Peckris

Actually, it HAS had - and still has - full lustre. The artificial toning is applied over the lustre which is why you sometimes see untoned examples. It's also why true BU 'toned' coins have a gorgeous lustrous purple appearance, as distinctive - until wearing - as normal lustre is. I just used multi-quote for this post. What you do is click the MQ button under each post you want to quote from, THEN you click the Add Reply button at the very bottom, and lo and behold it inserts all the posts you've MQ'd.

Forget the pound, a mere johnny-come-lately at only 200 years old - if we lost the penny (in some form or other) we'd lose a coin with nearly 2,000 years of history. The d in £sd stands for denarius, a Roman silver coin uncannily similar in size to the present penny. Perhaps they should revalue the £ and make the penny a worthwhile denomination!

ask, and ye shall be given Hopefully the link should work this time. 3 centimetres - that seems about right. Strange about the legend, though Peck's illustrations are not quite fully comprehensive.

.

Coat in petrol, wipe clean, you too can have rainbow coloured coins!!!

I bought a job lot of George V silver (halfcrowns and shillings) at an auction in the 90s. Strange lot : obviously from a dealer at some point as the price sticker in £sd was still on each vinyl envelope, plus a date somewhere in 1969-1970, and many duplicates. Strangely the vinyl envelopes were in gross condition, greasy, weeping, brown and horrid ... yet at some point someone had removed many of the coins and buffed them up nicely, even though most of them were between AEF - GEF. What strange mental process involves deciding to clean coins but leave their disgusting envelopes intact?? I popped them into a decent envelopes. A few years ago I put the remainder of my stock of them into auction, but doubted they would fetch £100. They realised over £200! As for 'tickets', I'm not quite clear what this term refers to? I assume you must be talking about the rectangular coloured cards in the upper part of Coindex envelopes?

Yes, Welcome to the forums Bob (Bob Tanner? - that is so NOT your real name!!) You'll find us a friendly lot, even those of us who prefer vodka or wine to beer

I'd qualify that slightly - it's true that the twopence had a far lower mintage than the penny, but was a far less popular coin due to its size and weight; more were put aside or kept as souvenirs. In that grade or above (VF) they are therefore easier to find than pennies which nearly always turn up well worn. So comparative rarity is something of a moot point!

scott, that is an EXCEPTIONALLY good reverse strike for that series. There may be ghosting (ahead, but while there's music and moonlight ♫ ♫ ... oops, got carried away there for a moment ) but there's more detail on Britannia's boobs and phys than you normally see on pennies.

And badly in need of help... Help him wank? Not I, sir

Hmmm, exceptionally rare, but with a starting bid of only £99.00 this time. Nice coin, nevertheless. It is rare, but so is a winning England football team and I haven't seen one of those on ebay either Is it just me or does that look like the twopence? According to Peck, the KH6,7 halfpenny pattern obverse/reverses have legends that take up the full wdth of the rim. On that photo, the legend only takes up 2/3 of the rim, just like the twopence. And if it really IS the rare halfpenny, why hasn't the seller included a ruler in the picture to prove it? I'm suspicious. Looks like the bidders are too.

You talking about Britannia's face and chest? That's standard! Forget the farthing below it, the penny series was plagued with ghosting etc. The poor definition of Britannia's upper is not only usual for pennies (except the 'recessed ear' variety of 1915-6), it's entirely related to the high profile of the obverse. It's virtually impossible to find a penny Britannia before 1922 (with the possible exception of 1911) without that effect. Believe me scott, your 1918 is a good one (based on the obverse).

You, sir, are a wanker. Lol, i near spat my coffee oot when i read Pecks reply

I actually bought my first edition of Freeman new in the late 70s. This is one case where first editions are rubbish, or so I've been told. Though atually I've found it one major useful reference book over the years.

What's the size (diameter)? If it's a genuine Edward I groat it could be worth thousands. But it's more likely to be a silver penny which are pretty common and generally only worth a few pounds. Why not post pictures or scans of both sides so we can see? That would also show the condition which is crucial to any valuation.

Fascinating! That adds a lot to the earlier discussion, and kudos to you for the research

Certainly not that 1918! Apart from some damage to the 8 in the date, the hair detail on the obverse is WAY above average for that particular date - I congratulate you on that penny scott

You, sir, are a wanker.

I'd personally rate that between F and VF - nearer to VF certainly, but there's too much general wear for it to be a true VF.

I think this is very plausible. Something new tends to galvanise people into not only putting aside an example of the new design but saving one of the old ones too. Could this be the reason why the easiest bun penny in BU is 1887? Interesting - I've always found 1889 and 1890-92 are easier! Unless you mean STRICTLY BU rather than Unc with loads of lustre? Maybe the 1887 is commoner because it was the year of the Jubilee Head silver (the first silver redesign for 50 years!) and though ugly, people obviously saved the new coins in large quantities? Then, though there was no base metal redesign, people would have to "throw in" a penny halfpenny and farthing to make up the complete set.

Wonder what the price was? The 1873s and 1881s (especially) are very difficult in high grades!

Clearly that's a highly probable explanation for many, and one which I never thought about. That too, sounds quite plausible, but why 1928 in particular, peck ? Oh, what I meant was, after the designs changed. Could have been any year really! But perhaps people liked the old designs and were sorry to see them go?

In my wife's family, the tradition was to keep a penny or a larger set of coins for the year of a child's birth. This is something which we have continued with our kids and if a friend has a child, then they get an uncirculated mint set from me! OK, a bit off the subject, but if this was a widespread practice then it would account for a large number of survivals in high grade. I had a published theory about the survival of 1923 halfcrowns in high grade : it was the last year of high mintage of halfcrowns of the old type. (Low mintages in 1924-26.) My theory is that a (?large) bag of 1923 halfcrowns didn't get issued, and was belatedly released after 1928. By that time, the old designs were wearing rapidly due to shallow design. People getting uncirculated 1923s in their change might have thought "Hey, the old design! And in nice condition too!" and put one or two aside. And so more survived than other dates. Just a theory of course, but there has to be a reason why that date is so easy to find.

Even out of focus you can easily tell it's a fake. It's not a fake, it's a replica! Look at the distance of the design from the rim. No wonder he unfocused the camera

Your 1926 is the normal one, and not in too bad a condition. Your eye is a little over-optimistic! Correct for 1949, the 1900 is certainly VF minimum but it's hard to gauge its surface from the picture (as you say), the 1914 is Fine or maybe even GF but you would have to be able to see all the shield for VF, and the 1902 is only Fine (the shield is quite good, but look at all the flat areas on Britannia). Sadly there' nothing of any particular value there. The 1926 MIGHT fetch a pound or two on eBay, but perhaps only 99p. There's a scarce(ish) variety of the 1902 where the sea level is below the point where Britannia's legs cross, but I don't THINK yours is that one (and in that grade there's not a huge difference in value between them anyway). Sorry to be a bit downbeat.