Peckris

Thinking aloud, Clive, on the assumption that banks hadn't been invented yet, do you know the actual mechanics of how coins entered circulation in this period ? Interesting question! It had never occurred to me before, but now you ask ...

Due in no small measure to the large numbers of American servicemen stationed in this country. I should have guessed!

I assume you're being ironic az? The thing is ghastly in every respect except the gold content (what a waste of gold!). The portrait is particularly hideous. If that thing came into my possession it would be melted down for its gold in no time

Not so. Silver coins were produced in great numbers from around 1942 onwards, and survive in huge numbers in high grade (partly due to hoarding when silver was replaced bu CuNi). It seems whatever else they economised over, currency was deemed essential to the war effort. That little group isn't worth much to coin collectors, but it migiht mean a great deal to any surviving relatives of the crash, and it is a historic and poignant story in its own right.

It looks like a short cross penny, and it appears that the obverse may say HENRICVS (Henry), but that's as far as I can go on this. If no-one more knowledgeable jumps in, I can do some research in Spinks using your picture.

I don't know whether there were regional variations, but in my area of West London, I must have seen no more than a couple of dozen well-worn veiled heads in the last two years of l.s.d. and perhaps half that of bun pennies. I wish I'd been where you were! I was in Bristol, and the average grade of Veiled Head I found was between VG and F. I would have given anything to find some decent bun pennies! The few I did find - apart from the odd 1890/1/2 in VG - were pretty much flat discs.

So true! Or, make sure it's strict BU. Or both

I may be wrong, but I'm sure I once saw a "check your change" small paperback booklet from about 1968, at one of the the Midland Coin fairs, and it referred to "Modified Head". Although I suppose that was designed for the wider public. Just checked mine, and you're quite right : it does, and yes, that's probably the reason. I also checked the 1968 Seaby price guide, which says "effigy".

To my eye it looks like a stain, or alternatively the coppery toning you quite often get on cupro-nickel. CuNi of 1947-1951 is particularly prone to copper streaking.

Yes, there's a few of those fantasy pieces around. That's very attractive - I got a very similar bronze dark proof fantasy 1788 halfpenny with exactly that same obverse. Got it on eBay for the issue price of £9.99 (no other bidders ). If yours wasn't too expensive, it's well worth it, as it is a very handsome piece.

I saw that specimen yesterday, and was admiring it. Another date and I might have bid for it. The likelihood is though, it's either an early strike, or the way it's been lit (looks like flash), or both.

Not quite true - there were precious few bun pennies, but there was a ton of Veiled Heads, as witness the bag of 'em I used for weightlifting in the late 70s!! Oh yes, we did! Or in my case, 5/- as that was the size of the bags of pennies from banks. And it was fun to look through them, though my haul wasn't that great to be honest. A handful of 1946 die flaw pennies (when no-one collected them) was probably the best I did. And one 1953 penny, rated much scarcer then than now. (I'm not counting Veiled Heads - they were as common back then as they are now). Pounce pounce! Actually Freeman came out that same year And Seabys did a great variation on their Standard Catalogue - a catalogue of base metal coins, plus tokens. PLUS, all the "Check Your Change" type booklets, which covered varieties (not always accurately - one of them listed 1860 as a rare date without distinguishing between copper and bronze!) Though interestingly, the guides all said 1926ME, so it must have been people writing for the wider public, assuming the WP wouldn't know what an 'effigy' was if it bit them!

This adds a completely different dimension. It's not only provenance, but it adds to the history of numismatics as well. Perhaps we should all write something like this when we sell a coin. Sadly I don't think many of our missives would survive though. I always write a ticket for a collection coin whether it is the Churchill crown or a unique coin. Details of the collection reference, ruler, denomination, weight, Spink/Peck/ESC reference number and any other important feature go on the front, purchase details and provenance on the back. Thankfully(?) I don't have too many two ticket provenances as I have difficulty fitting in more than 10 previous owners together with sale dates and lot numbers. I always pass on the ticket(s) if the coin gets sold. Hm, anyone interested in owning my FileMaker Pro record for a coin? It's all there - picture, date bought, where from, how much, condition, values in Spink each year since purchase, location, etc. One small problem, it is digital!

