ozjohn

I found this letter to the editor written in 1913 shortly after the introduction of Australia's own coins in 1910, The letter was written to The Argus newspaper of Melbourne. What is interesting is that the coins we collect today had real significance the people of the day unlike the worthless pieces of metal that load our pockets today as they were used in their daily lives as a medium of exchange rather than something that makes up the odd part of the price of an item. The bankers were also lamenting the loss of the halfcrown which was useful in making up the payroll in the most efficient manner. Imperial halfcrowns circulated in Australia until the early 1930s as UK coins were legal tender at that time. When the imperial coinage was debased in 1920 post 1919 imperial coins were collected by the banks and returned to the Reserve Bank who in turn claimed compensation from the UK as they were only .500 fine as against .925 of the Australian coins. In 1932 Australia devalued the pound to about 15/- sterling which means imperial coins were worth more in the UK than in Australia even though many were ,500 fine silver. I assume this fact was not lost on the people at the time and the coins probably migrated back to the UK.

Downloaded Dave Groom's book and most instructive it is. Keep up the good work perhaps one for the 19th C ?

Nice coins posted on this topic. I've always thought the reverse of Edward florins have the most pleasing florin reverse although the gothic design may give it a run for its money also some Edward florins can be weakly struck on Britannia's breasts. Here id my 1908 that I obtained recently in Melbourne.

Hi Peckrus, Sorry about the link. I just copied it from Micheal's site and probably made a mistake. Thanks for the info. The coin came from NGS as an MS 62 which despite the remarks about this 3rd party grader is close to the mark given the poor mint strike for most 1920 coins. I think NGS may have got it right for the wrong reasons. Regards, John

PS I should have added the bottom of the garter for Rev A has a ridge on it where as the garter in question for Rev B does not.

Post 1 cont.

I was looking through Michael Coins catalog where he listed two types of 1920 halfcrown reverses Rev A and Rev B. The attached photo shows the reverse of a 1920 halfcrown I have and I emailed a scan to Michael for his opinion. When Michael replied he confirmed that he thought it was the Rev B variety. Michael also made another comment about the coin to the fact that Rev B coins were of the deeper cut larger head on the obverse which is the case for the one illustrated on Michael's catalog. The coin I had was a shallow cut larger head type on the obverse. Has any one any knowledge of this variety. Details for this variety can be found on www.michael-coins.co.uk/hc1920 %20rev%20A+B.htm in general it refers to the bottom part of the coin on the garter that goes past the 19 in the date. I will post an image of the Rev A coin on another post as the file exceeds 500k. Thanks, John

Every time I see these replica coins on Ebay I report the items perhaps all members of this forum should do the same, I don't know if it does any good but perhaps a large amount of reports on these items may do some good. In general these items are counterfeits and can be used to defraud and I always thought it was illegal to counterfeit coins of the realm but I don't know if this applies to demonetized coins. In the US I believe it is legal to sell reproduction coins but they must be marked as such. I know this would not stop a truly dishonest person but could help to keep some of this material off Ebay.

This thread is really combining two issues namely photographing coins to show them in their best light and the vagaries of the minting process with some people trying to minimize the former as well as later damage by the use of photo shop, lighting etc.. Perhaps this is where the CGS out of a hundred can come in useful whereas the F, VF etc. gradings are too wide to expose small differences such as hair line marks even if you use gradings such as VF+, GVF etc. are used. The other thing to think about is the grade of a coin is mainly an estimate of the amount of wear a coin has sustained since leaving the mint. For example most florins and halfcrowns minted between 1911 and 1920 are poorly minted coins with the upper shield on the florin almost missing and the ear of the king on both coins flattened. After 1920 with a change of alloy and recut effigy of the king a fresh crop of problems appeared with the king's head almost devoid of detail and the lion's faces on the reverse of the halfcrown flattened. However the upper shield on the reverse of the florin improved after 1920. In summary for photography all you can do is depend on the honesty of the dealer but I have to say instances of too much image processing can be apparent especially with the unsharpen mask are easily detectable by looking at the image. Also the use of a flash rather than external light seems to enhance surface problems. As far as the grading perhaps there should be two grades for a coin like with diamonds with one for clarity and one for inclusions. Read for coins one for grading ie Shelden etc. and two for surface condition. I suppose terms like FDC try to do this but in some ways the grading and the surface condition can be two separate issues.

