Peckris

You might want to except Maxentius - there was a horde of virtually 'as struck' specimens found not so long ago. I have one.

My pictures are usually scans - you don't want scans I think?

I have the 1928 proof set, unfortunately I really am pretty hopeless at taking photographs of coins.

That's a nice, respectable, in-between grade penny. Worth a few pounds in that condition, but they increase exponentially in value as you go up towards the Grail of mint condition. But certainly worth more than the 'washers' you see so often, e.g. on eBay.

test Ooh, I like this new bigger limit!

I'm still, of course, resisting the temptation to say "Told you so". (Oops...) My initial thoughts were...........Coin 5 is EF, digs on the OBV, Leaf veins worn, REV left hand thistle has wear along with part of the crown, could be GVF at this rate (sorry) you know how harsh they are So you know what to do with your "i told you so" as i was also correct, i was being evasive as they were going to CGS It's got a CGS grade of EF. I've no more to add.

An interesting read. For a moment I confused her with Plautilla, another Mrs Emperor who had a very interesting story. I share your passion for sestertii but sadly getting a good collection of them is beyond my pocket as they only survived for the early Empire being replaced by the much more common AE denominations, whereas the common or garden denarius and its later sister the antoninianus, lasted right through.

For decades they've been massively out of touch, and I just don't take them seriously. Their predecessor's - Coins and Medals Annual - 1970 issue listed a BU 1932 penny at £50 (a fortnight's average wage), and a BU 1797 2d at £35. Even by the standards of the time, that's - as you so eloquently put it - shite.

Change of what - tabard? religion? wife?

It's currently standing at £103. If it stayed at that it would be fantastic VFM but sadly, as Paulus says, it will go a lot higher.

Yes, a fantastic resource. Unfortunately, when I typed in "UK" "Coin" 1700 to 1800, there was a nice good number of items returned, but on Page 1 (I didn't go further) there were only two coins with images, and both were 1754 farthings, one of which I think was a superb silver alloy proof. I tried one of the items without an image and although it took me to the item details I just got the message about "No image, it may be restricted access or copyright issue". That's going to be a real bummer if you can't get to see images.

I like the BM plans to publish an online catalogue of all the 80,000 coins in their vaults. Edward VIII is a good monarch to start with, but I rather hope they follow it up not with Liz II but perhaps George V or Edward VII or Victoria. Still, I expect it will take some time to accomplish. I wonder if it will be free access or will we have to subscribe to see it?

Fascinating - and not bad coins either, despite their irregularity (or perhaps because of it?)

That's something of a tautology! The shallow head variety always appears to be lightly struck - that's the nature of the beast and why it was modified to begin with.

Blessed are the chosen ones..... I didn't think an unc F-90 existed today Bob's was the best I've seen. I've never heard of an UNC example, unless you have one in your pension fund Dave? Here is my 1877ND. It is not quite VF, but is better than the one slabbed by CGS as Fine. I hand delivered this one to the new owner, in Britain, last September. I wish I had it back! Ha,Ha. Sorry to be rude, but that is nowhere near VF - I'd only rate it F or GF at best. You are right Peck...it is rude. Ha,Ha! Probably GF to NVF is the correct grading range. The advanced collector that bought it, had a GF example, and mine was better than his. Ok, but I'd say the "advanced collector" was sadly deluded if he rated his example - worse than yours - as GF. I'd class myself as at least an "experienced collector" and I was, to be fair, backing up my opinion via Derek Allen's book. I'd personally rate yours as F/GF but opinions differ, of course. Also, my opinion is based around British, not US, grading, which is anything from half to a whole grade different for a stated grade. Your assessment may be absolutely spot on for the American market. Enough to say that you and I disagree on this subject. and that's ok. BTW...the collector I mentioned is not sadly deluded, he is well respected throughout Great Britain, and has a PHd in Computer Science! I hope we are still friends... Colin88...PM me if you are serious, and we can talk about your question. Mais naturellement, mon ami

I'm still, of course, resisting the temptation to say "Told you so". (Oops...)

Classic! Love the boy band take off

A better indicator is the width of the rims, wide and narrow as with the observe. Best seen side by side. As with the 1956 varieties, and the "1968"? Yes, that's quite a telling difference.

it's a good bit of cheap fun! My 1971 halfpenny shines like gold! So do all 175 of mine!!

Blessed are the chosen ones..... I didn't think an unc F-90 existed today Bob's was the best I've seen. I've never heard of an UNC example, unless you have one in your pension fund Dave? Here is my 1877ND. It is not quite VF, but is better than the one slabbed by CGS as Fine. I hand delivered this one to the new owner, in Britain, last September. I wish I had it back! Ha,Ha. Sorry to be rude, but that is nowhere near VF - I'd only rate it F or GF at best. You are right Peck...it is rude. Ha,Ha! Probably GF to NVF is the correct grading range. The advanced collector that bought it, had a GF example, and mine was better than his. Ok, but I'd say the "advanced collector" was sadly deluded if he rated his example - worse than yours - as GF. I'd class myself as at least an "experienced collector" and I was, to be fair, backing up my opinion via Derek Allen's book. I'd personally rate yours as F/GF but opinions differ, of course. Also, my opinion is based around British, not US, grading, which is anything from half to a whole grade different for a stated grade. Your assessment may be absolutely spot on for the American market.

Blessed are the chosen ones..... I didn't think an unc F-90 existed today Bob's was the best I've seen. I've never heard of an UNC example, unless you have one in your pension fund Dave? Here is my 1877ND. It is not quite VF, but is better than the one slabbed by CGS as Fine. I hand delivered this one to the new owner, in Britain, last September. I wish I had it back! Ha,Ha. Sorry to be rude, but that is nowhere near VF - I'd only rate it F or GF at best.

According to Dr Lucy Worsley's series on The First Hanoverians, Queen Caroline wife of George II was some lady - witty, up-to-date with science and the arts, surrounded herself with like-minded people, held salons, had a hand in eliminating smallpox .. yet her husband was a git of the first water apparently. And the original Sophie - mother of stuffy old George I, and who would have been Queen after Anne if she hadn't inconveniently died - was a similar sort of person. Yet history remembers only George George George and fat George.

Where can I access that, Peck? I've got it in PDF Stuart if you want it.... Hey, cheers, Declan, that would be very much appreciated! I recently unearthed my original scans and PDF document too, so I can upload it anytime someone wants a copy AFAIK (and someone will shoot me down if wrong) there just isn't the same depth of varieties in the 50p series, as there is in the 10p. Even the 5p has far fewer apparently.)

It's a nice coin. The only drawbacks I can see are a slight flattening starting on the hair and top of the ear.

Ron Stafford's survey of the first 10-15 years of 10p's makes fascinating reading, whether you're into micro-varieties or not.