jelida

Hello Jackie, I’m afraid I have to disagree with AI, this doesn’t appear to be a deliberate design and I doubt that it is a coin. As a detectorist, as well as obsessive collector, I have over the years found similar items, some are welding spatter and others the result of molten metal spill. A couple look like silver and are certainly white metal. The pitted surface is the side that landed on the ground, the other is the result of solidification, possibly with some crystallisation . My thoughts anyway. Welcome to the forum, don’t be afraid to post your queries. Jerry

Good spot, and an absolute bargain penny. The half is probably Rhuddlan too, the reverse reads OND.ON for SIMOND.ON.RVLA. Found a nice cut half of SIMOND detecting years ago. Jerry

That’s nice, if others have been recognised that likely increases the desirability. I still doubt that it is a deliberate design modification though, given that the planning for the bronze currency was already well advanced. Jerry

The 1859 is interesting, not a deliberate ‘ribbon’ I suspect, perhaps a die flaw or foreign body impact or result of die clash but if more than a ‘one off’ could become collectable though probably not at a massive premium. The 1858 small date is scarce rather than rare, unless combined with large rose reverse which yours is not. Maybe a small premium over large date but value is low I think due to poor condition. Jerry

Definitely different coins. A complaint is certainly in order, and negative feedback. I would point out to the vendor that the coin is still legally yours, and that it has unique features that make it identifiable in the future. However sadly legal action , even should the opportunity arise, would likely be prohibitively expensive. No harm in publicising the vendor if you don’t get redress. Jerry

Sounds good, but we still need photos! Jerry

Lovely! I have one in similar condition, the Copthorne example and now yours are the only other ones I have seen. Jerry

Under ‘Professional ways to store collections’. Strangely there are also two ‘British coin type set’ threads. Jerry

Pure Acetone is your friend here, just bathe the coin for a few minutes and dab gently with good quality cotton wool, or brush with a very soft brush while still immersed. Practice on lesser coins first, and beware that acetone is highly flammable and volatile. Available on EBay and most chemists. Jerry

No, it’s definitely CIVI TAS, the AS is very clear and there are four characters beginning with C in the CIVI quarter. Always worth looking out for spelling and positional errors though, I’ve got a Henry III penny of Hereford reading HENRICS , also a known variety. Jerry

Yes, both are pennies given the weights. For a complete coin, weight is usually a good starting point. You really need to use the information and guidance available to you and become your own ‘expert’ rather than relying on others who clearly don’t care what they tell you. Jerry

The second coin reads ‘CIVI TAS LON DON’ not ‘ LONDONIENSIS’ and judging by its size is probably a halfpenny not a farthing. Have you bought a suitable scales yet? Jerry

I suspect so, and while close I don’t think it’s an actual die match with H’s. Potentially a very rare coin, especially as the one illustrated is the best Dave Greenhalgh could find! Jerry

Hi Stu, here is the pic. Very similar crown. Jerry

That very distinctive ‘stalked’ central fleur looks pretty much identical to the illustration of the ‘Edward III Pre Treaty Series E York Episcopal’ Penny on page 70 of ‘The Galata Guide to Mediaeval Pennies Part 1’ though I cannot see a quatrefoil after ‘ANGLIE’ on H’s specimen. It is an interesting coin, and I think Dave Greenhalgh is the man to give an opinion here, if anyone is a contact. Jerry

I think you are there or thereabouts. There is definitely an inner circle both sides, and a CIVITAS LONDON reverse. The obverse Iegend is probably EDWARDVS REX but there is too little face/crown detail to be much more specific - certainly North class 10 or later, and likely Edward II. The North classification has been substantially re-written and subdivided in the Withers (Galata) publications which are highly recommended. Jerry

I agree, it’s either die wear or very possibly the power of the strike, a reduced impact affecting the metal flow into the recesses of the die. Other detail such as the rocks and the lines on Britannia’s shield also seems reduced. I really don’t know who’s given her the finger though. Jerry

Hello Jaybob, if you type the description from the slab into a ‘search engine’ - one called ‘Google’ is good- and press ‘search’, you may be able to answer your question yourself and you will find that the sense of achievement is far greater than asking someone else to do it for you. Otherwise, the answer is ‘yes’. Jerry

Well the mintmark (above the ‘C’ of CIVITAS ) looks as though it might be a cross pattee, or at least the leg of an expanding cross. This would rule out Richard III, but it could still be Edward IV, Henry V etc- though I haven’t looked into further detail. Jerry

Just make sure that you have it all safely stored, I and many others would pay good money if it was available as a download or cd. Jerry

Looks like a Charles II shilling to me. S 3322? Jerry

Just soak it in acetone, won’t do any harm. Jerry

I really don’t see any hint of delamination, just a die flaw and the adherent plastic residue. It really is a very decent coin. Jerry

Agree- dab, don’t rub, with cotton wool and acetone. Jerry

At least two of the Victorian pennies are mis-identified, including the F28 I think, so do check the photos, not the text. Jerry