The above comment refers to the initial post of course.

If the language used in this post is representative of current usage then there are big problems with the school system. Never mind about the coins!

Have you heard of soap and water? It tends to remove surface dirt from a coin without spoiling it,

Me thinks you are getting too picky. If this example has a cracked die there would be plenty more with the same perhaps most of them who knows? The point is it is a low tide penny which is considerably less common than the high tide type.

My two bob's worth. A bit hard to grade from the obverse but the reverse is more telling for the King Edward issues. If you look on the lion's nose on the reverse there does not seem to be any wear. The lion's nose is probably the highest point on the design. If you refer to the Standard Guide to Grading British Coins location 1291 in the Kindle version it shows an AU graded 1902 shilling/sixpence which has a little wear on the lion's nose. Also the King's ear on the obverse seems pretty good as well. On that basis I would grade the coin AU. This thread also illustrates how difficult it can be to grade a coin from a photograph unless the photo is very good. In my experience it is difficult to obtain consistent results with a camera and find a flatbed scanner more consistent although it does not always present the coin at its best. I do support the Idea that rarity should not effect the grading but it is probably inevitable when someone is trying to selling a rare coin at the best price they can get.

www.goldsovereigns.co.uk/fakes.hmtl This web site may be of some help.

Just returned from a trip to Victoria where my wife and I visited the Victorian Art Gallery. In the gallery there was a Bertram MacKennal bronze statue. Part of the caption on the statue explained that anyone could own an original Mackennal for less than a penny. B.M. is of course the famous Australian artist whose name is in the truncation of KGV's neck on the coinage of that period as he designed the effigy of the king.

Sorry I attached the wrong picture.

Hi Mark, I'm another halfcrown man and I collect from 1816 to 1946. I'm not sure if truly UNC George IV coins for any date really exist other than proofs as the quality of minting these coins was poor due to the very deep design adopted. Very rarely the top of the kings's ear and the side facial hair are all fully struck and the top of the shield on the reverse suffers as well. These problems are often taken as wear when it is not always the case and telling the difference can be almost impossible. A good guide is to look at the milling and if that looks pristine but the ear looks flat then it may be the "wear" is more due to poor manufacturing also if you look carefully at the edge of the obverse of coin often you can see a raised collar of silver on the rim of the coin. If there had been much circulation of the coin then this would be the first to wear. If you want a perfect coin the proof is the best. I always wonder how many they had to strike to get the required number of proofs given the problems with this coin. I have a couple of proofs and a CGS AU75 1911 halfcrown and I think I'll have to be happy with that. A photo of the GGS AU 75 is attached.

The oldest coin I found in change in the UK was an 1849 godless florin while in Australia a 1913 florin which is early for Australian coins other than Sydney and Melbourne mint sovereigns, In the 1960s there were plenty of George V & VI .500 fine silver coins which even then were worth above their face value in silver which was 15/- and ounce while 6 florins (12/-) contained an oz. of silver. .925 George V coins were becoming less common as the price of silver was well above their face value. I still have many of these coins that I saved at the time to this day.

Of course praise when praise is due. All of the coins I have brought from Colonial Coins of Adelaide St., Brisbane have been better than their stated grade by about half a grade. The coin shown was graded at VF by the dealer but I think GVF is closer to the mark. I think grading standards may be more severe in Australia than in the UK which may account for this however this would not apply to all dealers. I forget what I paid for the coin but from what I remember it seemed reasonable at the time.

1928 should read 1938.

Crowns were struck for 1937 and 1928 in Australia but proved to be unpopular because of their size. I assume earlier British issues circulated in Australia before our own coins were produced.

Sorry I didn't see the earlier post.

I think the ident on the top LH side of the shield is the position for a lance to go through and help to stabilize it

Paxolin was the cheap and nasty stuff. Fiberglass was he better product with RT Duroid for microwave circuits. Never mind about plastic money we now have virtual currency ie Bitcoin.. Personally I am not convinced about the value of Bitcoin and think it is basically a Ponzi scheme.