Rob

Still is.

That's just coke/metal polish/some other cleaner and has been burnished. Maybe heated as well, but that is a less probable afterthought. How many do you want like that - I can supply hundreds.

If you aren't careful, Seuk will be organising another Danish invasion. Just sayin'.

If you want a hardbound copy they will do that too. It's probably only about 40 or 50 pounds on top of the basic book and protects the pages better than the softback.

Michael Sharp's classification (see BNJ 1977). Bust type H1, reverse 1.

That's the one thing you don't want. Coin collections are a personal thing. They will probably buy something that is overpriced and in a grade that you will want to improve on. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder etc.

I think it probably is the one described by North as Aldgar as there is no AED..... listed. A weak upper portion to the E could mislead the cataloguer. Eadgar is also listed for EdC at London. Aldgar (Aedgar) would make sense as he strikes in both EdC and H2, the above being a late issue. Maybe Clive has a bit to add.

There is no AEDGAR at London. Plenty of AE.............s, and an ALDGAR according to North. A picture would have been infinitely more useful than a description as spellings of the same name frequently varied. It is often to do with using up the space fully (empty gaps in the legend weren't allowed), or abbreviating a name to fit in both moneyer and mint.

There's nothing to match in D&H, but Davis Dublin 17 onward (p.214-222), mostly have a crowned harp. There is a number (dozens) of legend varieties/number of pearls to crown/laurel leaf pointings which are rendered irrelevant by the condition of the object above. The dates are approx. 1800-1822.

With the exception of a few well documented types, the likelihood of a coin being dodgy is very low. People get exercised for obvious reasons about the fakes being touted as real that emanate from China, but these coins are known to collectors. If there were lots of copies around of other types, the word would soon get out. That it hasn't is a fairly good reflection of the risk. Copy types are measured in the hundreds or maybe a thousand by now, but are characteristically too good to be true. Taking the British coinage over the past couple of millennia, it is fair to say that the number of varieties combined with dates is into 6 figures. Look at individual dies and we are probably well over a million. Got to keep things in perspective.

There's cleaning and cleaning. You can use soapy water or some other suitable solvent depending on what you want to remove. Try it in an ultrasonic bath, but only as long as the coin is held suspended and not touching the sides of the vessel. What you don't want to use is a Brillo Pad. Looking at a lot of detector finds, I suspect that message hasn't got through. If you have greasy deposits then a suitable organic solvent wouldn't go amiss. I suppose the crucial point, if you intend to use physical contact, is to use something with a lower Mohs scale value than the material you are trying to clean.

That's fine. I can't see anything wrong with it. My example is attached. Sorry about it being a scan and a bit featureless.

You can get flan cracks in both milled and hammered. If the weight is about right, then it is likely the coin will be too. If you have haymarking, you might find the copper is preferentially leached from the coin when it is underground. I guess that would depend on conditions.

There is a good list of reference volumes attached as pdfs to this site. Not the easiest things to read IMO, but useful for anything that isn't illustrated.

Sealed plastic from 1839? Better rewrite the science history books.

Yep

It had better be. It's mine. The 1562 reference was directed at the plethora of copies on eBay, invariably described as sixpences.

If you are looking to spend £100-150 then you could be alright for a decent Henry VIII halfgroat or sovereign penny. You will struggle if you are looking for the Holbein portrait on a coin however, as a testoon with a decent portrait is measured in thousands. To give you an idea of the grade you could expect to find, a few images are attached for the Tudors. First up is a 2nd coinage 2d struck at York under Abp. Lee - about 18mm dia.. Second is a sovereign penny. There are several types of this and not all are equal. The portrait on this one is a bit better than you might expect for the money you want to spend, but a clear portrait of the king seated on the throne should be possible. About 15mm dia. Third coin. Henry VII you can get a middle grade groat (4d) of the commoner types or mintmark - about 25mm dia. You could also get a halfgroat (2d) of this reign in reasonable condition. Halfpennies of Henry VII, Henry VIII and Elizabeth I will be at the bottom end of the price range for a decent example, but are quite small at 11 or 12mm dia. Fourth, the Henrys are a facing bust. 5th, the Elizabeth design is a portcullis. You are unlikely to find much in the way of Edward VI or Mary in your price range, but might be able to find a lower grade fine silver issue shilling of the former. A shilling is possible for Elizabeth 1 as is a sixpence, threepence or smaller, but a rule of thumb is the larger the coin, the more expensive they tend to be for the generic types. Portraits on Eliz.1 shillings tend to be quite weak, so this might not be the best option if you want a coin in better condition. A sixpence with a decent portrait would be better (6th coin) as these come better struck up. This isn't exhaustive, but gives a few options.

Same original picture, just smaller.

Anything on pinterest requires you to sign up to view the pictures. If it helps, I take a picture and save it as a jpeg. If it is over 0.5Mb then I resize it using paint so that it is just under that size. You don't have to use the maximum size to get a decent picture though. Obviously it will depend on the size of the coin. e.g. This Bristol halfcrown is 37mm across at the widest point. The first image is 481kb and the second 116kb. There is no serious degradation in image quality, and is certainly adequate for the average viewer.

And whatever you do, avoid anything dated 1562

What sort of coin do you want? Big, small, high grade, lower grade (I'm assuming grade has to be reasonable), Henry VII, Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary or Elizabeth 1? I'm not going to ask whether it is gold or silver, as the former is out of the question in your price range. Affordable denominations are shillings down to farthings ( shilling, sixpence, groat, threepence, twopence, threehalfpence, penny, threefarthings, halfpenny, farthing) but not for all reigns. There are some serious rarities within that group.

There used to be a large gallery section prior to the website changing hosts and software 4(?) years ago. The gallery pics didn't transfer across, and images have been further depleted due to the ludicrous amount of money demanded by Photobucket for hosting. Most people used to load their images via that host, but nobody is going to pay hundreds of £/$s just for the right to dump some images on their servers to be uploaded to other sites. They frightened off everyone on this forum, and to be honest, I'm not sure what market they are aiming to capture given the cost of storage these days.

Give the business to Chris first as he provides the forum for free. Better than inflating Jeff Bezos' already gargantuan wallet even further.

I'm not sure how you can conclude they were done in the minting process, but would appreciate hearing your reasoning. I'm going for post mint damage. I would have a guess at it being the result of someone drilling through an object with the 50p being used to protect the work surface. If correct, the two triangular indentations (1st coin by D & 9; 2nd coin by A & E) are most likely from the jaws of the clamp holding the 50p in place. Alternatively it would have to be due to an object with two triangular feet and a rounded end circular one being forced into the surface of the 50p. I'm not convinced by this one which seems silly.