mint_mark

Hi Phil, I have sometimes had problems with sending email directly to winning bidders (ISP problems...) so my next step was always to send them mesages through ebay, which usually get through. Failing that, there is a non paying bidder process. After following the steps you end up with getting your final value fees back and the non paying bidder can be kicked off ebay. (This may have changed, I haven't used it for a long while) If you still feel bad about it and they are still there you can add them to your blocked bidders list, and anyone they deal with if you like. Keep cool!

Should we not just submit the map design used on the reverse of Euros?

Well, FLP could be a Philip and HIS could be Hispania... we need someone with a catalogue really!

Coin yearbook lists this as "enhanced effigy" (at half the price of the previous version). I don't have a 1992 20p at all!

That's the design alright... it was used on all the lower denominations. All I could think of was that the coins were current in several states... Nigeria, Gold Coast, Sierra Leone etc... maybe it somehow represents them? That's just a guess though...

These days I imagine you could get quite a bit of help from solar cells in the wings... I bet you're at the mercy of the wind though!

I asked on the foreign coins section here and was told it was very common. That's when Kuhli said that this particular edition (30th) of Krause was rubbish because it was the first using a new system There is a newer 19th century one listed but it never seems to be in stock at amazon or swotbooks. It came out earlier this year, so that's a good three years of price changes I think. I always go to amazon and search for "standard catalog or world coins", then sort by publication date, newest first.

Well, the problems were with the one you're selling... off the top of my head, Finland had the recent 1 markka at the start of the republic (before the 1 pennias) France had a missing C mintmark for KM902.2 France had missing dates after 1947 for KM888b.1 Italy had a value of $65 for KM188 Tunisia had something missing too. That's all I remember... I did write notes in the catalogue itself, but I can't remember where they all are Also, I don't suppose you got the new 19th century one did you? I'd like to hear how that looks too.

People called my Ford Puma a hairdresser's car. Then I discovered my hairdresser had one :/ Still, there's nothing else I'd rather have

Which edition did you upgrade to? I've gone back to an older one after being disappointed once, but I'd really like a positive review from someone before upgrading again.

I was amazed to find this incredible website!

I'm sorry I don't know the answer... but I wanted to say that I think it's a good question! Anyone?

Yes, they should be worth a few pounds each unless they are in a terrible state. If they are exceptional they could be worth ten times as much.

He'll have to pay ebay 15-20p in fees... kind of eats into the margin.

Congratulations! ...and I'm sure luck had little to do with it

I borrowed this from my local library and read it... but I can't remember if it was any good... so that probably says something

The groat is the origianl "silver Joey", named after the MP who recommended it, Joseph Hume. It was minted for normal use from 1836 to 1855, but towards the end people got confused between the groat and the silver threepence... they are basically the same size (groat is a little thicker). After the groat was discontinued the silver threepence became known as the Joey. An average 1843 is worth a few pounds.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the rose is to help signify the denomination. There were several denominations all about the same size... three halfpence at 16-17mm, half groat (two pence) slightly larger (no size given in my book) and the three pence at 19-20.5mm. Imagine trying to tell three coins apart in your hand where the smallest is 17mm, the largest is 19mm and there is one in between and none of them are particularly round. At this time, all the "three" denominations had a rose behind the queen's head... so three pence, three halfpence and three farthings, as well as six pence. All the others had no rose. Later on they used a system of dots behind the queen's head for some denominations. Not long after that (James I) they used roman numerals to indicate the value directly.

Patina and verdigris aren't the same though... I have seen lots of Roman coins for sale with stable green patinas. Doesn't seem to be as acceptable on more modern coins though

Hi Wayne, I have always thought this was a really impressive design for a coin, with the three shields for each part of Britain and queen Victoria there with so many titles they can hardly fit them in. In really good condition with almost no wear it would be worth around £30, with an absolutely perfect one (ie brand new) pushing £100! A nicely used one is more like £10 and an average worn one less than £5. These prices are pretty variable though... I can quite large differences between two books I have, so what you might get depends on when and where you sell it, and that's the only time you really find out what something is worth! Your coin is not a major rarity, but it is a great example of British coinage from the height of the empire!

Yes, but surely they would like to buy just the ones they need? Although I suppose a few spare sovereigns kicking about can't do any harm

I would suggest that selling as a group would make no difference because there is no reason to collect those four as a group. If they were the only four dates of a type or something then yes, but these are the end of Edward VII and the start of George V. I think it would be better to sell them separately.

Just read Sylvester's reply and he is dead right... obvious when I look at it again... the shape matches the top of his hair and the top laurel leaf, upside down. This would also explain why a couple of the crowns look a bit weak... all the metal is on the other side of the coin. Sorry for any confusion...

Hi Jon, Some of the others here have more expertise than I on these early milled coins, but here are my thoughts. The side with the shields is the reverse... the obverse is the side with the monarch's head. The flaw could be from any of several causes... the blank could have been damaged before the design was stamped into it. The die used to stamp the design into the blank could have been damaged. Obviously, the coin could have been damaged after it was made. One way to help explain it is if you can tell us whether the flaw is like a scratch (a dig into the surface of the coin) or like a ridge (sticking out from the surface of the coin) For these coins, another possibility is "adjustment marks". Coins would be checked after minting to make sure they were the right weight. If they were a bit over then metal would literally be scraped off the surface of the coin to adjust it down to the correct weight. However, I haven't seen enough of them to know if adjustment marks can look like this. Finally, that looks fantastic for a metal detector find... you must be really pleased!

I found some history about Waterlows... link found in google I thought I remembered the name from my stamp collecting days. I'm sure that as well as printing stamps they would have made the dandy rolls (I think that's the name) that put the watermark design into the paper. I imagine your father's giant watermark was made to commemorate the accession of the queen. I wonder whether it was presented to the bank originally or whether they acquired it another way. It certainly doesn't sound like an every day coronation souvenir. Sorry, no idea about value... maybe you could ask the " Waterlow Study Circle"?