DaveG38

Whenever you see a policeman over Christmas, remember you are bound to get off if you tell him 'I'm not as think as you drunk I am, ociffer.'

I've got a Celestron telescope and it's so powerful it can show pennies on the moon. Don't know anything about their microscopes though.

Hi Ski, Yes, I have a few left, so no problem. Use either of the payment methods I mention in my opening post and I'll send you one on. DaveG38

The coin is a jubilee head shilling, made of sterling silver, but if it is gold in colour, then its almost certainly been gold plated at some time. This date doesn't command very much value as many specimens were put away for the queen's golden jubilee. Also gold plating will detract for a true collector. The only caveat I would place on this is other forum members, who know more than I do, may be aware of specimens of this date struck in gold. None of my sources suggest this, but I am always aware that all sorts of strikings and specimens suddenly turn up on here and somebody may know something I don't. If so, I'm sure they will post any information for you.

I too have never had a problem, but I just felt that the book value of the coins meant that one burglary could not only undo a lifetime's work, but also I probably wouldn't be covered on my insurance. The issue first came to my attention a couple of years ago, when I examined my insurance documents and found that the limit of insurance for the coins was £6k and the book value was £60k! A few thousand either way, I could live with, but 10 times the value was way too much. I then changed insurers and got a better deal as far as agreed value went, but then values went up further to £90k, especially because of the gold, and my insurer's total limit was exceeded again. Add to that the difficulty of finding anybody who would add this level of value to their 'standard' policy and I opted to go for the Stamp Insurance company, with bog standard house and contents from a 'High Street' insurer (LV I think) and as I said earlier this has proved to be much cheaper overall. All I will say to you all is take particular care of your coins in terms of security etc., make sure your insurance is really covering you and be honest with yourself about how you would feel losing them if the worst happens!! I went for better safe than sorry, but then I was a Business Continuity Manager in a previous life, so I guess I would.

Thanks Aardhawk. I wish mine looked like this!!!

807 BM (8)+ 1719-Obv. large letters. [c] Thanks for this Gary.

Can anybody with a copy of Peck help out please. I've noted that one of my coins, a 1719 farthing is BMC807, but as 'my' copy of Peck had to go back to the library, I can't determine what the descriptors are.

For what its worth, my 1997 and 2004 editions of Seaby/Spink don't show anything special about the 1890M sovereign, so it must be identified in later editions.

I don't want to increase anybody's paranoia, but a few years ago, my credit card company approached me in order to arrange a change of card. The reason was that a coin dealer I used to buy from had been burgled and, apart from credit card details, one of the things stolen was lists containing all the details of his customers. From that a burglar could soon sort out who bought what and could judge which collectors to go for. Another situation that gave cause for concern was some people who attacked and badly injured a collector in his home and forced him to reveal the location of his coins. With both these cases in mind, and with an eye to the total value of my collection, I decided to go for the bank option. Yes, its a pain and insurance costs, but I'm in favour of safe not sorry. Appreciate others may see it differently, and hiding coins around the house seems a good idea to me. Of course this won't help you in a fire!!!

Boomstick, Like several others on this forum, I opted for specialist insurance purely for my coin collection, using the Stamp Insurance company down in Devon. They insure my collection, which is kept at the bank, for a premium slightly higher than that which I got with my standard household insurance. However, although that looks odd, read on ....... I found it quite difficult to find a standard insurance company that would adequately insure the collection whilst at home. Most wouldn't insure any single coin above £1000, many wanted major upgrades to security at home, including alarms and most simply regarded the total value of the coins as part of the house contents, thus limiting the overall value of the insurance. They also wanted to pay out at 2/3 of the Spink value. Add to this the steadily escalating value of the coins and I was finding it difficult to obtain adequate insurance. The net result of all this over several years was that although I could find an insurer, the premiums escalated to a ridiculous figure. At the last demand they wanted £800 or so for the house, contents and coins, of which about £200 was for the coins (even though they were at a bank). By opting for the specialist insurance through the Stamp Insurance Company, I had to pay a bit more for the premium on the coins (but I was able to escalate the value to their true level)at £225, but this was more than offset by a huge reduction in house and contents insurance which I got by shopping around. By no longer requiring the coin insurance as part of house and contents, I ended up with an overall saving of around £400 for the year, which was great. Hope this helps.

