Sylvester

CIVITAS also means city in this context. You may even find some Edward pennies that state VILLA, or town. I believe Bristol would be one such example. Pre-Edward I coins normally state the moneyer and the town/city. So if you have any Long Cross or Short Cross pennies, they state things like: WILLELM ON LUND (William of London), RICARD ON WINC (Richard of Winchester), ROGER ON NICOLE (Roger of Lincoln) etc. You can find whole lists of moneyers that are currently known about - coin books/internet sites etc.

Edward I era pennies, the mint is stated in the reverse legend. The Class 9 is Canterbury - CIVITAS CANTOR The Class 10 is London - CIVITAS LONDON

I stand corrected! I am no expert on errors, it was never a speciality of mine.

This is a die clash. Basically it stems from a flaw in the design of George V's coinage. The king's head was quite large in profile and of high enough relief to mean that when the coins were struck, the metal of the blank would be pulled into the obverse side more than the reverse, leaving a ghost impression of the obverse on the reverse. The dies have thus clashed, it's also known as ghosting. It's very evident on all George V coinage from 1911-1927, it occurs on all denominations from Sovereign down to farthing. They solved the issue by making George V's head smaller from 1927 onwards.

I've seen a few of these touch pieces for sale, some being hammered angels converted for the purpose and others of Charles II and James II vintages being token angel-like coins specially struck for the purpose. Some fascinating bits of history, thanks for sharing some of your wonderful collection with us! I guess, like myself, the history plays a big part of your interest in coins? It's always what drove me to get the items I've ended up with.

I love these! Such character coins of this era have. A whole guinea worth t'boot.

Yep. I've bought a few from him, but he didn't have any Type 4s and the Type 5 was only EF, one of which I already have. No UNC for these types though.

I'm quite partial to a Charles I shilling, feel free to share!

Coin prices have gone bananas somewhat. Very strong indeed. Probably more a reflection of the falling purchasing power of out fiat currency.

See this thread: https://www.predecimal.com/forum/topic/14903-type-4-5-1992-ten-pences/

I've certainly seen much worse Tealby pennies though!

I didn't know I had photos of these - a bit blurred, but the best I can do as I don't have the coins to hand.

It's not fake. It's a genuine coin. The 1920-22 issues were struck with manganese in the alloy, it's that metal which accounts for the awful yellowish streaking coins of this era. My Coincraft catalogue stated it was just 1920-22, but I've seen 1923 and 1925 coins in similar condition, so one wonders. They amended the alloy in 1922 to 50/50 silver to copper. It was modified again with the new coinage designs in 1927/8, they added something like zinc or tin to the copper portion, and coins from this point onwards tarnish much nicer imho.

For a Tealby that's a very clear and well struck coin! They are about the worst produced English coins of all time.