See if I understand - you want a type set of each major Victorian type, especially the coppers/bronze? Then your best strategy is to go for high grade coins like your 1899 penny, but stick to common years. So for the copper penny halfpenny farthing, that would mean 1853 or 1858. For bronze bun head, 1861 or 1890 (for farthings, 1884/5/6 are VERY common). For Old Head, 1901 (or 1899 as you've started there already!) If you decided to expand into silver, the Jubilee Head denominations for 1887 are very common, and for Old Head, 1893. For Young Head it's a bit more of a complex area, come back and ask if you get interested in those. If you buy an issue of Coin News you can find the details of most dealers in it, towards the back.

A picture / scan would be more than welcome

Hi Rob. The 1797 penny is around Fine condition (strict graders might say a bit less) and would be worth around a tenner. The 1858 is also a penny from the dimensions, and is around VF though a little grubby! The commonest varity is also worth around a tenner. There are several scarcer varieties but the coin would need much closer inspection.

I have a clearer lighter image that shows the loop, diagonal and point I described earlier.

The seller clearly didn't know what they had (if anything) as there's no detailed description. The buyer must have gone entirely from the photo.

You were in a 'guy shop'? TMI.

Perhaps its grumpiness was why it was phased out? I don't see why UKIP should be upset about rebranding the pound as a penny - they are great traditionalists and there is a lot more tradition in the penny! (I use the term "great" advisedly ) scott - the 'one penny decimal' may be doomed, but I was speaking of the denomination name, which I'm sure should live on, even in the commercial mindset of the Mint.

The 3/2 overdate is very obvious, downward loop of the upper part of the three alomost joins with the central protrusion, the diagonal is faint protruding as a point at the base of the lower loop. Cant seem to attach the image, but will try again tomorrow John Thanks John ~ now that you've pointed that out, it is obvious. The art of recognising overstrikes, it seems to me, is knowing exactly what to look for in order to distinguish from the others. I have attached a closeup of a 53/2 Classic example of overdates being difficult to see! That looks like a normal 1853 to my eye.

You'd need to get a nice price. The pictures show multiple contacts and wear to the high points. Difficult to tell with the photo angle but it also looks slightly edgy. There is also a not too attractive peripheral tone which is certainly in need of careful examination in the hand. At $800 you could certainly buy better. I'd agree - that series comes along reasonably frequently in high grade. If you hold on for a bit, a really nice one should come along. (If that particular coin looks much better in hand, the picture may be a scan, notorious for giving great detail but killing tone and lustre.)

Coindex envelopes? Now you've confused me! In the 'olden' days (or present; as people like me still do) collectors usually stored their coins in coin trays (ideally in cabinets). The trays had round holes for the coin and so round pieces of paper (tickets) were used to record details of the coin. These were of a similar size to the tray holes and so could sit neatly under the coin described. Old tickets from known collectors are of interest because they show with certainty part of the provenance of the coin. Obviously with newer means of storing coins (flips/slabs) coin tickets aren't so handy. And I guess most collectors now probably keep a computer record of their collection. But tickets are a way of keeping continuity between one collector and another. Below is one from a coin owned by Peter Seaby as an example of what I mean. Hm, obviously I've nnver come across 'old tickets' in my own experience - only similar items written out by the dealers I was buying from. Coindex envelopes are those vinyl squares, but instead of the curvy 'tuck in' flap there's an extra rectangle pocket welded to the coin section, and in that is a blank piece of card to inscribe coin details (often yellow, or green, or pink). These were supplied in plastic coin trays that were higher than the ordinary card coin trays, to accommodate the higher envelopes. It was a 'system' developed in the late 60s if I remember. If not by Peter Ireland, then he certainly used to supply all his coins in them.

On the other hand "jan1213" might be a nice looking woman.....jan, janette, janet ? ....OK, I'll get me coat ---------> That would be an old mac, right?

I say, dump the pound! Replace it with the penny sterling! Make the subdivisions cents, so the 10p becomes 10c, 50p = 50c etc