Rob

I'm thinking probably not! Any ideas on the 'irregularity' running from the harp and through the central crossbar? Well, any raised areas on the coin will be down to marks on the die, so maybe a dint or damage there? Eventually dies were hammered so much that they would crack, you can occasionlly see at least the start of that on coins. I'm thinking in this case, something was dropped on the die causing a cut. Interestingly your coin is from a different die from other coins I've seen with contraction marks used instead of stops on the reverse. I had assumed there would be only one, but apparently not .. curious. I really haven't read enough C1 literature to competently comment. I have to confess though I'm really surprised to hear the thoughts were just for a single reverse die for contraction marks! Now I'm curious, too! Does Bull cover shillings too, or am I just looking at Morrieson for the next level read? I'm wondering if the plethora of stop variations has any connection to the person who cut the die. I've noticed a strong connection between engravers in the W/SA series, and Bristol also appears to have links to specific people. As it is unlikely that a strict controll would be introduced under wartime conditions, we should probably assume that the indicators were present before the onset of the Civil War. Groups of pellets, pellets in the field, unusual stops etc. may well have a hidden meaning.

And the last given Rayner is no more.

Nice Penny, it looks similar to some tickets I have that I think are Ex Dr E.A.Johnstone, but I am sure Rob will be able to shed some light on it The G looks right for Johnstone as do the 2 and 8. It's a shame there is no lower case m as this is quite distinctive, but on balance I'd say it is a Johnstone ticket. If ex-Peck, then Johnstone must have bought it from Spink in the 1960s when Peck's collection was dispersed, but the presence of a provenance in Johnstone's hand dating to 1940 suggests that Peck doesn't come into it. There are two possible names for the 1940 sale; J McPherson or George Wight. Both had collections of English in the sale, but M & R doesn't say whose lots were which. I'm sure L282 will be the lot number which was on the second day, so that would suggest Wight as the provenance. Unfortunately I don't have the catalogue. The purple number may well be a Baldwin reference. Johnstone was a Baldwin customer and they acquired his collection post-mortem. It is possible the VICTORIA 1868 1d Bronzed writing is that of the 1940 vendor. If so, I'd like to know who it is for future reference. It looks like both sides are in the same hand Rob. The e and g are both quite distinctive as is the the loop coming through the base on the 6's. The word Copper looks to be the odd one out and by a different hand to the rest of the writing, which would suggest that somebody post the 1940 sale thought this? The differences between the inks on the two sides led me to the suggestion that the coin description wasn't by the same person as the acquisition details. You would have thought that both would be written at the same time and so the most logical solution would be recording the acq. date on the reverse of the ticket acquired at the time of purchase. Copper is probably written by someone at Baldwins. It isn't Peck's handwriting. Rather enigmatically, Peck's handwritten notes for BMC note an 1868 copper proof farthing added as an afterthought, but it doesn't appear in the Second edition listings or the addendum published in the BNJ (1967). There is no mention of a copper proof penny or halfpenny in these notes. Freeman includes the penny and farthing as proofs in copper, but not the halfpenny.

Nice Penny, it looks similar to some tickets I have that I think are Ex Dr E.A.Johnstone, but I am sure Rob will be able to shed some light on it The G looks right for Johnstone as do the 2 and 8. It's a shame there is no lower case m as this is quite distinctive, but on balance I'd say it is a Johnstone ticket. If ex-Peck, then Johnstone must have bought it from Spink in the 1960s when Peck's collection was dispersed, but the presence of a provenance in Johnstone's hand dating to 1940 suggests that Peck doesn't come into it. There are two possible names for the 1940 sale; J McPherson or George Wight. Both had collections of English in the sale, but M & R doesn't say whose lots were which. I'm sure L282 will be the lot number which was on the second day, so that would suggest Wight as the provenance. Unfortunately I don't have the catalogue. The purple number may well be a Baldwin reference. Johnstone was a Baldwin customer and they acquired his collection post-mortem. It is possible the VICTORIA 1868 1d Bronzed writing is that of the 1940 vendor. If so, I'd like to know who it is for future reference.

