Peckris

At small sizes, that coin looks most attractive. But at larger sizes the attractive toning suddenly starts to look rather uneven. That may be all it was, rather than a dislike of toning per se. I couldn't accept a harshly cleaned coin or even a barreled ancient.I don't mind the black gunk removed from silver (or even accetate improved silver....in moderation).Gold won't need anything more than hot water and a PAT dry....Copper forget it[/b]. I don't collect medals but I have a few inherited and a couple have obviously been polished.They have retoned nicely. Again with coins its horses for courses and if we all had the same expectations there would be just one series of very expensive coins. I wouldn't go that far. Really bad green can be removed quickly with balsamic vinegar overnight, or with olive oil if you don't mind waiting several months. As for general 'film', or dirt or gunk, the use of surgical spirit applied using a microfibre cloth, can help with that.

I'm not sure at all. It's definitely not hammered, probably quite a lot earlier from the look of it. I'm thinking it may be contemporary with Celtic issues, but it would need someone with much more knowledge than I to confirm that.

The gold sovereign would be worth at least bullion value which is quite high right now. But you would need a decent picture of it for eBay (the sellers who post pictures like yours don't do very well! unsurprisingly). The other two are also only bullion value for silver. The 1887 shilling is the commonest Vic silver coin, and holed it would have no collector value at all. The 3d I can't see too well but it doesn't look high grade, so would be worth little. I would forget the silver and get a decent picture (both sides) of the sovereign for eBay.

I was at a provincial auction about 7 years ago and there was a lot of several late Geo V and early VI silver 3ds which had obviously had their Unc-ness enhanced. A fellow dealer I was chatting to about it said that collectors were a lot less bothered about cleaned coins than they used to be. Mind you, these weren't the 'fine crazing' nor the 'dipped dead dullness', they just looked a bit too shiny. I wonder if it's true though - maybe collectors are getting less fussy? I may have fallen victim to it too. My Vicky Gothic florin is almost untoned and has a kind of silky sheen, likewise my 1910 halfcrown. They could have been dipped very briefly, or simply had their lustre fade to a kind of silky finish. On the other hand my 1844 halfcrown was DEFINITELY too bright (Ian Richardson said, when I was exchanging 4 high grade Victorian halfcrowns for it, "Good choice, I'm surprised more people haven't shown interest in that one"!) - however, it's now toning rather nicely - the obverse to a reddish tone and the reverse with some brown/black around the edges. Exposure to the elements does seem to work.

Those are a mix of British and British Dependancy commemoratives and proofs. I've no experience of Isle of Man or Australian issues, but judging from the rest of them, they probably wouldn't be very valuable. The 1977 Silver Jubilee cupro-nickel crown is worth a theoretical £1 but you'd never get that. The Kennedy half dollar contains some real silver so has a bit of intrinsic value. The 1951 crown usually retails for around £10. The 1973 proof 50p, around £3 retail. The whole lot? Not sure really. Probably somewhere between £25 and £50 at auction, though as I say, I'm unfamiliar with some of those proofs. Don't retire just yet! Well done Peck...you beat me to it. The Kennedy half raised me £2.28 last week and how many 51 crowns do you want for £10? However the 77 crown is legal tender at 25p...thats what I paid with my pocket money when they were issued. Ah, well they have to be in the original cardboard case of issue, like our friend's here Astonishing to think that the Millennium edition of Spink listed them at £20 per!

Those are a mix of British and British Dependancy commemoratives and proofs. I've no experience of Isle of Man or Australian issues, but judging from the rest of them, they probably wouldn't be very valuable. The 1977 Silver Jubilee cupro-nickel crown is worth a theoretical £1 but you'd never get that. The Kennedy half dollar contains some real silver so has a bit of intrinsic value. The 1951 crown usually retails for around £10. The 1973 proof 50p, around £3 retail. The whole lot? Not sure really. Probably somewhere between £25 and £50 at auction, though as I say, I'm unfamiliar with some of those proofs. Don't retire just yet!

Whatever - it's a bloody gorgeous little coin

When he says "full", Joey, he means the size of St Paul's Cathedral

If it has the same profile, thickness and weight as a 20p, then it is a blank that got through. It should be flat on both sides as the relief is made by the dies. They usually sell for a few pounds at most, so there isn't a fortune to be made, but it's still a nice thing to have. Basically Hannah, you can group 'weird coins' into groups : • misstrikes and errors (which Rob has identified yours as) - these are collected by some, but even if you don't sell it for a modest sum, it is worth keeping aside as a curio • counterfeits - these might be created to fool slot machines, or like so many current £1 coins, to pass off as a genuine coin; some are historic : a lot of early 19th Century silver was counterfeited in copper and given a thin wash of silver, and these are now quite collectable in their own right. • forgeries - these are valuable coins which have been faked to fool collectors, and which are our biggest headache • tokens - produced to meet a shortage of small change (e.g. late 18th Century), or gambling chips, or even for political reasons • coins that have been 'tooled' or defaced after being taken from circulation - engraved love tokens in the 19th Century, or just worn on a necklace; some are interesting and collectable without being particularly valuable, others are near worthless, e.g. modern coins with initials engraved • coins that have acquired a patina or other unnatural tone - e.g. green from being buried in the ground, or turned into wafers from being immersed in acidI'm sure there's other groupings I've missed - it's worth a whole study in itself! I have a love token i thiink, says MV in very nice lettering, worth its silver at least Acid? What a nasty thing to place a little coin in!!!! Hummph > A picture of the "love token" might be worth a look? As for acid baths, I have the ghost of a 1929 shilling! I can only hope it was no better than VF when it was bathed, as it would have been such a waste. As it is, I have an interesting curio

