Peckris

Yes - I have a 1929 shilling like this. Once I'd learned it was acid, I can now recognise them almost instantly. I thought acid erodes and not stretch metal? Yes. But the elongated teeth may be underlying stress patterns from the strike which are normally invisible but which have been uncovered by the metal erosion.

You can console yourself with the thought that the HD recorder might be used for educational documentaries, the Kindle for lots of historical works, which will all leave too little time for the Xbox - on the other hand, pigs might fly

It's so badly worn and damaged that all one can say with any certainty is that it's an early milled copper farthing, which were produced from the 1670s to the 1770s. Worth its own weight in copper. Do you not think the bust is too close to the edge top and bottom for a farthing? Coupled with the weight which is at the top end of the range for farthings and with undoubted metal loss given the irregular flan, I thought a halfpenny might be a better option. Yes, you could well be right Rob - a cut-down halfpenny makes more sense. The bust - which is the only recognisable surviving shape - is too big on the planchet for a farthing.

In all those cases, I would ascribe it to either poor design (the downstroke of the R coincides with a milling groove - you can still make out the top of it, it's not really a P) or collar wear. In neither case would I call it an error as such.

The only proof for 1946 (if any exist) would a be a very rare VIP proof, which exist for many dates in the series. However, I've not heard of one circulating as (1) they were only issued to VIPs and (2) why would anyone spend something whose face value was only one penny but obviously worth a great deal more as a rare proof? I'm not sure why you believe yours is a proof, as it looks like a bog-standard circulated 1946.

It's so badly worn and damaged that all one can say with any certainty is that it's an early milled copper farthing, which were produced from the 1670s to the 1770s. Worth its own weight in copper.

As it was originally mint toned, possibly nearly to black I think any toning now is the result of a good clean at sometime in the past. Aye. An original should look something like the one for sale here : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1916-George-V-farthing-/110796001215?pt=UK_Coins_BritishMilled_RL&hash=item19cbf4cfbf#ht_500wt_1156 (That colour is not dirt or toning - it's the way they were treated at the Mint to darken them so they wouldn't be passed off as half sovereigns).

Yes - I have a 1929 shilling like this. Once I'd learned it was acid, I can now recognise them almost instantly.

Nope. Though the Royal Mail owes me two, but I'd say they aren't going to show up now. Bastards.

No - have a closer look. Note particularly Britannia's face, hand, and foot. On yours, the finger detail has totally worn away, the face is only a vague blur, and the foot is simply an outline. Whereas on that 1952 proof you can see all those details clearly. Your coin is AVF and probably slightly polished? while that proof is shiny from being a proof. In hand you would see the difference dramatically.

That's a classic case of acid bath (post-production, of course). Typically all the detail remains in a semi-ghostly form, but the planchet goes very very thin. I've never actually seen a coin that's been in an acid bath. I would have expected it to be surface pitted though and also not to have the extended teeth, as Rob points out. Would this just be someone having fun with H2SO4? I ought to get some acid and try it for comparison. Rob, the portrait and legend are all correct but the overall diameter is slightly less, with the edges almost ending at a point, suggesting there wasn't sufficient metal. Surface pitting would occur with minor acid spills - localised damage. Where a coin has been immersed completely for a while in an acid bath, the metal dissolves, though due to the characteristic nature of strikes, the surface detail is not the first to go; I'm not sure why. I think the 'extended teeth' MAY be due to striking stresses in the original normal coin, which would be beneath the surface and hence invisible under normal circumstances (but that part is just an educated guess). I'd be 90% confident of the acid bath hypothesis though.

At that exploded size it's a little hard to judge grade as every little flaw is magnified. However, there does seem to be a bit of wear which is probably not nearly so evident at normal size. But the tone is glorious. AEF? Or possibly EF at normal size.

That's a classic case of acid bath (post-production, of course). Typically all the detail remains in a semi-ghostly form, but the planchet goes very very thin.

I think your problem HAX is that there is unlikely to be a Malacca coin specialist on this site? There may be someone with a general interest in coins of the whole region? Maybe scott knows something. He has worldwide interests.

Especially for A UNC/UNC coins to fit into. If the rest are mid/low grade they will have lost a fraction from the diameter. Peck is quite correct, the only really accurate test is a digtal caliper set which you can pick up for peanuts on ebay/tinternet. tinternet, is that an auction place special for tinted coinage ? There's a place up North. It's called Yorkshire. There they refer to t'internet. Clearly a ' has been missed. Sorry Peck, ' missed and also an i from "digital". Clearly my one fingered typing isn't up to scratch at night with a stomach full of Glenlivet (thanks a bunch for making me buy a couple of bottles for Christmas at £20 each Mr Tesco). Yes you are probably right. However I do have 7 of these folders and it doesn't seem to fit into any of the spaces.I take your point about it being a higher grade than some of my other coins Argumentus, but I have at least a dozen that I would have said were a similar grade and these seem to fit.I'll have a look to see if I can get hold of some digital calipers! Many thanks for your comments once again. Interesting that it won't fit into any space. Mind you it would only need to be the merest fraction oversize to result in a non-fit. Not even a BOGOFF?? Nah! I can't grumble too much though as it's one of my favourites and it hasn't been this cheap in what seems a very long time Compared to petrol, ANYTHING looks cheap!

