Peckris 2

I gave up Netflix ages back, I just use Amazon Prime nowadays.

I'd say EF myself. "I can imagine loads are around in VGC being kept as a "Ooooooooooh this will be worth loads in years to come!?!" so not expecting a huge value on it...." There were certainly collectors back then, but tended to collect hammered and early milled. Even by 1926 (the date of Spink's Milled Coinage) coins of Edward VII and later were considered too modern to be of interest, and 1887 collectors or even members of the public would have put them aside purely as mementoes, no thought they would be worth anything in years to come. In that condition I'd rate it about £40+ if the colour is good (not what the photo shows).

As the square colons are both consistent and global, they're clearly not accidental. In the absence of any knowledge from forum members, Michael Gouby would be your next port of call.

Perhaps "shelf" was AI's interpretation of what Arabia was standing on?

I don't believe there was a Roman goddess with 'Shelf' in her name!!

If I had to make a semi-educated guess, I'd say it could be a crude provincial imitation of an official Roman denarius.

You want to talk to @1887jubilee who knows more about the 1887 JH coinage than anyone I've ever met.

He would have said something like "I remember the old mismatics under Obama - they were rubbish, fake."

Have you given up your market stall?

Having owned couple of acid bathed coins I agree with Rob. Acid doesn't shear off the main design leaving the original thickness - it attacks on all axies, leaving a much thinner coin with the elements of all the original design still clear enough to see, including the legend.

Maybe it was just me, but many of the images did seem almost identical. I didn't complain, but then you made the remark about a lack of responses, so I just theorised about why that might be? Good luck anyway

I think that must be it.

My 2009 first edition has some colour pictures it's true, but the majority are black and white. Is this new edition all in colour, or is it the same as the 2009?

I found maybe 3 or 4 as a schoolboy in the late 60s, and only because few people knew about it (an issue of Coin Monthly in 1968 first drew my attention to it). Sadly my examples are in average circulated condition - high grade examples seem few and far between.

I was referring specifically to this thread, not your others.

Get a room, you two...

Washing works with silver but not with bronze unfortunately. You could try bathing it in light olive oil for a few days but not for too long.

I rather think the silence may be more down to the sheer flood of posts and pictures you've made just recently? I got halfway through yesterday and then gave up.

It's an acceptable example, but shame about the green.

But ... but ... I AM Spartacus!!

I stand corrected, but there was a big change in the 1880s so in that sense my point stands. but

Your coin is not the "normal pairing" apparently (from those pictures), but shares the same pairing as the I over T - which suggests that more than one die was used for that pairing.

Crucifixions weren't done on a cross but on something that resembled a capital T !

Very popular. I remember as a schoolkid in the late 60s that Whitman folders and Sandhill cases were THE main holders for coin sets - the Whitmans for date runs, the Sandhill for type or year sets.

"During the Victorian era, coining presses were entirely mechanical. " Really? I thought that around 1882 they changed over to electrical, which is why virtually the entire 1882 penny mintage was done by Heatons while they were converting?