certainly then substitute the dies and striking could continue. If this scenario is correct then it is likely that there are very few of these misstrikes.

Don't see anything wrong with either of them.

Here's a question I don't recall anybody raising before. Does anybody know if there is a non abrasive way of removing enamel from a coin? By this I mean the colours applied to coins, often in Georgian or Victorian times for broaches etc. I guess it will always depend on what the coating consists of and how it was applied, but any ideas anyone?

Are you referring to the coin or the seller???