Rob

Yes, but it is appropriately from Clowne. So someone may have a sense of humour.

Whilst on the subject of coins with a dubious pedigree, earlier this week I was asked if I wanted a few odds and sods. In them was a not very good 1893 JH 6d, so I was naturally interested. However, my initial enthusiasm diminished when upon asking if there was anything else for sale, was told yes - these included a Northumberland shilling and a G3 crown. Images showed both to be copies, so I interpreted the 1893 6d as a copy that had been beaten up to make it look real. You couldn't tell if it was cast from the image, but the chances were high. Caveat emptor.

You could always ask Steve Lockett if their records agree. If they have pictures it would be better still.

Just looks to be weak. Not worth a premium anyway.

All these arguments about independence for whatever country it is ignore the fact that all 'developed' societies live beyond their means. They got there by exploiting the under-developed nations. Eventually the wheels are going to come off the bus for everyone. There are too many people on the planet and we produce goods too efficiently for the status quo to be maintained. In the long term, earth will be ok - humans I'm not so sure about.

Have you seen their audited accounts? If not I recommend you don't bid any higher as you could leave yourself exposed to unquantifiable liabilities. Caveat emptor, and all that.

hystorical, historical or hysterical?

The description is somewhat more honest than the title.

3 of my last 30 purchases have been modern c**p.

Sounds about right. There are more bamarked unc coins than unmarked ones. The bigger the coin the more there are likely to be

I find the coin to be very attractive -- I might be a buyer for £3500 on a "wild day" -- but £4800 is a bit on the "crazy" side. Oh well...to each his/her own. I don't doubt for one second that someone will buy it at this level either -- CRO has a religious following of people with more money than gray matter. If that's what the exchange rate is then £3K would be about right.

Abjectly original sounds like they are disappointed it hasn't been AT'd. Maybe they could spend the profits on a thesaurus. Nice coin, but a bit overpriced. Maybe £1000-1200 less and it would be worth the money.

It's a difficult one to call. Scotland has a greater %age of government handouts than England so there would be less drain on finances as a result. England wouldn't get the oil revenues, but would retain the gas ones roughly speaking. The practicalities are more problematic than the posturing. The banking system will be in a greater mess than it is now. Plus, if Scotland gets independence then Labour would lose its benficial skew to the voting system in Westminster which would definitely help England's finances longterm as it is doubtful they could form a government, let alone spend taxpayers money in a carefree manner as they are currently wont to do. The cost of politics won't reduce as there are too many vested interests in every country to maintain the gravy train that is political favour. My son is looking forward to a border at Gretna as it makes it easier for him to spend days out the country.

Doesn't makes sense for him to resign unless he wants to wash his hands of the whole affair after he's bu**ered up the Union. 4 million Polish immigrants? They'll soon be the majority ethnic block in Scotland at that rate. Scotland will be a nation of plumbers - useful for curing the financial leakage.

Wot. You mean his position would be untenable? So he's just campaigning on behalf of Sean Connery?

Blimey, where do you live?....I'll have a dozen.... Oop north. In the land that is foreign to anyone south of the Watford Gap. A divided country - people in the south-east seem to be oblivious to the rest of the country, people up north can't afford to move down south. That's why so many commute from as far away as the north-east by train into London. A season ticket to London is probably cheaper than the cost of a mortgage - maybe someone knows?

Any incorporated foreign object would be random, any die distress will have multiple examples.

