Leaderboard

These are the best of my bunch, 1864 is probably the best example that I have, these as the rest I have were boot fair finds well over 30 years ago, pre computers internet day and age...... also It turns out 12 months have passed by it was 1 year today that I first joined www.predecimal.com/forum 👍🍻

I was fortunate enough to pick up mine before the prices went completely crazy:

ah! these are some of mine, the better ones.... to heavy to put in a folder so left in pouches 👍

I hadn't realised GIV Crowns had got so high! This is my best, picked up about 15 years ago as part of an old family collection:

1904 narrow date with 1 over tooth, Lucky enough to pick this one up in uncirculated condition Ex rare

Consider getting a specimen crown rather than the RE proof as it is much cheaper. The specimen is nice, has reflective fields (but no frosting), and comes in the same red box as the proof. My specimen (top) cost me £50 in 2020 and my RE proof (bottom) cost £500 15 years ago.

We all have dogs in our collections. I remember when I was cataloguing Stewartby's collection for Spink. I was under pressure to keep the lot numbers down as far as possible because of the quantities involved. That raised a problem when I was trying to catalogue the Edward IV halfpennies as he had one excessively rare light coinage Canterbury coin with mm. Pall and trefoils at the neck (S2072A). The problem was the fact it was unique. The downside was unique or not, it was a dog. To keep the average lot value up, I decided to mix it with a high grade halfpenny and gave it a buy me estimate. As I suspected, the high grade piece did all the heavy lifting on the lot, but I already had one, so pulled out the stops and bought the pair. Having bought it, I immediately sold the better coin for nearly as much as the lot of 2 cost, leaving me with a cracked, bent, holed, worn, and just about every other fault imaginable coin that cost me about £9. Still never seen another. The coin in question was found in Hampshire near to the Delme-Radcliffe home, who acquired it when found, wrote it up in the BNJ vol.51 and sold it in her sale in 1985 (lot 288). An absolute dog, and one of the last things I would part with. I used it to tick the pall marked coin box. Here it is in all its splendour (?)

Many thanks for the suggestion – I could list a dozen Brexity coin matters, but you immediately came up with one that I never thought of! Three points come to my own mind concerning the BM “Money Gallery”. 1) There is a useful account about how it came into existence here – straight from the horse’s mouth https://icomon.mini.icom.museum/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2019/11/The_HSBC_Money_Gallery_at_the_British_Museum__Access_to_excellence.pdf “In 1995 HSBC Holdings PLC, the international financial group, with a deliberate focus on the increasingly globalised nature of monetary transactions, agreed to provide a donation worth £2,000,000 for the project” I am not sure when you visited – but the “deliberate focus on the increasingly globalised nature of monetary transactions” definitely lay behind that 1997 plan - to make sure every country got representation - and this seems surely linked to the advertising strategies of HSBC some years back (Just search Youtube for “HSBC” and “culture”). So my feeling is not that Soho matters were deliberately dropped. More like - it just did not fit the HSBC core narrative and was forgotten. I will add, knowing the sort of money that international brands pump into football, at 2 million, the BM rather sold itself short. Or maybe, scholarly interest is just a niche matter these days? 2) From my own side, it was the reorganisation of the gallery under Citi funding around 2012 that troubled. You point out the change of name, from “Coins and Medals” to “Money”. Under Citi only one long wall was left devoted to “Coins”. The other entire wall was now devoted to “Money”. Predictably the “Money” wall culminated in……... credit cards. Citibank made many billions from Credit cards, and was part of the associated anti-cash/coin advertising push back in the day. It seems curiously difficult to find the Citi BM donation on line – but I seem to recall it was 4 million. Personally that seems to me a cheap price for what rather looks like a shot at re-writing history. 3) More fundamentally, my fear is that these international money men are coming to the institution with the mind set of an advertising agent. Grabbing the attention of the general public is the core aim, scholarly accuracy sometimes lagging a long long way behind. Very specifically I can point to a Youtube video of the current curator, appointed post Citi, holding a silver pound coin of Charles I and saying the words: “it is a pound weight in silver” Oh dear. Rob Tye

