Test Jump to content
The British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/03/2025 in all areas

  1. I think all these alterations add to the history. A plug means someone thought it interesting enough to use as a medallion or touch piece, then someone later felt it was interesting enough to repair. Engravings are often love tokens or claims to ownership. A split or fragment means it has been in the ground for some time. I think that is why I find perfect proof coins a bit dull.
    5 points
  2. 5 points
  3. Hi all! I’ve been collecting on and off for a few years but only recently decided to try and take it up seriously. Came across this Henry VII plugged groat at a fair which after some deliberation I decided to buy as apart from the plug I thought was a really nice example but just wondering what people’s views are on plugged coins generally - do other collectors avoid them altogether and do they hold any value? I thought the price was reasonable given the plug but wonder what others views are. Would others buy a plugged coin to fill a gap or go for a lower grade, non-damaged, coin instead? Thanks!
    4 points
  4. Not the best of pictures but here's the edge. It reads * SERJEANT WILLIAM GRANT , 1ST BAT 92ND HIGHLANDERS. I bought it online from a dealer in Glasgow who had omitted the edge details in the description of sale. I was a bit miffed at first until i did some research. He is Roll number 51 on the Waterloo medal database. He also composed a poem about the battle that was on a manuscript that was sold by Noonans in September 2006 (lot 1100)
    4 points
  5. some that I have picked up ages ago......
    4 points
  6. I guess most "serious" collectors would avoid plugged coins, or any other damage. But if that is the only way you can fill a gap within budget, then go for it! I have a number of damaged coins in my collection - some with engravings in the field, some ex-mount, some hammered even missing fragments, but they will fill the gaps until and unless I can afford to replace them with something better. Here, for example, is my William I penny. I would love to have one without the missing chunk, but until one comes along at a price I am happy with, it will stay with me. Your Henry VII, by the way, is a lovely example apart from the plug.
    4 points
  7. Dont know if this is any interest to anyone. Although i have posted in pennies, it also covers other bronze. These were amendments freeman made after his first bronze book, showing some that he had estimated to be less rare than he originally thought or at the time of print didnt know existed, such as the 1860 Halfpenny mule, 1870 Dot penny etc.
    4 points
  8. So do I. It will get the wife off my back telling me to stop doing all the things I enjoy. Rest assured all will be fine. I'm not giving up the ghost yet. I haven't yet created a box for Rob Pearce 1958-2026 to tick yet. Eventually it will be filled, but family history suggests I might be around for a while yet. My father's eldest sister was 96 when she died. Never married, ran a smallholding on her own, then had a sweet shop in Wells, rode a motor bike until she was 70 and refused to go into a home to the day she died on the grounds they were full of old people. The interesting bit was the bike. At 5'3" and weighing 5 &1/2 stone, one that she rode was an Ariel square 4. I guess she didn't want to conform to the insecure female model. By the time she stopped after coming off on ice one night, she was down to a 250, but was collecting her pension. I liked visiting her sweet shop.
    3 points
  9. I'd say definitely 1735. This is what the 1733 date looks like:
    3 points
  10. Get in quick for this one: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/187859014593?itmmeta=01KCWD3RSPGS13XT0BRGS6G0P9&hash=item2bbd4513c1:g:jDsAAeSwnv1pRbEi&itmprp=enc%3AAQAKAAAA4FkggFvd1GGDu0w3yXCmi1fvsd0HwSoi3YVy3fEVKmzOU8EzcZuz8p%2FWljDDMPKaHkCqMoBVOUyU20uY%2Fk16edJXx5F6RDVCUVj8YBpZ0bcKH4TvJgCIt53fO1P%2BB7p7IPC3zyoGCpItoclwOlycCLt6syNuMKQL398SvgN%2FRbMQ5CT6ipDKzZzuKktdX4sH%2B8qBURpxXSMEif7ItzhiHxh%2FixUe1Ps9LJIKs31ia1sUwLyxkzevXuUrmv51nI5KQUj9qzfXRVg2jy%2BvtCqCJgBBXqOe%2Bv5PwAVO1oJdvZ50|tkp%3ABk9SR4aNj43nZg
    3 points
  11. The manuscript of the poem he wrote was sold at Noonans. https://www.noonans.co.uk/archive/lot-archive/results/131481/
    3 points
  12. It was the basis of the updates, subject to his future decisions. He later removed the milled penny (that I recently sold) from the catalog after receiving an assessment from the Royal Mint that it was a post mint alteration. Just as his 1970 edition was an extension of his several updated versions of his penny studies expanded to include half pennies, farthings, patterns, trials, etc. There are ALWAYS corrections, updates, modifications, etc to a work of this magnitude. There have been many new discoveries to add to Peck, Braman, Freeman, etc. No guide/catalog is a final authority, it merely contains information known at the time. They grow, mature, learn, make adjustments and corrections, expand as a living being.