Just to bump this one along. I haven't found anything regarding the P&M penny with the rose mark. Rose is definitely an Irish mark from 1555-8 as Irish groats bear this mark dated for all inclusive years. We know that the Irish base Rose pennies normally have the rose mark and the CIVITAS EBORACI reverse. According to the Irish State Papers for the first year of Elizabeth's reign, a document dated 4th feb 1558/9 concerning Harp Money says that in Anno Primo P&M, £20059 6s 4d of 3oz rose pence were struck from 6oz fine base currency. By my reckoning, this should refer to the base pennies of similar design to the English pieces but marked with the rose and having the EBORACI reverse. There is no mention in Symond's article (BNJ 8. 1911) of coins having been struck in York. Does anyone have, or know of any documents referring to the mint at York remaining open at this time? According to Symonds, at her accession, Mary closed the provincial mints, so any pence struck at York would have required its susbsequent reopening. Therefore, beside the obvious Rose mark which we know is for Ireland, is the use of the EBORACI reverse a further simple means of identifying the Irish pence even though they were struck at London? Following the closure of York, were all dies returned to London and the York reverses of Edward VI used up without modification? These have nothing in the detail to restrict them to Ed. VI, so their reuse would be acceptable. If so, this would simplify the position of the rose marked London penny above which ought not to exist. i.e. it is a mule between an Irish penny obverse and English penny reverse. Normally you would have London reverses paired with the castle or halved rose and castle marked obverse die. Some of the English halved rose and castle base pennies look as if the castle is struck over a ground out rose, whereas some have a mark that is clearly a single halved rose and castle punch. Is the 'ground out' rose an Irish obverse modified for English use following the period ending in 1555 when the Irish pence were struck? The pennies were returning to Britain in sufficient numbers by 1556 for a proclamation to be made banning them on the 19th Sept. This was not the first such edict, but the date of the previous one is uncertain. If anyone has any info regarding the York mint being open in this period it would be appreciated.

Just reread this and obviously hadn't read Nordle's reply in relation to Peck's. Nordle is right. My reply was directed at the previous posts. This referred to the OP which is a pit on the die. Cuds are usually flat and featureless.

A cud is where a piece of extraneous metal has been incorporated into the flan. This is due to disintegration of the die surface leading to pitting.

Yes it might if unusual, but no it wouldn't on the grounds that quality control at the mint is not very good. Having said that, if they are trying to get the mximum life out of a pair of dies, they are maintaining a long tradition. Historically, dies have always been used until they disintegrated, it is just that you see more cracked rather than pitted die.

The most expensive 3 bed semi I've bought in the last few years was 67K. The others were around the 60 mark. Prices have increased though as it would probably be over 70 by now for the same property.

Therein lies the gulf between the south and north. I was thinking in local terms where 80K will buy a 3 bed semi in need of some modernisation. Otherwise, today a 2 up, 2 down in Blackburn starts at just over £30K according to zoopla. 25 years ago, a similar property was 3500 in need of repair, 5k done up. That when even in Manchester a 3 bed semi in a respectable part of town was typically in the 75-100 bracket.

Welcome to the club

A prime example would be the Petition Crown. Recently I checked and reviewed the provenances of these. Bergne no.7 makes for interesting reading. It also has raised a question which I haven't been able to answer yet of which later. A Edmonds from silversmith in the Strand - Wesley? T Dimsdale 1788, Soth 6/7/1824 T Thomas 387, 23/2/1844 £48 J D Cuff 1373, 8/6/1854 bt Webster E Wigan, colln bt Rollin & Feuardent 1872, sold after buying no.2 W Yorke-Moore 255, Soth 21/4/1879 £86 Webster Hon R Marsham 731, Soth 19/11/1888 A D Clarke 364, Christies 15/6/1891 H Webb 692, Soth 9/7/1894 R M Foster 243, Soth 3/11/1903 B M S Roth 348, Soth 19/7/1917 Lt-Col T G Taylor private treaty to A J Morris, sold privately to W C Weight 17, Glens 23-25/7/1923 E H Wheeler 500, Soth 12/3/1930 W L Raynes private treaty to Spink 1962 E M H Norweb 223, SCA45 13/6/1985 J Perley Storer 101, SCA111 21/11/1995 In the late 19th / early 20th century a number of collectors held onto the coin for a few years at most. Even in this period you were looking at a cost of up to £150-350 for it and clearly the short period of ownership reflected the outlay involved. It takes a collector with very deep pockets to sit on something of this magnitude for a prolonged period of time. An investor will likely get fed up in short order. Yorke-Moore, Marsham, Webb, Roth, Wheeler Raynes and Norweb were heavyweights, but on the whole even they didn't hang on to the coin for too long. Alongside that is the consideration that young collectors would never be offered coins such as this by private treaty. The question regarding the coin above concerns the first owner. Until the coin was repaired in the mid-19th century, it had CW 12th Oct 1799 very lightly scratched in the obverse field. I suspect that CW was the initials of the silversmith on the Strand in London at this time, but can't find reference to Wesley's first name. Anybody? He had an apprentice at the time called Lambert who set up on his own account in Coventry St/Piccadilly Circus(?) a decade later, from whom Edmonds purchased Bergne no.6 in around 1812-13.