Especially for A UNC/UNC coins to fit into. If the rest are mid/low grade they will have lost a fraction from the diameter. Peck is quite correct, the only really accurate test is a digtal caliper set which you can pick up for peanuts on ebay/tinternet. tinternet, is that an auction place special for tinted coinage ? There's a place up North. It's called Yorkshire. There they refer to t'internet. Clearly a ' has been missed. Sorry Peck, ' missed and also an i from "digital". Clearly my one fingered typing isn't up to scratch at night with a stomach full of Glenlivet (thanks a bunch for making me buy a couple of bottles for Christmas at £20 each Mr Tesco). Yes you are probably right. However I do have 7 of these folders and it doesn't seem to fit into any of the spaces.I take your point about it being a higher grade than some of my other coins Argumentus, but I have at least a dozen that I would have said were a similar grade and these seem to fit.I'll have a look to see if I can get hold of some digital calipers! Many thanks for your comments once again. Interesting that it won't fit into any space. Mind you it would only need to be the merest fraction oversize to result in a non-fit. Not even a BOGOFF??

I'm sure they would be melted down to make some nice nose studs or something. I imagine the fact that would entail a loss of many ££K would ironically be lost on the *ahem* new owners. As for verdegris, all I can suggest is olive oil. Pop your nice green coins in and leave, possibly for months. Gradually the verd will be reduced, though it will also effect the coin itself. I don't believe there's any way to avoid that. If the coins are not very high value, another way - and much quicker - is to soak in balsamic vinegar overnight, then rinse off throughly (vinegar's an acid). You will find the verdigris is merely a dark stain, but the rest of the coin will be considerably lighter.

Peter's a notorious pessimist He's not so far out though. Me, I'd keep three coins from the second picture, as being reasonable foundations for the start of a collection. Top left and top right, and bottom right. Not great value but decent enough to keep. The third picture needs re-taking - it's way too dark, especially the bottom (obverse).

Awww, you really shouldn't have. Oh. You weren't..

Especially for A UNC/UNC coins to fit into. If the rest are mid/low grade they will have lost a fraction from the diameter. Peck is quite correct, the only really accurate test is a digtal caliper set which you can pick up for peanuts on ebay/tinternet. tinternet, is that an auction place special for tinted coinage ? There's a place up North. It's called Yorkshire. There they refer to t'internet. Clearly a ' has been missed. Yes you are probably right. However I do have 7 of these folders and it doesn't seem to fit into any of the spaces.I take your point about it being a higher grade than some of my other coins Argumentus, but I have at least a dozen that I would have said were a similar grade and these seem to fit.I'll have a look to see if I can get hold of some digital calipers! Many thanks for your comments once again. Interesting that it won't fit into any space. Mind you it would only need to be the merest fraction oversize to result in a non-fit.

Sorry to make the obvious comment here - are you sure it isn't your Whitman folder? Some of those cardboard cutouts left something to be desired.

That's no problem. You can view the coins yourself, and in addition you have the expertise of fellow members. No member of a coin club is going to risk selling crap with the eyes of his peers on him.

There are a lot of 'gilded' George IV farthings. I've never been quite sure if they were contemporary attempts to pass off as gold coins, or modern attempts to pass off as gilded proofs. Either way, the examples I've seen have always been high grade (like yours). For gilded coins in good condition, an approximate rule of thumb would be 1/5 to 1/3 catalogue value of the ordinary copper issue depending on eye appeal.

Not unless you're a mind reader. But I intend - when I can get it together - to sell off such of my high grade 'date run' items as I feel are superfluous. This will mostly be halfcrowns from George V to Eliz II and sixpences from George VI to Eliz II and any number of proof sets of the 1970s and 1980s. Plus other oddments.

I think a bank defeats the object really. It's a hobby not a gold reserve! I can just see the bank manager's face when you tell him "I was just in the middle of a reply to one of the guys at predecimal when I suddenly thought 'Hey is my 1860s bun penny a Freeman 6+D or 6+G?' So if you'll just fetch me a table my good man, and put it in a good light. I'll be about an hour before I have to rush off and finish posting the reply before being logged off."