    3 points
  13. Maybe it's me, but it's only a short time ago that members were talking of the lack of activity on the forum, as if it was stagnating, and now we have a pile of new members turn up recently.....good to see....
    3 points
  14. Hello, I bought this coin and the seller said it was a 1733 farthing, but it doesn't look like 1733, maybe 1735? Can anyone provide some insight?
    2 points
  15. It just seemed bit of a sweeping statement and reflected the personal searches of 2 people for different varieties. Had it been a survey of 30 or 40 collectors, all searching with the same level of intensity, either statement would have had more supporting evidence behind it. Both are unquestionably less than common, but I wouldn't like to assign a rarity of one relative to the other because I haven't done the spadework. My NGC MS65 1673 halfpenny was in a 65 slab when I bought it in 2006 and did so because I could see without a glass that it was actually a 5/3. To me that was obvious. Thanks to the work done by Nicholson identifying the various 5 over 3 dies with their different styles, I was then able to say that the majority of 1675 halfpennies were actually 5/3 and the straight, clear 5 from new dies was the rare type. At this point the yearly mintages fell into place, because if you believe the mint output figures, 1673 and 1675 were not particularly different and certainly not as rare as the 1672 in the case of 1675, yet listings in past catalogues suggested they were much on a par with far more 1673s than the figures suggested. That was my 3rd unassigned 5/3 to go in the collection, none of which was in less than a 63 slab. And all now out. Add the identifiable dates from images rather than cataloguers opinions and you arrive at not dissimilar numbers of 1673s and 1675s, and 1672 then becomes much rarer relatively. Which is what the mint said. Consequently I am happy with my analysis. This study also showed the existence of a doubly cut overdate, when close examination of my 5/3 showed it in fact to be 5 over 3 over 2. Totally unambiguous if you look at the pictures in the confirmed unlisted varieties section. It ain't going anywhere soon, but my sketches do allow others to identify the reverse die involved. Nobody would have considered it likely prior to my discovery due to the propensity of the mint to use dies to extinction.
    2 points
  16. I'd not call it professional but for my three main obsessions, er, collections (shilling date run 1663-1970, Irish coins 1928-2000 & French 3rd through 5th Republics) I have a four ring binder and bunches of coin safe plastic sheets that hold anywhere from 42 (shilling sized) to 30 (half crown sized) or 12 (1870's 5 franc sized) and that suits me nicely. It's easy to show them to friends and easy to take it along when I go to coin shops or shows. Easy to find on Amazon, couldn't tell you elsewhere. Hope this is of some use.
    2 points
  17. I have a rather nice 1736, 3 over 5. These are much harder to find.
    2 points
  18. Thank you Stuart. All in all it has been passable here, but a few incidents have caused a bit of grief. I have had ongoing issues with a few external adjustments made when sitting at Birmingham since the middle of the summer. Trying to upgrade the website at the moment. A few changes to stock that I honestly believed had gone through due to the reply received from the platform, had not in fact, leaving me selling most of the desirable coins for a second time. It has happened to a few people that are regular customers who are more forgiving than new ones. The second set are less forgiving because they don't know you. Accordingly, I have had to make orders manually processable only. A pain in the ass, but at least it eliminates me having to incur a second set of full fees just to refund the customer. Makes me look a twat, and I never see them again. All is explained in the message on the landing page. The question is, can you see it or would you move past the front page too quickly to register the message? Anybody interested, have a look and give me some suggestions for a revamped layout. Website landing page Doesn't rain, only pours. Next problem. In addition to the above site issues, on Boxing day the CH boiler broke down and leaked it's contents everywhere. I have now informed myself by experiment that the new trainers my wife bought me a few months ago, are in fact waterproof as claimed. A quick check suggests the volume they can hold is in excess of 1 litre, but, it's a write off. Ideal boilers have shown themselves to be less than so. All the HE series units have a manifold that consistently breaks and they have done so on this boiler at least 3 or 4 times on several occasions since 2004. It's plastic, but rather than make a replacement that will last, they are offering a full boiler brand replacement. That's shit. I like to buy something that can be repaired with the least landfill possible. I am going for a Vaillant this time. Next problem. I've not been in the best of health for the past couple months. I'm not sleeping at all. The wife thinks I'm slowly going off my