I think people get a bit worked up over the question of cleaning as the topic is somewhat nuanced. Every coin in circulation showing signs of wear has effectively been cleaned because the act of circulation ensures that contact is made with other surfaces which rub against each other. i.e. nothing different to taking a the use of chemical cloth to a coin and rubbing. That just speeds up the process. The only thing that is offensive in the eyes of most collectors is a case of a polished coin, with or without the use of chemical substances. Personally I love toning for the fact it gives added confidence that the surfaces have not been messed about with, but even that has a few caveats because silver dip will leave a residue on the coin which over time will give the piece in question a typically pinkish hue. Any coin in someone's pocket will end up from friction with lots of faint parallel lines, because they were there. Without polishing chemically, I defy anyone to see the difference between pocket rub and a soft cloth, though clearly it would be possible in the case of demonetised coins to use your loaf and conclude that not being in circulation any more, the only option left is deliberate. In the case of the Morgan above, if the surfaces aren't reflective, probably not other than 'cleaning' from circulation, because there is clearly wear to the high points.

Thanks Paddy. Charles II 1667 and William III 1696.

I have now added this type to my rarest pennies site and would be grateful to see any other examples.

As a dealer I can safely say that if sold as a complete collection, you might get a small profit if taken as a whole but that would have to include the genuinely scarce pieces like the Kew Gardens 50p. The vast majority will go at face value if collected from circulation. I bought a complete collection of issued decimals in 2013 and still have most of the circulation pieces. Collecting them from circulation was no mean feat, but when everyone else can do the same, it eliminates much of a premium. Plus everyone wants coins with no marks if possible. One offs in sets sell for a premium, but not that many collect 1p, 2p, 5p 10p and 20ps, so you are left with profits coming from 50p, £1 and £2 coins. Nobody wants the £5 coins. If modern, most people buy year sets and get the job done in one go.

Hi everyone. I have decided that I will change my collection and I will now collect type sets instead of date runs. I have tried to look for a good type set album or list for UK coins but I have been unsuccessful. If anyone could please provide me with a British coin type set list or any recommendations for good albums. That would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, all the best, F Drummond.

Thanks for posting, that's an interesting history about the societies. I haven't had much experience of the numismatic academia personally though the BNS journals from start (~1903) are all now freely available on the internet. Peter Mitchell produced an entertaining description of many of the personalities in numismatic life, including museum staff and dealers, which is here: https://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital BNJ/pdfs/2003_BNJ_73_21.pdf I am saddened but not surprised by the Leftward tilt of academia - this has happened over the last several decades and is in general anti-any celebrating or pride in Western history, culture and achievements, though I'm sure there are many honourable exceptions. The social pressure to conform to versions of this mindset will be strong. So parts of academia will exhibit an underlying anti-Western bias and this includes pre-20th century Western achievements (which includes our coinage, both from an artistic point of view and the great technological creation of modern coinage via Soho), as it will be lumped with "elitism, colonialism", etc etc, whatever buzzwords they need to fit the ideology of equivalence i.e. every society's culture/art is the same. An example of this is in the BM's Money and Medals (formerly Coins and Medals) gallery. The display has chronological descriptions around the walls of the history of coins. Now, coming to the late 18th century/early 19th century one would expect a big emphasis on the introduction of the steam press to machine make coinage, which was of a higher and more uniform standard to anything that had gone before. Boulton and Watt essentially created modern coin manufacture, which was then exported/copied around the globe. But instead GB is lumped in with Russia (!) in the title. Reading the small print revealed that we made some coins for them, but at first glance it looks like they were equals in coin manufacture/technology! No other country in the world would so underplay its own glorious heritage. The staff are of course wonderful as I have visited the reading room on several occasions over the years to view their collection, and they couldn't have been more helpful. I made another depressing discovery when I phoned Birmingham Museums a few years ago to ascertain if it was possible to see Peck's Soho collection which he bequeathed to them. Result - I ended up talking to someone who obviously knew nothing about coins (or Peck for that matter). She told me that their last official numismatist lost his job in 2014, and access to the collection was now impossible as it was all locked away and inaccessible. I don't think Peck would have approved somehow.

Try and get some more capsules for them like the one the Jubilee head Victoria is in. Those PVC ones break down over time and leave a sticky green residue on your coins.