If it's Indian, then it's most likely the Islamic part (Moghul?) - if that script is not Arabic, then it's Urdu. It's definitely not Hindi.

If it has the same profile, thickness and weight as a 20p, then it is a blank that got through. It should be flat on both sides as the relief is made by the dies. They usually sell for a few pounds at most, so there isn't a fortune to be made, but it's still a nice thing to have. Basically Hannah, you can group 'weird coins' into groups : • misstrikes and errors (which Rob has identified yours as) - these are collected by some, but even if you don't sell it for a modest sum, it is worth keeping aside as a curio • counterfeits - these might be created to fool slot machines, or like so many current £1 coins, to pass off as a genuine coin; some are historic : a lot of early 19th Century silver was counterfeited in copper and given a thin wash of silver, and these are now quite collectable in their own right. • forgeries - these are valuable coins which have been faked to fool collectors, and which are our biggest headache • tokens - produced to meet a shortage of small change (e.g. late 18th Century), or gambling chips, or even for political reasons • coins that have been 'tooled' or defaced after being taken from circulation - engraved love tokens in the 19th Century, or just worn on a necklace; some are interesting and collectable without being particularly valuable, others are near worthless, e.g. modern coins with initials engraved • coins that have acquired a patina or other unnatural tone - e.g. green from being buried in the ground, or turned into wafers from being immersed in acid I'm sure there's other groupings I've missed - it's worth a whole study in itself!

As a starting point, from the Arabic-like script and minarets, it seems it could be Islamic in origin.

Surprised? That's why you should always buy the books and then the coins. Most people overpay for items because they haven't done their homework. An ethical seller might list an unc 1967 penny for £1. Less scrupulous people might list the same item for £10, after all, £10 isn't a huge amount of money in this day and age. With a little knowledge, the same £10 might just buy all of the Elizabeth II pennies in UNC once you realise how cheap they are. Would you prefer 8 coins (1953 & 1961-7) for the price of 1 without dropping grades, or not? Silly question probably. A really ethical seller would give BU 1967 pennies away free with other purchases. Will they ever be worth anything? Hm. Not in our lifetimes. Having said that, the earlier Liz II pennies (1961 / 62 / 63) are becoming a lot harder to get in genuine BU. The only really easy ones are 1965 / 66 / 67. I know that, but on the assumption that a business needs to sell things you have to say that everything has a price. The point I'm trying to make is that you have to get a feel for the market and not blindly accept what is presented. This can only be done by research, whether on line or printed is not important as long as it is done. Having done a spot of reading, it wouldn't come as a big surprise to find that some uncirculated coins are remarkably cheap despite being 70 or 80 years old. Some 1953 coins, 1948, and 1936 come to mind particularly.

Surprised? That's why you should always buy the books and then the coins. Most people overpay for items because they haven't done their homework. An ethical seller might list an unc 1967 penny for £1. Less scrupulous people might list the same item for £10, after all, £10 isn't a huge amount of money in this day and age. With a little knowledge, the same £10 might just buy all of the Elizabeth II pennies in UNC once you realise how cheap they are. Would you prefer 8 coins (1953 & 1961-7) for the price of 1 without dropping grades, or not? Silly question probably. A really ethical seller would give BU 1967 pennies away free with other purchases. Will they ever be worth anything? Hm. Not in our lifetimes. Having said that, the earlier Liz II pennies (1961 / 62 / 63) are becoming a lot harder to get in genuine BU. The only really easy ones are 1965 / 66 / 67.

I've always wanted to get some of the older "odd denomination" US coins such as the three cent piece and two cent piece and see what reactions I got when I spent them. After all, I get lots of funny looks when I spend half dollars (half the cashiers think they are quarters, others think they are dollars and still others think I'm spending foreign money!) and $2 bills, I can't imagine the looks if I'd spend 3 cent and 2 cent pieces. Unfortunately, even low grade examples seem to sell for $20+ for each of them, so as of yet I haven't had an opportunity to do it. im gonna do that with a crown but a decimal one Just make sure you don't demand change from a 25p when what you've handed over is a £5 crown....

P'raps it's just the picture, but the one on the left doesn't look much like a hollow neck to me.