On the contrary. The Civil War started during the currency of the Triangle in Circle mark which ran from July 1641 to May 1643. With output spread over 2 years, this was the most prolific mark of the reign with £1324 silver in the pyx. Contrast this with Heart which ran for 1 year June 1630-1 where the total value of silver in the pyx was £4. As a specific amount of production was removed for the trial, this gives a pretty good ratio of the amount produced. T in C is so common that you could reasonably argue that it is overpriced in comparison to other marks, but given the usual production standards seen it is still worth paying good money plus for a top rate piece. Any premiums will be the result of conditional rarity or type rarity. Within every mark there are types which are extremely rare. It is this rarity which drives the price and competition, as witnessed by the recent discussion on the T in C marked F7/2 shilling which virtually all collectors of hammered on this forum would have bought if they had been quick enough. 8 known, dire condition comes as standard, everyone wants one, but few manage. The price was almost irrelevant.

It purports to be an Anne gold coin, but the shape of the crowns and datal 7 give it away as a forgery. There is also no toothed rim. Without the size I can't say what denomination, but the relatively cluttered design suggests either a guinea or half.

Collecting is about all of it. History of the various types, who made them, how they were made, why they were made, die and punch links, errors, mules, high grades, low grades, common, rare, bullion and base metals, currency, patterns, proofs, big coins, little coins, anything you care to mention that fires the individual's imagination. So much to learn about past generations and even whole civilisations, their histories, values and beliefs. If anyone is bored with coins, I suggest they don't exercise their grey matter enough.

Make your own, there isn't one. You can have as many pictures as you want.

Neither. It is toy money which was never intended to circulate or deceive.

Why are you buying damaged coins? Just because they are the first thing you find? I see you are quite young and by extension new to the game. You must learn to cultivate some patience because you might have to wait months or years for the right coin to come along.

Clearly his knowledge of history is as good as his grading. First 1901 Edward VII coin I've seen Given the predominance of shite offered, does he buy it or produce it? You have to suspect the latter. Take a grotty, dull, worn and otherwise unattractive coin. Brillo it and make a grotty, shiny, worn and otherwise unattractive coin. If people could be held accountable for their claims, he'd be in serious trouble. There must be a lot of very unhappy sellers somewhere down the line.

EF reverse, the obverse better. Probably gEF with the small rim mark. I'm not getting the lustre either.

If you have a price list from the last 2 or 3 years, the numbers quoted for low to middle grades haven't shifted much and would be a good approximation to current values. Only the price of bullion would be variable. I assume you are a collector as you have identified a Davies die pairing, which is too esoteric for a total novice.

Ir was'nt big enough? In the absence of any evidence of the item in question, any claim was sure to be rejected.

His grading is certainly divorced from any other appraisals being at least a grade over from what I've seen, but the hiding of edge defects is common to all. I've have half half a dozen from NGC or PCGS over the years which looked good front and back, but I wouldn't have bought them based on the hidden side view which of course you only find out on liberation. I guess the temptation to slab an EF early Georgian copper is compelling to the person submitting if they know the TPG will give it a grade irrespective of concealable defect. If these hidden defects were noted it would be ok, but they aren't. Flaws on early coppers are more common and a consequence more acceptable - but only at a price.

I know there has been a lot of ribbing on here regarding BNTA members, but it isn't without warrant! I am beginning to think the logo isn't worth the computer it was designed on! 'this next statement is just for fun, please don't bust an artery getting all chewed up about it,' but I think you could MORE reliably buy a slab! I concur. I think there is probably a greater chance of a slab being identified as such than a coin being given the correct id.

I get the impression NNC is a one man band who puts whatever number he thinks of first on the slab. Looking at many of his slabs, if it says 62 think 26, if UNC think VF. Only buy from this guy if you absolutely are certain what you are doing. He isn't alone in hiding edge damage though as I've also had NGC and PCGS slabs which have hidden defects. As a result, I tend to automatically mark a slab down unless I know the particular coin in question having seen it in the hand previously. You also have to consider the difference between an American EF and a UK EF. Generally speaking, a British EF will be in an AU holder.

