Chris Perkins

I have been unable to find pictures, either of my own, or on Colin Cookes site (for which I have permission to use) of the following coins: A William IV Threehalfpence. A good grade William IV Threepence (non Maundy) 1834-37. An Edward VIII Shilling (that's a tall order I know, I may have to scan the pictures from previous editions) A good grade Veiled Head Victoria Florin. (I still need to check if I have one laying around) A good grade Veiled Head Victoria Half Crown. (I still need to check if I have one laying around) Can anyone provide 300dpi pictures/scans of the above coins? Or perhaps point me to images online so that I can ask permission from the site/image owner. Thanks chaps.

Or Daffodil

This pdf is pages 1-66. Please check the new introduction pages at the beginning, as well as the additional pages at the end. The file is 6.55mb: http://www.rotographic.co.uk/1-66.pdf

Files are rejected if they are over a certain size. Is the image a jpg, and how big is it?

Aren't they leopards?

The three lions, as far as I'm aware are actually leopards. I think heraldically they've always been leopards, and they just wouldn't fit in the football song: 'Three leopards on the shirt...' The single lion is Scotland, and the Harp Ireland. For some reason Wales is not represented (unless it has a Welsh plant in the border). The smaller coat of arms in the middle is that of the Duchy of Brunswick and Luneburg (later renamed Hanover).

I would say (without seeing it) that it's most likely a fake. I have a mid 90's fake £1 with the wrong reverse for the year. It is documented that the forgers did not pay much attention to the reverse types.

From that date it's probably a token. What does it say on it? Who graded it PR64?

No, if it gets blown up it will loose definition.

I'm sure you could zip the 2.24mb to less than 2mb....Or was that already zipped?

Thanks, how big is it in Mb? A backup cover would be good, I mean I'm sure I could knock one up, but if I use one from you lot I'll be sure to give you credit for the cover design!

The cover is getting important, can you send me it on a floppy disc sylvester, or is it too large??

Can you share the pictures and findings in here Sylvester and Carol, just to provide interesting reading?

was that running with or without the MOT? Naturally it wasn't running on the public highway without a valid MOT. That would have been illegal. Don't try that at home kids.

I was given a Triumph Dolomite once. No MOT and very rusty, but it ran well.

According to the book I publish 'Collectors Banknotes 2004' (http://www.rotographic.co.uk) the 10s was 138-140mm x 78mm. The £1 was 151 x 85mm and the £5 was 212 x 135mm. It is illegal to make reproduction notes of any age or size and even to do so in miniature form would require written permission from the bank of England and the printing of the word 'SPECIMEN' twice on each side! I know that because I have to apply for permission with the printing of each annual eddition of the above mentioned book.

One of my clients had one of those plant splitting date varieties in the 80's. He sold it for a few thousand, but now wishes he kept it.

Why was what done? It's probably (unless someone has tampered with it at some point) just a standard coin that would have started off as a blank disc. It would have been struck with the two designs on each side either with a patterned ring collar around it to leave the pattern in the centre of the rim, or the blank metal would have been put though a machine to mark the rim before the designs were struck to both sides. The rim pattern is different to the full size rim millings on modern coins, but that coin was struck in much the same way as coins are made now (except it would have been a steam powered press). Despite its appearance it was always just one piece of metal (unless someone has tampered with it since)

But i have style with that sadness so therefore i'll get away with it! Your spelling and puntuation is certainly of a very acceptable and clear standard (mostly!) which is more than can be said for some contributors! I'm no English professor, but that seems to get more and more important to me for some reason.

In a way I'm shocked because it means Sylvester is now the main contributor, and therefore sadder than me ;-) But I'm also pleased, because it proves that the forum has grown beyond just my silly points of views and has become well and truly shaped by its members.

It'll be 1806, not 1808 and it is not spliced. They were made like that with the reverse upside down compared to the obverse and a thin milling giving the appearance of 2 coins stuck together. I think that was probably done to make them more difficult to forge. If it's in circulated condition it won't be worth a huge amount. If you'd listened to Sylvester and typed more carefully, we wouldn't be going round the houses like this!

We are frequently puzzled by the behaviour of young Master JMD. Let's just leave him peacefully to his own devices!

Your collection speaks to you? Blimey, you have got it bad

Don't worry, the girlfriend will do that in the week.