I think you may have missed my post above? It's actually most likely GEORG.II D.G. M. BRI(TT). ET H. R. (GEORG II DEI GRATIA MAGNA BRITANNIA ET HIBERNIA REX) ("George II by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain and Ireland") That's if it conforms to inscriptions on English coins, and so much of it seems to.

Yes, I'm sure I could fill a few gaps. I'd have to look at what I've got, but it's probably only a small % of the full range available. I will post back when I've had a look. The easiest date is probably 1971, as this is (I think) the most common British coin of all time.

i do not understand. Alarm bells should now start to ring. They make their money by selling you the first item and then routinely send you things on approval that they expect you to pay for but are never even close to being value for money. Unless you (or your grandfather) have signed up for a specific number of items and any distance selling cooling off period has expired, then you are under no obligation to take further items. I assume it was your Grandfather who bought the items in question and it is he who will be bombarded with items on approval sent to the contact address given. On the assumption there is no long term contract, I suggest that you write to them (preferably signed for to prove that they have received the letter) or email them asking to be taken off the mailing list, whilst pointing out that you will not be buying any more things on approval from them and that if they send them, they will not be paid for and will be treated as unsolicited goods which you are under no obligation to return. (Unless of course that is, you actually do want to receive them in the future). They rely on people's guilt in not taking up an offer that has so "generously" been made available to them and a lot of people get conned into thinking they have a bargain. This has expanded on the reason why Peter said this was your first mistake. The one thing these people crave is contact details. Randomly sending out gilt pennies to all the addresses in the telephone book would not be cost effective, but selling these items to people with a passing interest in coins is the basis for a business as the material costs are a tiny fraction of the retail price and so you only need a small percentage to take up the offer and make it worthwhile on their part. Taking up the next offer by actually paying for it means you will probably get an expanded and more expensive selection of similarly overpriced tat to choose from soon afterwards. If you really want their items I suggest you buy them in the second hand market as the price will be a fraction of the original. Sorry for the doom and gloom one day into your 15th year, but there are a lot of people on this forum who don't like to see people being ripped off whether it is coins or anything else and these items fit the bill perfectly. Others will echo what I have said and so you would be well advised to post any queries you have for specially packaged or presented items. Use dealers for purchasing single coins. Chris who runs this site is one, and there are a few other members with websites listing coins for sale such as John (argentum...), red riley, ColinG, myself, Michael Gouby (whatever his id is?) etc. not to mention the many more who list items on ebay. Any reputable coin dealer will take back a coin you are not happy with, though for obvious reasons it becomes unhelpful if rejection is the norm and in this case you should drop the dealer. Yes, I agree. My sister got ripped off by some 'promotion' that arrived in the post - it was supposedly a prize draw, and you had to send the promoters a text. They then sent her 6 texts in return. What they didn't explain (except maybe in some very very very small print) was that receiving these cost £1.50 per text. And then, when she had already lost £9 and next topped up her phone, they sent her 6 more! This isn't as bad as that, but it's a way to get you to spend a lot of money on things that aren't worth what you pay for them. Decorated plates were a popular scam in the 1980s. "Limited edition" medallions by various private mints (the Franklin Mint for example) have always been another. If you like your 2009 halfcrown (whatever that is) then by all means keep it and enjoy it, but don't expect to sell it in the future. It's not real coinage. Don't get ripped off!!

Both websites are in Dutch. Go to Google, then select translate from "more" and paste the URL into the box. Google will then translate the page into English. Correction - Google will then translate into a fairly close relative of English

Most of the letters seem to be out of the proper alignment, which is a bit odd. The earlier Victorian coins were usually of a high standard of workmanship. Issues like these would tend to make me a little suspicious. There are many fake gold coins. Thet are not usually sought for their varieties. An investment....Ummm.A nice good portrait hammered Liz would be about the same price. You mean something like this Peter`? That's a milled coin Dave! But to my eyes, the best of Liz's output

Nice proof, very nice. It definitely doesn't look like an overdate, more like a mark or blemish. You'd have to ask yourself, when striking proof coins in 1806, why on earth there would be any 1807 dies (yet), and why - for a proof - they would use it!!!

Most of the letters seem to be out of the proper alignment, which is a bit odd. The earlier Victorian coins were usually of a high standard of workmanship. Issues like these would tend to make me a little suspicious. There are many fake gold coins. Thet are not usually sought for their varieties. An investment....Ummm.A nice good portrait hammered Liz would be about the same price. That would be on her birthday, after sending Prince Philip down the offy?

Weren't there some sheep mintmarks (at least one) on hammered coins?

Well, that would certainly fit with the Georges being also Electors of Hanover ... but what about the British obverse legend and British Garter on the reverse? Brunswick-Luneburg used the british legend on the obverses of some of their coins and also the british garters. George Luneburg became George 1st of England in 1714 . The coinage of Brunswick-Luneburg during the 18th century is very interesting, other Thalers also have the 4 shields the same as those used on the George 2nd Shillings of GB. Fascinating - I never knew that. And the Anglo-Saxon chumminess persisted I guess, until George V changed the royal name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor.