Rob

Thank you.

I think the pictures could be better. There is nothing better than a hi res photograph for showing the important detail, but as the images are life sized it isn't that good for the small pieces IMO. Some features are blown up howwever, so all is not lost.

No idea, I bought mine at the Midland last weekend.

I've seen that before somewhere, just trying to think where?............

Now that the new version has made its appearance, what do people think of it? For those that haven't seen it yet the format has been changed. It is now sorted by reign rather than denomination and much better illustrated than the last edition. It has also been completely renumbered which means that most people will buy it if they want to be able to reference auction lots. A lot of patterns have been included that weren't in previous editions, but as is probably to be expected, it is a bit of a curate's egg. For all the patterns that have been listed, including off metal strikes, there are a large number that haven't. There is no breakdown to the levels seen in say Davies or Groom, yet it is still deemed worthwhile including a re-entered N for the 1653 halfcrown or an unbarred H in HONI for the 1817 shilling for example. Only the previously noted legend errors where the wrong letter was corrected are listed, and it appears that very few previously unlisted error corrections have been added. A useful addition is the inclusion of recorded die numbers by date for the Victorian silver. A weight of 1.35kg and a thickness of one and three quarter inches makes it a bit heavy/bulky to cart around a coin fair, so assuming it is going to stay at home it might have been preferable to include all the various varieties referenced in multiple volumes which are still missing. I think that although a revision of ESC was long overdue, for the variety collector the other detailed references are just as necessary as they were before.

That's why you have legislation. Laws are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools. You don't need many of the latter to screw things up for everyone.

Sorry to pirate the thread. I've done a bit more digging and the legend appears to tie in better with halfcrown reverse 15 rather than shilling reverse 5 (which I initially used to demonstrate the principle for Clive). The inner circles are only about 1.5mm different in size which would tie in with the pellets being slightly further away from it than on a conventional shilling reverse 3.

To make it easier to understand, here is a montage of Exeter shilling reverses 3 & 5. Reverse 3 has the pyramid/pellet and barrel scroll garniture, whereas reverse 5 has the tower mint halfcrown style. The rose initial mark is at 8pm when the shield is the right way up but if rotated to the normal position then you see the large S type scrolls appear in the correct relative position with the curved/straight sided garnishing normally at 6pm clearly visible.

This is the Exeter shilling I referred to earlier. Lot 3699 in DNW 79. As you can see, the reverse is made up of two different designs, one with the scroll garnishing and the other with the pyramid and pellet garnishing. The only way I can rationalise this is for the die to have been only partially rubbed down prior to re-engraving. There is no logical reason to explain why an Exeter shilling would be struck with one die and then restruck with a second reverse. Civil War currency wasn't called in for recoining, so that eliminates an obsolete coin being used as a blank.

The second picture is the only way I am seen leaving the local Tesco. One trolley full of beer and a packet of crisps to eat on the way home. I leave the wife to deal with the other 20 aisles.

What do you think is wrong?

But basic condition is UNC and as struck i.e. as it was made. Everything else such as wear involves work done and hence added(?) value. This can't be right?

We'll probably never know. In DNW a few years ago there was an Exeter civil war shilling with two completely different reverse designs on it which had to be on the die, because if struck twice, you would expect the majority of the underlying detail to be obliterated by the second strike - certainly if the latter was a half decent attempt. Part of the problem in interpreting these anomalies is that sometimes they ground out small areas of the die when recutting, for example when an initial mark was changed, or as in the case of my Oxford 1644 C4 halfcrown where you can see the plumes by date have been individually removed leaving a very uneven surface. By extension, we are unable to assume that a recut die's surface will be planar as it would more likely be akin to the Somme. It is easy to imagine that a die recut under the light of a candle in the middle of winter would not be fully ground down. The whole thing is only a centimetre or so across, which would also not help.

I would go for a reverse die in a previous existence, insufficiently rubbed down before being recut with the obverse.

Since when has such minor details got between a student and a beer. I was viewing it from your perspective. As far as I am aware, just because they are living away doesn't mean to say you aren't coughing up for their pleasures. Having personally dropped in on a friend in Singapore for a day's liquid refreshment, I appreciate that Munich is next door to Berlin.

There is also the small matter of 4 or 500 miles to Munich for the celebrations, plus drinks. Repairing the laptop looks like the cheaper option.

Scan? That would be less than 500kb. Hosting sites such as photobucket, tinypic etc would all work.

It might be struck on the wrong flan. What is the weight (to 2dp if possible)? You can add a picture up to 500Kb using the more reply options, or alternatively use a hosting site and link to the image.

The golden cart has returned................................ for a mere £2bn.

Not me. Thankfully I don't have any boxes which have to be ticked with one of these. It's bad enough having to get a triple unite, Cromwell 50/- and dragon marked Henry VII sovereign to name but three, if I am to pursue the aims of the collection fully. Ain't gonna happen, is it?

The 1911 proof sets in boxes seem to all(?) tone to a blue green colour. This consistency suggests to me that it is the internal padding material, or at least the dye with which it is coloured which is responsible.

Still there every day without fail. Amazingly persistent! It isn't just a standard spam message because he has gone to the trouble of taking a few images. The problem is his slightly OTT valuation of them as he hasn't reduced the price from £8m.......... I am holding firm. The message changes a little, but is essentially the same. res.sir, good morning, i tell lots more time that i have lots of coins to sell. but you do not reply me and do not purchase my coin. simple way to doing business you give me money and i will give you precious metal coins. world is very small. we deal via international transport and bankwire. first deal i have to do with you that 1837 ancient coins in 80,00,000/- advance cash deposite in my account. and then i send you ancient coins. if you are interested please call me on my cell:- 00918469466030, chintan tank , near new haveli, jamnavad road, near sangath appartment, LAXMI KLYAN, dhoraji, rajkot, gujrat, india. For those that are really interested, attached is an example of the choicest material on offer.

What a big 6!

Afraid not.

At least the grade isn't too bad. i.e. it makes it a presentable piece of jewellery. I thought from the way you were describing it the mount had been removed to leave an unsightly blob as with the crown.