trolley due to lack of sleep and generally ignoring any potential health issues. Pointing out that my basic health figures are better than hers, she chooses to ignore my comments. She swims 4 or 5 times a week and does other exercises but has high blood pressure, nearly 200 over whatever. I do sweet f a and have excellent numbers - 120 over 85. Probably because I also smoke too much (she doesn't), drink too much (she doesn't) and don't try to pretend I'm in my youth (she doesn't either, but instead spends most of her time worrying about me not being so). To sum it all up. In the lead up to Christmas she got totally p'd off getting no sleep due to me coughing and keeping her awake. I've been banished to the sofa, and now sleep when I feel like it. She also booked me into the quacks and worse still managed to impress on him her concerns, much to my consternation. I now have a prostate exam for Friday. A senility test for alzheimers on the 8th. A new CH boiler being fitted on the 9th, and a lung cancer check in a mobile scanner on the 15th. This is apparently going to appear in Tesco's car park as part of the national screening program for smokers and ex-smokers. All is capped off by a consultation with a sleep specialist on the 21st. Apparently there is a program for that too. Anyway, enough of my woes. Downstairs for a quick cigar and see who is wandering around the garden followed by a quick whisky. One thing my family has got right is that a bottle of Linkwood is a regular in my Christmas stocking. :) Happy Days. Please look at the current website layout and give me some ideas about what would make it work better for you. More drop downs? More info? Ease of use? It is currently 03:30 on the 1st Jan 2026 and I don't feel at all tired.
    2 points
  19. 2 points
  20. Hey, H, I personally think both the coins are pennies tbh! You have been majorly misled by the idea that one is a farthing, it’s ridiculous! As for myself I feel really uncomfortable with you setting ‘expert’ against ‘expert’ to attain provenance/identity, etc.…it all sits very uncomfortably with me, personally, especially when you can’t even provide a basic weight, at nothing beyond the cost of around £15. Speaking only for myself…I’m looking for your personal, and financially minimal commitment of weight in the future!
    2 points
  21. I am pleased to discover how scarce the Farthing is too! I have this one in my collection. No idea when or where I picked it up.
    2 points
  22. This is the Nicholson example, was later in the Pywell-Phillips Spink sale Oct 2018.
    2 points
  23. Agreed. It is the Anchor mm which is class IIId in the Spink guide. Auction houses are not always correct with their identifications. When i was researching my type IIIa groat i was looking at old sales. I was frequently finding type IIa coins listed as type IIIa & IIIb , the Pansy mintmark was also frequently mistaken for the Cinquefoil mintmark. Edit added information. On the older documents on groats of Henry VII type IIId did not exist. It jumped from IIIc to IV. Its possible the auction has just used the old classification where type IIId was included as IIIc. I am not sure when they created the type IIId class but on older 1960s documents it was not present. That could also be the reason it was listed as IIIc.
    2 points
  24. Aha... re discovered these....convict coins was mention some years back I believe one is George II 1727-1760 the coin is engraved 1749....the other engraved but unable to decipher any details..... anyone able to offer up more details would be most welcome....
    2 points
  25. That’s stunning, @Ukstu I’ll try and look the thread out @Sword it was in a conversation about Maundy money, as you guessed.
    2 points
  26. I'll also take plugged/edge loss etc hammered coins, especially if it makes them affordable (eg my Richard III in the name of Edward IV/V groat), I try to avoid actual holes and coins that have been broken and repaired unless extremely difficult to get otherwise (eg my Matilda 1d). I woudn't take a milled coin with any of these defects, although I've got a couple that have been cleaned/polished.
    2 points
  27. I don't tend to buy them now but when i first started collecting i bought holed / plugged coins. I have a milled sixpence of Elizabeth I that would of been way out my budget at the time if it wasn't for the plug in it. Don't mind counterstamped stuff so much as it's an interesting field that you can research sometimes. I picked up a cartwheel penny last year that had an edge engraving in the same style as the waterloo medal. When i researched the name on it i found out the guy had actually been at Waterloo. I only paid £10 for it as well so wasn't expensive.
    2 points
  28. No sorry but they are just scrap. The best thing to do with any Bronze coins post 1901 is to buy the David Groom book " British 20th Century Bronze Coin Varieties ". Its only about £10-£15 posted on Amazon and will help you get familiar with any varieties for Bronze Pennies, Halfpennies and Farthings. There is a seperate one for silver coins also, should you be interested in those.
