Rob

Sorted then. Well done. Those who don't like keeping reference books/records, please note.

Maybe, I don't know. That's why I said perhas someone else has the books to check for references and values. I see few Scottish coins apart from the early pennies, or the much more common milled bits.

It looks Scottish, but my books are at home and I'm not, so someone else has to chip in with a reference number/value.

A picture tells a thousand words. Image limit size is 500k per post, so if exceeded, leave the thread and rejoin with the next 500k.

We meet on the first Tuesday of every month starting at 7:30 in the Nursey Inn on Green Lane in Heaton Norris. Below is the text outlined in our 2025 chairman's report which gives full details. South Manchester Numismatic Society (SMNS) Chairman’s Report to 2026 BANS Our AGM was held in June 2025 at our long-standing venue, the Nursery Inn, Heaton Norris, Stockport, SK6 4NL. 7 members attended and 2 apologies were accepted. In addition to the normal agenda, discussions moved on to topics which had been submitted by members as AOB. As a result of these conversations the following was agreed. It was decided that our subscription to Zoom should be cancelled, although the option to renew remains under consideration. We also reduced our annual subscription to £5. It was decided to change our meeting start time to 7.30 from 8.00 pm and to reduce the number of meetings to the level of most BANS societies at once a month. One of our members, Roy Williams, volunteered to submit pieces for publication in the Societies section of Coin News. He has been doing an excellent job in promoting SMNS. Since the AGM the average attendance has been eight across seven meetings which has been boosted by the recent pleasing acceptance of four new members. Two of us, Denis Martin and Paul Greenlees, have given presentations. The Exhibition Evening and the Colin Cooke trophy was won by David Holt for his display of Henry VIII posthumous coinage. At the latest meeting chairman Denis spoke an appreciation and presented Peter Crummett with a gift to celebrate his 90th birthday. It was decided to make Peter an Honorary Member following his over 65 years of support. Before the 2026 AGM in June we have a quiz and a talk from Peter to which we can look forward. In writing this Charman’s report I am pleased to announce that 2025/6 has been a most successful one. Dr Denis M Martin ( Chairman) There is a good range of knowledge in the club, with quite a few specialist fields. Early medieval, Tudor & Stuart, Greek and Roman and some Byzantine, Farthings, Shillings, Modern, Tokens misc. Foreign is probably the least represented unless covered by other fields. We are a tolerant lot that appreciate you can't know everything, so any additional knowledge is welcome. Online access to the meeting was used so that Garry Oddie and others could 'attend', but that obviously went tits up when he died. He joined most meetings and often gave a talk.

Drop him a line. Better still, come up to the next SMNS meeting as he will be giving the talk, so definitely there. You can then speak face to face over some Hyde's beer in the pub where we meet. His knowledge on all things Edwardian (Plantagenet) is considerable, but is always willing to learn. Happy to put you up if a bed is needed.

I called Denis last night to disturb his break and he could only offer the following from memory. I think he misunderstood the question - but it was near the end of the evening. His reply as follows. 3e Northern mints. York (Royal), York (Episcopal), Newcastle, Durham. In my opinion not much to choose between them for relative rarity. York most common , then Newcastle and Durham about the same. 9b. Relatively common. Exeter, Chester and Kingston upon Hull the less common ones. Newcastle in early class 10 are very common even the 10X mules between class 9 and 10 which for other mints are rarer. Newcastle stops minting early in 10ab. I know of no data to confirm my thoughts or otherwise since data for amounts of silver coined is only available for London and Canterbury. All other rarity values are empirical. So to answer your question with my thoughts. It looks like the earlier pieces were lower mintage, but circulated less if typically found in higher grades. If the Newcastle 10s are more common, how does that tie in with larger production and troop movements given we did spend a lot of time fighting the Scots at this time. Sorry, I have too much to do, to do the spadework here. Just a thought.

Assuming the dimensions are correct for diameter and thickness, it looks like a machine shop job, with part of the rim turned down and the milling added. A curiosity, but no value. From the image, it looks slightly larger diameter, in which case the outer ring has been added, which ought to be a little heavier than usual. If you have accurate scales, compare its weight to another normal penny.

The problem is the banks no longer take them for exchange, so if impaired in any way, their value has actually reduced to the scrap cupro-nickel price. As with many commemoratives, they were hoarded, so there is no point in getting a worn one if you want it in decent grade. If I can get £3 for a really nice one, I'm happy. Most go in the rummage bin, or the big smelter in the sky.

Technically yes, but nothing out the ordinary. If a die is filled with grease (because they are stored that way before use to stop oxidation), then it won't compress when striking coins leading to weak or missing detail. This happens frequently as they use a lot of dies. If the flan is slightly thinner at one point, then it likely means it has been cut from the edge of a sheet, which depending on the amount of metal left for the last sheet say in the batch, could simply run out of metal to use. The sheets for making flans will be squeezed between 2 rollers to get the right thickness, which eventually must result in insufficient metal to fill the gap. It has curiosity value for many, but is a feature that's regularly seen. Someone might pay you a pound or two for it plus postage. For added zeros, put it on ebay and say the decimal point wasn't struck up. I'm sure someone will fall for it.

