Coinery

Goodness me, this looks like a new VERY intelligent move by the counterfeiters to 'blend in' with the mass market by making lesser grade coins? The kind that might entice a middle-market collector to step unwittingly out of their comfort zone? Somebody needs to face this full-on with a dedicated and properly functional website, that looks at all these 'problems' at the die and micro level.

The 1860 halfpennies can't surely be modern copies to deceive the discerning collector in that condition? Wouldn't be worth it? Would love to know how they came by that number though?

Hah, yes, indeed! Strangely I've never fancied the cabinet thing, not sure why? Whilst I don't think I shall ever find them in a grade that interests me (not that I'm even going to look for them at the moment), but there are a good number of legend variations, even for the Crown N! And then there's... I do think a full-size coin album could be pushing it though?

Andy Jack is selling them for £28 with free post at the minute, which is a bargain. I just don't know about such a large album? I'd never find that farthing again if I put it in there!

I want a really nice leather coin album, with an attractive spine and a slip case! I've managed to find a reasonable product by Numis, but it's the slightly bigger album (A4 size - a little wider). I'd ideally like something A5 ish in size (pocket size, but not really), has anyone ever come across such a thing? Something that holds 6 x 2" coin flips per page would be perfect! Edit to add link: http://www.duncannon.co.uk/detail.asp/c=86/q=1/sku=NUMIS%20LEATHER%20BINDER

I'll kick that one off for Elizabeth I if I may? I think we'll have to go for an imposing shilling, one of the fine silver (.916) series, bearing the iconic Lis! Of course, 1k won't buy us a top flight wire-line coin, but we can have a reasonable wire-line AND beaded inner-circle Lis shilling for a grand. So, we'll have a Lis shilling with perhaps bust 2A or 2B! That's my 1k proposal for Elizabeth I

It's right up there, Scotsman, a lovely coin, the second set of pictures are better but, as Rob said, we'd need to see it as a higher-res image, so it can be enlarged on the screen. It's a possible AU, or even UNC, going by the 2nd set of images? Better are needed, though!

Was pretty uninspiring yesterday too! edit: I did buy a farthing though to keep me excited about things! I'm not going to look anymore, though, just too difficult! By the time I've researched and learned about the coin I'm looking at, I've already fallen in love with it! Big problem!

I'd definitely go penny for the cartwheel.

Maybe a groat? Liz, or more iconic still, Henry VIII?

Take it steady old chap, enjoy the evening! I used to love prawns before i went soft! Enjoy!

Can anybody else shed some light on this point below too? - Spink has the first coinage of Edward III marked as indistinguishable from the Edward II coins (Type 30-32). Is this still the position, or does Withers attribute them more precisely? I'm sensing from the 'net that the Edward II dies likely continued into the first coinage of Edward III, so are we only looking at early strikes (undamaged punches/dies) for the confident attribution of ANY Edward II farthing?

Thanks, Colin. I guess, as the most detailed study to-date, I will also be running with Withers as my primary reference, adding North and Spink only as points of interest. Am I correct in thinking that crown N is exclusive to type 30 (I will have the book in the next few days)? I've also read that crown N, with its 'wire-line' band, broke up fairly early on in the type, leaving the majority of crown N coins with fractured/no band? I've looked at as many 'Ns' as possible, and have noticed that the missing bits in the band can sometimes reappear on in the later Withers 30s. Do you think we are seeing clogs, rather than damage, though it may/likely have broke up eventually, but perhaps a bit later? My point re the broken/clogged band, is whether you consider it safe to assume that a perfect crown would come from an early part of the reign? Thanks, again!

Now hang on, does Edward I also have crown N on some of his later coins?

Yes, not the perfect link-break.

I don't have Withers, or North Vol. 1, yet, so I'm referencing various websites for the following: Could I please have some feedback on the following points, in the absence of the above? - Spink appears to end the Edward I farthing series with North's Type 10 which, as I presently understand it, has crown M? Spink has the beginning of the Edward II reign 'classically' start with Type 11 (10-11), which has Crown N (or withers type 30), where do the two reigns overlap? Is the confusion quite simply that Withers has Crown N (type 30) dated 1310-1314, and North has Crown N (Type 10-11) as 1305-1335)? - Spink has the first coinage of Edward III marked as indistinguishable from the Edward II coins (Type 30-32). Is this still the position, or does Withers attribute them more precisely? I'm sensing from the 'net that the Edward II dies likely continued into the first coinage of Edward III, so are we only looking at early strikes (undamaged punches/dies) for the confident attribution of ANY Edward II farthing? AND finally, I've spent a great deal of time this evening looking at the crowns of the Edward farthings, is the 28f on this link misattributed? It looks like a crown N, rather than an M, making it a Withers 30 I'm guessing????? http://hammered_farthings.tripod.com/edward-i-farthings/edwardvsrex.htm

It doesn't have that 'usual' pewter look about it?

That's a joy to behold, Nicholas!

I'd be happy if all my Edward II coins (when I start) could come up like this Edward I Penny!

There's still the water rates to be considered!

Oooops, sorry, forgot to resize first! The 4d was very much the hardest of this date to find, I'd upgraded the others a couple of times along the way. I finally ended up with 2 4d's (neither were a fine compliment to the set), but I can only find the weaker of the two, which I'll not burden you with here!