Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/17/2026 in all areas
-
By way of introducing myself let me tell you about my favorite coin in my collection. I had been collecting bronze penny coins since I was a young boy. Then, in 1975 I rode my brand new motorbike the nine miles to the Somerset town of Frome. In a junk shop on Catherine’s Hill I saw two coins displayed in the window. I thought that the smaller one looked like an old penny. I did not know what the larger coin was as I had never seen the like before. They were offered as two Victoria copper coins from 1858. They were priced at £6.50 and £7.50 respectively, a lot of money in those days. I decided to buy the smaller, cheaper penny sized coin. When I got home I looked it up in my 'Check Your Change’ book and found that at 28.4 mm in diameter the coin was in fact a half penny. I got straight back on my bike and returned to Frome for the other coin which proved to be a penny at 34mm diameter. On closer inspection I realised that the number 8 was struck over a number 7. At the time I thought that I had discovered something special. It turns out that I had not. They were very nice coins though, and kindled my interest in copper pennies, halfpennies and farthings.12 points
-
A well known variety. See screenshot from Michael Gouby's website below. Typically a master die in the Victorian period had just the 18.. pre-entered on it, and from that working dies were made that then had the last 2 digits hand entered. (This is behind all the date width varieties for example on Victorian bun pennies). For 1857 shillings, one working die had the last two digits entered with numeral punches from the wrong font thus causing the example above.8 points
-
6 points
-
5 points
-
I picked up this interesting piece of information from a local historian. He is a buff on the Fortescue family of Castle Hill North Devon, and when he heard I was into coins he was keen to tell me that one of the Fortescue family was used as the model for Britannia on the Edward VII Florins and British Trade Dollars. He has now provided me with a copy of a talk he gave on the subject. I attach a screen shot of the relevant paragraph, but if anyone wants the full talk, PM me and I can send it in .pdf format. Of course I only have his word for it! If anyone knows any different, please let me know.5 points
-
5 points
-
5 points
-
Favorites are a fun thing. Mine is very likely my 1818 Crown. Bit of rim damage (ex jewelry?) but that kept the price where I liked it.4 points
-
4 points
-
4 points
-
"So what's King Kenny all about???" For some obscure reason my friends called me that when I was at Chippenham College in the early 1970's. My first name is Kenneth but I prefer Ken. Not very interesting but hope this helps.3 points
-
3 points
-
3 points
-
3 points
-
No. All have the same size font digits. What you might be getting confused about is that some 1849 specimens (not yours above) have the small WW initials next to the date obliterated by the linear circle. These ones are taken from an 184(8) pattern matrix which has had the linear circle re-engraved (and the 9 added), thus obscuring the original WW initials. Or possibly a confusion with 1849 halfcrowns, which are indeed known with both normal and smaller date digits (latter is rarer).3 points
-
3 points
-
3 points
-
I don’t like using proprietary products because I don’t know what’s in them, and I believe VerdiCare is difficult to obtain in the UK anyway. After some research on what the British Museum used to use to treat bronze disease and verdigris on large objects, like cannon, I tried the technique for myself on this battered 1799 half-penny. For anyone interested, the treatment was 100 minutes at 90°C in a 2% w/w solution of sodium sesquicarbonate in chlorine-free water. Followed by a rinse in chlorine-free water to remove the chemical and then a rinse in acetone to remove the water. The heat is needed as the reaction is impossibly slow at room temperature.3 points
-
I have seen plenty of both 2023 and 2025 £1 coins, though less recently, so maybe the Ebay hype is getting to people. Now if you found a 2024 £1, or indeed any 2024 GB coins in circulation, that would be well worth reporting!2 points
-
The angle of that V is slightly steep, but there could well be a die like it somewhere…no denying that near-horizontal line in the image, though. I reckon that’s an Irish farthing myself. Couldn’t clearly see that in the first image. By the way, that’s a VERY decent couple of images, second time round 👏👏2 points
-
2 points
-
I would say Poor/NF The reason it's so worn is that no silver was struck for currency between 1758 and 1816 (you can forget rarities like the Northumberland shilling, and the 1787 shillings and sixpences were special issues for certain banks customers which is why so many exist in high grade as they mostly didn't circulate). So the poor old George II shillings got so much use before 1816 that it's no wonder they got worn!2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