Why do you want to send all the swimming pools, tennis court etc to Manchester?

A lot. I spent some time working for the Financial Ombudsman Service and essentially we started with the assumption that the claimant was in the right. Certain occupations - teachers, policemen (sorry John) were prevalent in making claims and a fair few won despite the fact that you knew in your heart of hearts that they were being somewhat economical with the truth, you just couldn't put your finger on it. In my time there, the assumption was made that professionals such as solicitors or accountants should really have known what they were doing and would have had the nous to read the small print and ask questions. However, I understand that has now changed and solicitors are now claiming like there is no tomorrow. So either we've got the worst legal profession in the world, or someone is pulling a fast one. Bizarre. I do have a degree of sympathy with anyone (apart from the above) who was mis-sold Payment Protection Insurance however as it was normally an add-on to something else, such as a pension. The cost was usually a fraction of the overall total and as such people tended to disregard it. When you add up many years worth of payments however, it does come to a tidy sum. I think this and other similar situations are endemic across society, irrespective of background. 20 years ago my sister used to arrange mortgages for a high street lender. When the s**t hit the fan in the early 90s, you've guessed it. The biggest problems were with self-certified incomes by the legal profession and accountants. i.e. their application could be tailored to achieve the desired result. Compensation now appears to be a major pre-occupation of this country. Whiplash claims, trips, mis-selling, contents losses etc. Why work when you can get something for nothing? Sad really.

You can distract Peter with some fat cigars and me with a bottle of vintage Talisker. It'll take more than one bottle if we're talking about early pennies. As for favourite monarch, I've got a soft spot for Edward the Confessor. A very interesting reign and a somewhat 'human' king. Not to mention that I'm enamoured with his coinage... Nae chance wi' the 18 year old Tally me thinks! You'd be quite amazed how many I have converted in Ukraine with that Aqua de Vita. Had a glass of talisker over 20 years ago, never found a better whiskey to-date, and it's not for want of trying as many others as opportunity presents! I've always appreciated a glass of Linkwood. Just had a quick look on the net, I might give it a try! Their 1981 runs at 56.9% doubt I'll be able to afford that one! But it is extremely nice.

You can distract Peter with some fat cigars and me with a bottle of vintage Talisker. It'll take more than one bottle if we're talking about early pennies. As for favourite monarch, I've got a soft spot for Edward the Confessor. A very interesting reign and a somewhat 'human' king. Not to mention that I'm enamoured with his coinage... Nae chance wi' the 18 year old Tally me thinks! You'd be quite amazed how many I have converted in Ukraine with that Aqua de Vita. Had a glass of talisker over 20 years ago, never found a better whiskey to-date, and it's not for want of trying as many others as opportunity presents! I've always appreciated a glass of Linkwood.

Given it has been messily plugged, that's a lot of dosh. Heads up for anyone who's interested, the Briot hammered halfcrown is the one that was unregcognised as a type by Lockdales a couple of years ago - hence the estimate of £30! CNG bought it there and paid under £1K. They had it on their site at $2450 for a while and it didn't sell, so has gone in the auction. Good provenance on it being ex-Cumberland Clark, Farquhar, Dupree, Hopkins and Pritchard. There are a few stress marks, but it isn't a bad example.

You're cheap Scott, go for the halfcrown Go for a ninepence or sixpence - far less common. Better still a flat crown shilling where there are only a couple dozen or so survivors.

Spend a little bit on a course on how not to be taken in by sales pitches.

Their prices have been too high for the last few years now. In 2005 I bought a nice James I 1/2d mullet over bell for just over £50 all in, which wasn't cheap, but not OTT at the time. Maybe they have decided that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Ebay is full of overpriced tat and a few billion potential buyers who haven't a clue what they are bidding on or buying, so perhaps they are just trying to milk the market. Nobody is obliged to bid or buy, and at those prices hopefully nobody from this forum will waste their money.