When I decided to become a type rather than a date collector I breathed a huge sigh of relief. Until I realised the particular ball and chain that comes with that. You see, a type collector must have each 'type' in as high a grade as possible. James II or George I silver, anyone? I think the problem for me started when I was a child and collected Brooke Bond tea cards. The difficulty was that once you had the album you had to have the set. What was the use of a nearly complete album? And so it is with me for coins - I have to have the date run!!

The decision is already partly made in that I don't really have that much interest in hammered coinage. I do have a few dozen, but they don't really do it for me. The plethora of Edward I, II and III pennies all of which look much the same doesn't grab me, and that's without the mints and moneyers. So my current policy is very much try to find the 1686 halfpenny and keep building 18th century sixpences and shillings - so far I'm doing quite well with Anne, as well as filling gaps in the two Georges, plus the Maundy (many thanks to Red Riley here). Sooner or later though, you are right that I'll have to decide where to go next.

Scott, I have a run of the dates and main types, but if I went for the Peck varieties, I'd have a long way to go. And there's the problem of new unknown varieties. For instance the 1684 James II which is on its way has a stop between FAMULUS and the date, which means its an uncatalogued type!!! Agggh.

A door I have recently opened, which I have to admit did not appeal to me that much at first, but I soon got bitten AGAIN!!! It is like starting all over again, especially with the hammered coins, completely new reading, a new approach to what has "appeal" and I think you have to do a lot more mileage to find the "right" examples. Don't get me wrong, I think milled copper/bronze will always be my primary area of collecting, but it has certainly been a fascinating leap. Then again....more competition over the pieces I want......Dave I would just move on to other denominations Well done on the James, the tin farthings are an area I have not yet ventured into with any real intent. I seem to have started at both ends and be working my way into the middle. I think this is mainly due to the time/finances required to fill those gaps in the tin/early copper series. I will get there but it's just going to take time and patience. I also bagged a few at the DNW auction just waiting for them to arrive they have just arrived. Colin, I do collect other denominations and here I still have gaps waiting to be filled. For instance halfpennies will be done when I can find a 1686 tin one. Pennies are done. Threepences are done, except possibly the 1850s area where it's a bit fuzzy over what was a circulating coin and what wasn't. Sixpences back to 1720 and shillings to 1728 - not looking forward to the WCC series as I've got one but it cost, owch! Florins all done. Halfcrowns back to 1743, but I am short of a 1841, 1839 and 1823 1st Rev (and looking at prices I'm likely to have these gaps for a long time) and crowns to 1818. I've got a fair number of others further back but these are the 'frontier' dates. The trouble is that when I look at some of the coins, I can see that I need to improve many of them and so its a dilemma. Do I forge ahead with dates going back or do I improve, and then there are the varieties!! Choices, choices. All of this represents a lifetimes collecting, starting when I took coins out of change as a kid - oh the exciting days of £sd. I had a quite a lull through the 1970s and early 80s and picked things up again towards the 90s. And here I am with a few odd dates to go. Oh for a lottery win!!!

Spot on! I completed the date set of bronze pennies 40 years ago, culled from circulation and mainly in lousy condition. Upgrading and looking for varieties within the date series keeps me interested, and yes, I know damn well I'm never going to complete Freeman, let alone Gouby David I'm coming up to a major collecting junction of my own any day now. I collect all dates and denominations including farthings and I've just bought, but not yet received, the last one that I need. Basically, I collect circulating coins, not patterns or other exotics and I've been looking for one date of farthing for quite some time now. At the DNW auction the other day, I finally laid my hands on a 1684 James II farthing, which means I can now say that I have the whole set from 1956 back to 1672. The issue is do I now think about the varieties, of which I already have some, or just say that's it, farthings are done. I'm not sure yet as I am just savouring slipping the final farthing into place!!!!!