I can assure you I was not being patronising and was definitely not accusing you of being evil, stupid or trying to avoid tax; I was genuinely curious about your question regarding CGT and wondered if you belived (or knew) of a legal workaround that could be beneficial to others. If you look at my posting record I have always been welcoming to newcomers and have tried to help them with their questions. I have never been rude to anyone and don't intend to start now. But whatever, I'll refrain from replying to this thread again.2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
I agree that halfs and quarters are often in almost perfect condition because they were easily lost soon after they entered circulation. I too look for nice examples, scarcer mints, errors, etc. and enjoy the challenge of identifying them. This is one of my favourites. Walter (Waltier error) on Northampton, square E's on obverse (round on reverse), class 1a2/1a5 mule, possibly Mass 148, although the X looks different.2 points
-
In my experience there are 4 different obverse dies which have been altered to 1848/7. These are illustrated in the pictures below. Whilst Bramah does not have any pictures to illustrate his type 10b, he says the following in his 1929 book:- "The die has been altered from 1847. The 7 shows very plainly beneath the 8, its up-stroke dividing the lower loop of 8 into two unequal parts, that on the left being much the smaller." Interestingly, I have found two different obverse dies which fit Bramah's 10b description. These are the top two pictures shown below. Surprisingly, these Bramah 10b types do not appear on Gouby’s website. Bramah 10c / Gouby C (bottom left) is probably the most common of the 8/7’s Gouby D (bottom right), with the 7 at back of bottom loop of the 8, I think is the rarest type……and probably why Bramah has missed this variety. Gouby Ca and Cb are doubled examples of his variety C I believe his Da is simply a worn example of his type D. He actually remarks upon this himself i.e. "Possibly a worn version of D !?" If anyone wishes to see additional detailed legend pictures to support any of the above then please feel free to contact me.2 points
-
Forgetting the grade, the good thing about it for me is that there are no major digs or edge knocks/bruises, etc., making it a collectable fine too. Potentially your most valuable coin to-date?2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
It's definitely a London coin, but not class 1 or Henry II because the N and D are ligated (joined together). If memory serves me right that feature first occurred on class IVa, which was issued under Richard I, but the lettering style isn't right for that. My guess would be class V or VI (so John or Henry III) and judging by the position of the O of ON probably a moneyer with five letters in his name. A bit more research could probably tie the class and maybe even the moneyer down a bit. Edit: you beat me to it Ukstu; I was glancing through my copies of Mass and Slevin for inspiration, but we seem to broadly agree on class 5 or 6.2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
2 points
-
It will probably be a reworked 1717 reverse die. I wrote about mine on p.806 of the acquisition thread and another point where we had quite a lengthy discussion involving brg658 about this. More than one die may be involved, but it looks conclusive on the two coins mentioned in that discussion. There are at least a few die pairs, but haven't had time to pursue the maximum number I can identify.1 point
-
I agree - it looks kosher so probably a misdiagnosed denomination. But I'd say $150 is still B bit on the steep side for the most common 2/6 in the series.1 point
-
I know this is an old post, but, as a new member I am on catchup. I to have just started collecting Two Pence coins. I have been collecting Copper and bronze Pennies, Halfpennies and Farthings for years. Then I realised that my only two pence coin comes from 1797. I just had to start with the decimal two penny coins.1 point
-
Is the damage two small holes at the edge? I think quite a few were into swivel mount brooches.1 point
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
wow....so its wrong font...Awesome to know this.. it looked odd so now all explained. many thanks for this👍1 point
-
looking at the Half penny's that I have , like yours the details are still very vivid also being silver you'd think that they'd been cashed in melted down and re used ... Ive found 5 Halves that I have ...as yet no quarters, Hopefully others will join in, it will be of interest.... 👍1 point
-
there was cupro nickel proofs in,1875, 1877, its such a shame the state of it and punched through, but what a find if it is, even in that state🤩1 point