Michael-Roo

Here's an example of a blocked die on a 1721 halfpenny. Although the ones and seven are boldly struck the two is all but absent. The condition isn't great but, as I've not seen another showing this anomaly, I think I'll keep it.

Contacted seller and told him we thought it unethical not to make (daft) bidders aware of this. With three hours to go the listing has been amended and the words 'superb copy' have been added. Very shoddy behaviour.

The single dot is where the upper one of a normal colon should be so a filled die on the lower dot is the most likely reason for it not being struck up.

Thanks Stuart, much appreciated. How about this pair of Canterbury jobs, could you ID these too please?

Ten bids and counting. I've informed the seller and given him a link to the Ebay WRL info page written by Lawrence Chard. Let's see…. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/COIN-HENRY-V111-GROAT-MM-ESCALLOP-/253011401441?hash=item3ae8a79ae1:g:Ae4AAOSwyWZZT48B

Here is the last of my trio of '99s recently acquired. Common below Fine but harder to find in better grades so I'm quite happy with these. Scott, when you say from 1699 the quality goes downhill I assume you mean quality control, as evidenced by the number of legend errors seen? I've always found the portrait and Britannia dies to be superior to those of the first two issues. The portrait, particularly, is better rendered and stands in bold relief compared with the first which is somewhat flat by comparison.

Could be. Good point, and something I'd not considered.

Perverse amusement is all well and good but I really must spend less of my spare time looking at these pitiful listings and use it more constructively. All from the same seller. Expert grader…... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Jersey-1-12-Shilling-1877-coin-E-F-/292140506224?hash=item4404ee5c70:g:03cAAOSw44BYldDh http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GB-King-William-IV-1836-Half-Crown-Coin-/292143100010?hash=item440515f06a:g:rswAAOSwAANY6MV1 http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1834-Gulielmus-One-Penny-Coin-United-Kingdom-/292138563042?hash=item4404d0b5e2:g:BTYAAOSwShJXLmbw http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1889-QUEEN-VICTORIA-JUBILEE-HEAD-SILVER-CROWN-COIN-/292155467528?hash=item4405d2a708:g:NbAAAOSwcUBYL0mK http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/United-Kingdom-George-III-One-Penny-1797-coin-/292139569831?hash=item4404e012a7:g:7fQAAOSw~AVYvH6h http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Great-Britain-1758-Sixpence-George-II-coin-/292159282094?hash=item44060cdbae:g:wOAAAOSw3YNXbqAu

"The rest of his wares look like £1 land trinkets." Good one Stu.

I'm pleased to hear you like too C. I've always been a big fan of the early milled coppers. Here's another 1699 also recently bought. This may or may not be the 'no stop after Gvlielmvs' variety, I can't say for sure. Either way, original planchet flaw aside, its in much better condition than is usually seen, particularly the reverse which is often poorly detailed even on decent examples. The slight double striking is fun too.

One of my recently acquired 1699s has what appears to be an overstruck T in Britannia. I'm including a photo of the isolated T next to that of Tertivs for comparison.

Yes, couldn't possibly have been found metal detecting unless someone dropped it into soft mud last week, so this would mean either his 'friend' is lying to him, and has had him list it on his behalf knowing it to be fake, or the seller himself knows it is a fake. Let's not forget also, no explanation has been given for the damage to the coin which, conveniently, appears precisely where the word 'copy' had been stamped by the manufacturer.

Here you are Declan, the smoking gun... http://dorchesters.com/charles-i-shilling

My thoughts exactly. Either this has been sold on as it is by someone who genuinely didn't know or the 'WRL' has been deliberately removed in an attempt to deceive.

Hi Declan, I have seven or eight in various grades and none of them have surfaces which look like this one. I'm no hammered expert but my instincts are to think its shouting 'I'm a fake, and I don't give a damn who knows it!'. The colour is very reminiscent of the WRL replicas which often appear on ebay. Those usually have 'WRL' stamped onto them somewhere so I'm concerned about that (conveniently?) rubbed area at 5 o'clock on the reverse. I also think your asking in the first place suggests your own instincts are telling you this one isn't right. As I say, these are just my initial feelings, I'm sure one of the resident hammered coins experts will be able to confirm one way or the other very soon.

I was thinking VF+, but if Rob says VF then that's good enough for me. I see you've taken these photos from Ebay where it is graded aEF and comes with an asking price of £1700.

Although I see his shiny one ounce gold bar already has eight bids and has reached £10.50

Not my field, but there are plenty of people on here who will be happy to suggest best places to buy ancient coins.

They are 'dating back to 1971' though. Surely, anything so old MUST be rare…..

How about this for a bargain….. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2x-Rare-British-One-pence-New-Penny-Coins-1971/263008262638?_trksid=p2047675.c100009.m1982&_trkparms=aid%3D888007%26algo%3DDISC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D43782%26meid%3D1fc83ff7409e4ca88cce2b130481d022%26pid%3D100009%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26sd%3D162542721837

Sound advice Stu. Copies abound, so definitely worth sticking with reputable dealers.

Actually, looking again at the detail on the shield etc, it would probably appear better than VF 'in the hand'.

The reverse is better than the obverse. Overall, VF?

I had added this question and photos to the end of Jimmy Mercia's post about his London silver penny, but I think I should really have posted it here: "I have about a dozen of these but am useless at attributing to specific classes, so the above link will make for very interesting reading. In the meantime, can anyone tell me about this one which appears to have extra pellets in one of the reverse quarters? Thanks."