This is a close up of my George IV crown I got from a large collection that was a gift. It is a lot worse condition than yours Paddy.

I usually turn them down when offered, because I have never looked for one for the collection, and they are way overpriced for what they are. I was offered a couple of cleaned examples 6 months ago, but declined on the grounds that I don't like cleaned coins when much better alternatives are available, and the questions of iffy ones, abused ones and the rest are a bit off-putting. Give me a florin any day. Only problem is, if I get a type example of everything else I will have to eat my words. Not looking forward to the expense when I can buy fish and chips for a few quid.

As recommended by coin books at the time I bought a small bottle of benzene from a nearby chemists back in the late 70's to clean my lustrous bronze farthings. It was 25p (I still remember for some reason!) and they dispensed it from a bigger bottle at the back of the shop. Those were the days, it smelt lovely but it's now banned as a carcinogen, though it was a very commonly used solvent in industry etc 50 plus years ago, so most people seemed to have survived it.

The Gothic crowns probably had limited circulation due to the fact that they were vastly outnumbered by the large issues of 1844 & 1845 crowns. The mint has always produced coins based on demand from the banks for circulating currency. There could be two reasons for the gothic crown. First it was a commemorative piece celebrating the tenth year of Victoria's reign, but also the question of decimal currency had raised its head again since the beginning of the decade. This could also have been a test the public opinion for the new design issue, which as it happened to be popular, was then adopted with the pattern florins further refining the choice of design. I refuse to believe the monetary committee worked in complete isolation to the thoughts of the public, even if everything had to be approved by the monarch. For most people the circulating currency is the face of the monarch, so there has to be some sop to public taste. Where would you prefer to live? In a monarchy that is ruled by someone who is a bit of a dog, but tolerable, or someone you could point to on the coins and say, she's beautiful. Most people will prefer the latter given the state of the country 20 years earlier with the excesses of George the Fourth still in recent memory.

Obv.

There are four approaches I can see: 1. Break it up and sell it in single lots or small groups on Ebay. This requires quite a lot of effort on your part and will take some time, but gives you the best chance of recouping your investment, or even making a profit. The Coin cases and storage materials my do best. 2. Sell it through a local auction house who will break it down into maybe a handful of lots. It will be bought by dealers, who will break it down and sell to private collectors to make a margin. (Collectors don't generally buy bulk lots at auction.) By the time you have allowed for auction commissions and dealer's profit margins you will be lucky if you get face value for the coins. 3. Find a dealer who is interested and do a direct deal. The price will still not be great but at least you take the auction house commission out of the equation. 4. Sell the best pieces - some individual coins and the storage material - on Ebay and take the rest to the Post Office at face value. It sounds brutal but you will save yourself a lot of effort and end up with broadly the same as options 2 and 3. You have to look at it as making the rewards from enjoying the collecting process rather than profit. Sorry if that all sounds a bit disappointing but I think it is a realistic answer.

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

Those George III crowns were struck with a great deal of care (graduated striking and delivered to banks wrapped in soft paper.) The engraving is truly superb.

You can get the good stuff off ebay even if it is never supposed to be posted I bought a 2 ltr bottle a few years ago and still have loads

Acetone is very expensive from chemists! Try Ebay/Amazon or some hardware stores. Don't use the Nail Polish remover, which is Acetone based but has other chemicals added.

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

Never store coins in PVC containing envelopes as the plastic will release chemicals harmful to coins and cause the problem you have. You need to use envelopes made from an inert material like mylar. 2x2 coin flip is also an option and has the advantage of being airtight. I would only buy branded products (or at least from an established supplier), and I wouldn't take the word of a seller on eBay that their envelopes are "coin safe". If using paper, then it should be acid-free.

Paper coin envelopes are the best, although you cant see the coin unless you take it out, i doubt you spend hours gazing at them ?. You can just write on the envelope whats in it and easy to store as dont take any room up. Thats unless you want to buy a cabinet 😃 As far as removing any plastic thats leaked through the coins being on top of each other (they are better stored vertically) its better left unless there is any value and if so removed by someone who knows what they are doing.

I think it depends a bit on your mindset. I get more pleasure out of filling a gap in a difficult date run with a reasonable example than I do from picking up a common coin in Unc.