    2 points
  29. 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
    2 points
  30. Hi Stu, here is the pic. Very similar crown. Jerry
    2 points
  31. 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
    2 points
  32. wow, the penny has been Identified to be .......😲👍 Edward III, York. Quatrefoil in centre of reverse, CIVI TAS EBO RACI
    2 points
  33. The article mentions "Norman" and "dates to just after the Battle of Hastings" so I'd have thought more likely William I. The few I can read seem to bear the legend +PILLEM, which would indicate that to be the case.
    2 points
  34. That's not a bad price to be honest. All the Charles III sets seem to be expensive. I'm not sure there's much better available in the UK to be honest. I picked up one for £46 last month, that's the cheapest I could find.
    2 points
  35. I thought it worth reviving this one to show another 1698 halfpenny recently acquired. As has been previously mentioned here, these are very difficult to find, particularly in decent grades, having been struck for three months only. It pays to keep one's eyes peeled…
    2 points
  36. I do also really like the Shilling but my favourite British silver coin is the crown.
    1 point
  37. Anything anyone finds at the first or second time of looking immediately becomes easy and not an issue in terms of acquisition, and immediately reduces the rarity in their eyes. Oh that life were that simple. The entire essence of collecting anything is serendipity. Right place, right time and you are on a roll. Miss out on something you could have bought with one more bid and you are forever cursing yourself. There are so many could have, should haves out there I've stopped counting. Don't forget every missed opportunity creates the funds for the next one. Win every one and your issue becomes funding, because you are likely to have overpaid at some point just to have it and I can confidently say you don't have unlimited funds. I wanted one of the the Henry VII sovereigns in Carrington recently, so made sure the money was on standby and placed a bid. I was one bid short, or rather David Guest was the person who outbid me on the day in the room. Dragon marked sovereigns aren't difficult to find, but the price makes them appear so. This one ticked the trade off boxes just right. Not buying that meant the remainder of the auction was now up for grabs. I bought the type 1 Mary Angel and the Triple Unite instead. Not what I wanted that day, but both ticked boxes and I was happy with that. And it left me with cash to spare.
    1 point
  38. Oh I know that and I won't be changing what I have. If I could afford that, I'd be a very different kind of collector than I am. I enjoy what I am doing though that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the aesthetic joy of that design.
    1 point
  39. Saving for a new front door is indeed practical 😀 Seriously, I think it depends very much on the number, grade and value of the coins you intend to collect. If it is say a date run collection of UNC-EF 18 /19 century halfcrowns, then they would look fantastic in a quality cabinet. But if the priority is to make date runs of lower grade or common coins, then an album / flips/ 2x2 coin holders /quadrums would be much more practical.
    1 point
  40. 1 point
  41. Well you know what they say , QUALITY ALWAYS SELLS !
    1 point
  42. I absolutely love this! If you were ever able to bring this man’s life any more alive, do start a thread, I’d follow it like a novel. What a story, and so intimately connected through that coin!
    1 point
  43. Unfortunately, no. Nothing of interest there.
    1 point
  44. Reads ANGLIE on the obverse. Lettering of the C & S in civitas, and the B in ‘Eboraci,’ plus the A in ‘Edward,’ and reverse-barred N in Anglie, just don’t do it for me!
    1 point
  45. Very nice and well struck for a 1923 half crown.
    1 point
  46. Similar here, i think around £40-50 maybe a fair price for KCIII definitive annual set at this moment.
    1 point
  47. Again a comment on a familiar topic. Attached are two PCGS photographs from their PGCS's verification web site, both 1933 half crowns. Coin # 37007246 is a coin I own, while coin# 45189418 is a coin I saw on Ebay that has been graded by PCGS. On looking at both coin's photographs on the PCGS verification site IMO coin # 3700246 is a better coin although being graded by PCGS as MS 62 as against MS64 for coin #45189418. I understand that the coins were submitted at different times but the whole idea of professional coin grading is to provide a consistent result that collectors and investors can rely upon. Have PCGS grading standards fakken? To digress some coins submitted to NGC and PCGS are declared as cleaned and described as AU features etc. with out citing any examples it can be hard to se why they have made this opinion while other coins that seem to have obvious cleaning marks on them indicating some form of cleaning seem to receive a grading while coins submitted PCGS that have been dipped are deemed by PCGS as not cleaned Your comments are invited
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...
Test