Peckris

Ah, but we're Baby Boomers We will never grow old. ("Hope I die before...")

Yes certainly, here it is My feeling is that it isn't a hammered coin (i.e. not a genuine Chas I) - it looks too well defined and 'pearly'. I'd say it was some kind of commorative piece perhaps? No idea when from though.

I'd give the reverse a clear Fine, the obverse not yet there (too much wear to the hair, and a few letters going). So, NF/F is my verdict.

Your attachment has gone wrong. Maybe you need a space between jpg] and Hi ?

As a young whippersnapper with all most of his brain cells still intact, it caused me no problem whatever! It has to be said that people were eased into it all very gently - florins and shillings became 10 and 5 pences of identical size, and were first introduced three years before D-Day. Then halfcrowns and halfpennies were demonetised, and the ten shilling note was replaced by the 50p, two years before D-Day. All prices were listed in new AND old money for those three years. So by the time the Big Day came around, all that happened was that 2p, 1p and 1/2p's came in. Six months later, old pennies and threepenny bits quietly disappeared.

Nice idea Debbie - even if it doesn't work (I especially like the ROFL one )

Two '33s for the price of one?

I think that's a fair assessment. Most of us are in 3. but working and dreaming for 2. I am in that camp as well!!! Ditto Rob, I definitely mentally placed you in 2. All those rare patterns and proofs... Maybe, but is it a definitive collection? - emphatically not. I might have a few hundred of the above, but I've also got a few hundred four letter expletives to counteract the quality. I suppose it all comes down to what we personally define as 'quality coins' and 'important coins'. I know I have no important items. Quality? To me, 1797 cartwheels in AEF or better, Edward VII silver better than EF, any bun penny in better than EF with lustre, early milled in VF or better, etc etc etc - are all quality coins. Other people might say nothing less than EF is quality. It depends on the individual perspective. My rankings (above) were only my own views on it.

I often wonder why it is, for the sake of £20 worth of silver bullion, that the counterfeiters don't just do the job properly and be done with it? What Nick says. There is a clear distinction between a 'fake' and a 'forgery'. A forgery is something that is produced contemporaneously to swindle people in the course of ordinary trade, so it's usually something of intrinsic value (e.g. silver shillings) produced in copper and given a silver wash; or, the modern £1 coin forgeries that are produced solely to create £1 to spend - its production cost is peanuts. A fake is something inherent to art and antiques etc. It's something produced that has little intrinsic value, but is created specifically for collectors who buy it solely for its rarity or collectible value. Generally the authorities are harder on forgeries than they are on fakes, seemingly there is an unspoken attitude of "well if someone is fool enough to pay those sums for a painting without due diligence...". So, the producers of those George III shillings - if caught - would have probably been hanged, and the modern forgers of £1 coins would do time. Fakers of ancient coins would certainly commit a crime and if caught would pay the appropriate penalty, but the authorities aren't going to devote the same resources to tracking them down as they would, say, to £1 coin or £50 note forgers.

I've got the maximum "valuables" cover on my home insurance. Separate coin insurance is quite expensive, and you really need to have a collection that makes it worthwhile.

P M S L

I think that's a fair assessment. Most of us are in 3. but working and dreaming for 2. I am in that camp as well!!! Ditto Rob, I definitely mentally placed you in 2. All those rare patterns and proofs...

Certainly the reverse looks at first glance like a wearing die, but on reflection, it doesn't look quite 'right'. What Freeman says, however, is : "the date numerals of Reverse J in 1879, when combined with Obverse 9, usually appear thicker and in higher relief than in other years and with other obverses." That might be the answer?

There are as many different kinds of collector as there are people who have coins for any other reason than loose change. Some people just threw some coins in a tin when we were decimalised just for 'nostalgia' and never thought about them again. Those I would hesitate to call collectors, but just about anyone else would qualify. You could divide collectors broadly into various categories : - "Your own" country's coinage or wider afield - Modern or ancient or both - Milled or hammered or ancient or any combination - By date runs or by type - To invest or purely for the love of coins or a mixture of both - To specialise in a fairly narrow field or a wide range - To specialise in all known varieties of a particular type(s) or just the main issues - To buy the very very best and spend loads of money or to buy as many coins as possible on a tight budget - To specialise in a particular denomination(s) or a wide range of types - To collect by themes, e.g. animals on coins At the end of the day, I personally would split collections into three broad categories : 1. The biggest group - vast numbers of inexpensive coins, which can range from 'mere' accumulations to those arranged carefully in albums or boxes 2. The smallest group - 'important' collections which include coins which are known to most collectors in that field, often very rare, and which attract great interest and a definitive catalogue when sold (can be large or small as collections, but nevertheless important) 3. The middle ground - probably most of us, who have X very nice coins without being 'important' (little in the way of provenance), who wouldn't shake the collecting world when sold, but might nevertheless realise a good return.

I'm wondering how the 1816-1820 counterfeits were made. Many of them are such perfect copies (except the metal!!) that you have to think they came from dies. (Unless they produced casting moulds from UNC specimens?)

Agreed. In these enlightened times, it's possibly more shocking to be outed as straight when everyone thought you were gay. Imagine poor old Lionel Blair!

There's a great Dickens quote in a BBC trailer on now : Stern employer to office boy "Your Christmas holiday starts right now" Boy tugs forelock and is suitably grateful. As he reaches the door, the employer says "...and ends right now."

The old tanner is a good series to collect as its small size makes it lower on the popularity list, and prices are therefore more affordable. By "bronze thrupenny" do you mean the brass 12-sided one? Another good series to collect as they range from the ultra-common ultra-cheap (both reigns) to the very scarce and not very affordable. You could get a full set of BU Liz II for somewhere around £50 I'd say.

Just to add to what John said - if you don't want to wait months of oiling, you can soak in Balsamic vinegar overnight (remember it's an acid!). In the morning the green will have gone, replaced by a dark patch. The rest of the coin will have lightened considerably. It's a drastic remedy for a drsatic situation. Remember to rinse off the vinegar thoroughly.

Yes - the design of the £1 reverses have been way way superior to the dismal treatment of 50p's and £5's. I'd not realised that the edge motto on 2010 was "Pro Tanto Quid Retribuamus". Quid on a quid!

Very similar to the Afghan Taliban in their philosophy My first belly laugh in ages! :-) Absolutely identical to the Afghan Taliban in every way. Just a few minor amendments... For hanging, substitute 'a fine' For decapitation with a sabre, substitute 'a fine' For chopping off a hand or two, substitute 'a fine' For purging of professionals, academics, and intellectuals, substitute 'scowling disapproval' For attitudes to women, substitute 'Hey! Some of the best Puritans are women!' For banning Christmas, oops, no substitution

That's just the way it's always been, since time immoral. Personally I'd favour 'heads' and 'tails', but there you go! Blame the Eighteenth Century use of posh words, or Dr Johnson, which amounts to the same thing.

We all do it! Keep playing with the formula till it gives you the result you wanted in the first place.... Quite right! And then write notes to yourself explaining it. What does it matter if no-one else understands them???

Lord Protector rather than Lord of the Dance, eh? We love to hate those Puritans these days, and they probably were in a whole lot of ways a grumpy and cheerless lot. But I suppose in the context of the times, with a floridly embellished, richly ornamented but discredited Catholic church selling dispensations to allow entry to heaven, and an Anglican church busy trying to be an English-speaking version of the Catholics, any group that went back to 'simplicity' and 'plainness' must have seemed refreshing to some.

Cool - though I'm surprised at you not spotting mine was a twopence! But your picture is much better. I really must photograph even a few of my best coins.