Or to put it another way. Face value + (£1/ebay price).

It will either be the dies blocked with grease, or more likely given the weakness to both sides, a weak strike or a non-uniform/standard thickness flan. Weight?

A pound, and better spent than hoarded given its condition. I assume it is genuine and not a copy?

Plenty, but I don't want to take over the thread and quite a few are shown elsewhere. I have approx 2 dozen in the collection with different reasons for the various errors as made.

Hi Shelly. Sorry, but no large value. It is a result of a die beginning to break up shortly before it dies. Given enough time, every die would show this feature (or something else related to the wear process) as it is due to a chip breaking off, which leaves a depression in the die surface where it shouldn't be and results in a raised lump. You might get something on ebay for it, but don't plan for a night out on the proceeds! List it for more than the cost of a second class letter stamp plus 5p and you will have a profit, as there is a collector for everything. In numismatic terms it is called a cud. FYI, another die fault arising from their destruction includes cracking prior to complete failure (leaving a raised irregular line or lines). The pictures help to explain what I mean. The second also shows a depression in the reverse field due to the flan having a fault too - usually due to bad metal mixing or a trapped air pocket. Raised will be on the die and recessed (incuse) due to the flan. Faults have many varieties and can make an interesting collection in their own right. If you are interested and want to pursue something along these lines, ask questions and search through past threads. It is fun (honestly). Edited to add that the weakness in REX on the obverse is likely due to the compromised integrity of the reverse die, as the die axis is inverted and so follows the line of the reverse flaw. Weak or missing letters is another error rabbit hole to look into.

'Normal for Berwick'?

Buy some! I will only be interested in any that correlate to troop movements which ties in specific issues of coins.

It's a halfcrown, not a florin. Florins weigh just over 11g, not 14.

I concur. The BIN price is essentially $s converted into £s. Note the stock numbers suggest they have been there for a while, being 1 or 2000 short of the later listings.

It also isn't very logical. The wife sold something weighing 1.13kg on ebay, which AI determined should be passable as a Royal Mail large letter (max weight 1kg). Maybe the taxman will round down my bill to £1 on the grounds that subsequent zeros mean nothing. Hope springs eternal.

Given the scarcity of it, I would think a few dies are involved. Most of the metal composition/flan preparation/striking force issues were solved in the multitude of patterns struck in the previous few years, with some types only known with laminating flans for example. Never underestimate the Mint's ability to produce a number of rogue batches from time to time. In the mid-1840s, they were only getting a couple thousand from a die pair. A quick perusal of Linton's article in the BNJ regarding the 1848 halfcrowns is quite enlightening regarding flan quality for much of the decade. ‘The half-crowns of 1848’, 29 (1958-59), p.191-93. According to records, 91872 halfcrowns were struck in 1848. The mint had 13 obverse dies available at the end of 1847, all dated 1846. A further 16 (presumably unfinished) 184(-) were made in 1847, but not required, leaving them available for use in 1848. A potential 29 dies for the 91K struck, but only a handful of the unfinished dies (2 or 3) were completed and dated 1848, most being 1848/6. (One can assumed to be dated 1847, just to test the die batch). The previous year, a total of 22 obv. dies were used to destruction for an output of 367,488 coins. Hardly a long life by normal expectations. Again, there was an 1848/7 in the Adams collection which was possibly 8/7/6, but not conclusively so in hand. Similarly for the 1849/7/(6?). All very interesting, but requiring much speculation until clearer examples come to light. The 1849 in particular, was a real dog of a coin, but even so, unambiguous for the 9/7. Just because it has been given R16, it is only a reflection of the percentage of coins examined during research relative to other 1861s. What if a ton or two of output was lost at sea following despatch? We don't know.

FWIW, this is my 5+G. The obverse die is close to destruction and the coin somewhat spotty, but all features are clear.

I am not aware of any other obverses which show a similar flaw, but that is only what I have seen. The lighthouse is reverse G because the shape is more of a gaussian distribution with a pointy hat. E has straighter sides. I know 6+G exists with the first 1/1 as I used to have one, but the recut is lower, not higher. I do wonder if your coin has been slightly double struck on part of the flan, as the obverse rim shows a slight discontinuity(?) at 11 o'clock with another between 1 and 2. That could account for the crazy date alignment which is what sticks out most to me,, unless I am seeing things.

The lack of credibility (perceived or imagined), stemmed from the conflict of interest of the owners given the connection to LCA, through which many coins were sold at auction. Grading of their slabs in my opinion was rarely an issue, which given their association with GB coinage is as it should be. They were more familiar with British coins than the US TPGs will ever be. As ever, caveat emptor.

Happy Days. I think I will have a few pints in the local tonight. Given their pricing, it is clear evidence of the cost of nationwide advertsiing in papers and TV is not insubstantial - or someone has run off with the bank account funds. I would go further than no great loss, as it removes a source of overpriced material sold to people with a limited grasp on coin prices, and as an afterthought, maybe the recent IHT adjustments for pensions etc has led to the wealthy gullible reviewing their methods for passing on things to the descendants.