A slightly different take on varieties, based on the work I have done on my books on 20thC bronze and silver varieties. Firstly, a number of my customers commented that they were not wealthy enough to extend their buying to older higher condition coins and so expanding their 20thC collection to include the varieties was interesting for them and added a new dimension to what appeared to be a 'complete' collection. The second reason was that they recognised that certain varieties attracted a premium, but it was often possible on eBay and certainly at local auctions, to obtain many of the varieties at bargain prices, and this, for them, added to the thrill of the hunt.

When I was researching my book on 20th Century Bronze varieties, I concluded that the reported varieties, based on your definitions of the obverse and reverses are; Business Strike: 1+A, 1+B and 2+B Proof strike: 1+A, 1+B and a reported but not confirmed 2+B There were no reports of any type with the 2+A combination. Also, nothing I have seen since suggests otherwise. London Coins sold a 2+B proof earlier this year. Thanks for that Argentum.

When I was researching my book on 20th Century Bronze varieties, I concluded that the reported varieties, based on your definitions of the obverse and reverses are; Business Strike: 1+A, 1+B and 2+B Proof strike: 1+A, 1+B and a reported but not confirmed 2+B There were no reports of any type with the 2+A combination. Also, nothing I have seen since suggests otherwise.

I'd agree with what you describe. I've seen a few wide 0 over 6 as I recall and they were quite obviously 50 over 46. Rob, Thanks for this. I didn't really think it was anything special, but it's nice to know that others have seen this type as well.

Hi All, I've just picked up a 1750 shilling with the wide '0' as opposed to the normal narrow '0.' According to ESC the 1750 comes as one of three types: 1. Thin '0' 2. Thin '0' with the '0' over a '6' 3. Wide '0' always (but questioned) with the '5' over a '4' Mine appears to differ as the '5' is definitely over a '4' but the '0' also appears to be over a '6'. I can tell from the top of the '6' projecting from the '0' and around the base of the '0'. In the case of the '5', it has a projection from the top and the side point of the '4' on the left middle. So has anybody else come across one of these? It's about GF/VF in condition, and yes, I know a picture would help, but camera's on the blink at the moment and the quality of a scan isn't good enough.

They are quite tatty but still good value. The £65 one is the 1960 edition. And pretty ropey as well. 2nd ed. 1964 is the one everyone wants, and they rarely go cheap. Interesting that for once the second edition is worth more than a first!!

I'm tempted to go from coin collecting to coin investing in this reply, but in my opinion, the rise in the value of gold arises from a number of factors. Firstly, the new wealth in China, South America and India is driving the thirst for gold. Secondly, gold production is pretty much at a steady state and can't be ramped up (like oil) to meet demand. Thus there are more buyers for gold than there is gold available leading to a bull market. The final point is very contentious, but the US economy is in a dire state, owing or liable for roughly a hundred and fifty trillion dollars on even the best estimates. At the moment the economy has nowhere to go. Unemployment is rising, mortgage foreclosures are expected to rise dramatically and government spending is totally out of control. The government is unable to raise the money it wants through additional taxation and it knows it cannot go on borrowing, so it only has one option, which is to allow the Fed to print money and let inflation dig it out of its debt. Those with any savvy see this for what it is - hence the flight to gold. And its going to get worse (gold price higher) before it gets better. That's one reason why I have bought into gold in recent years. Even the gold I bought at £180 per sovereign is currently showing a paper profit. I'm betting on doubling over the next few years, but don't anybody act on my advice!! I'm not a financial advisor.

Well done that man!!

Are you sure its Irish? I appreciate that the triangle suggests that it is, but the portrait certainly looks like a religious type (bishop?) rather than the usual king's portrait. I also can't find this coin anywhere in Coincraft's Standard Catalogue of Irish coins, nor do any of the coins (I think) have 'Moneta' in the reverse legend, or the curious 6 pointed stars. If it's not Irish, it looks to me as though the obverse legend starts with TEOD, presumably Theodore or Theodisius or some such? Moneta, presumably meaning money is Monedas in Spanish and Monete in Italian, so I wonder if this is a European coin of medieval age, maybe Theodore Svetoslav of Bulgaria, which might correlate well with it being found in Poland. Anybody got any other ideas?