DaveG38

Which one of the 3 is in the greatest need of help? Piers Morgan, Simon Cowell or the woman - whoever she is? Amanda Burton? I agree! I thought I was listening to The Pav when he opened his mouth. Amanda Holden.

Is that really you saying that Azda..??..lol ! I think there's a certain member of parliament he'd make an exception for I didn't think Alex Salmond was a Westminster MP yet!

Depends what exactly he means. Threepences have traditionally been popular with casual collectors, and there is no problem obtaining a date run in reasonable (say VF) condition. However, in higher grades this becomes much more problematic, which kind of implies that the threepence circulated widely and relatively few seem to have survived in top condition. So, it might be argued that the coin was popular with the public because so few high grade specimens survive or that it is a popular collectable with casual collectors. In the case of more serious collectors, I don't think I would put the humble 3d at the top of the list. More likely the Victorin bun penny, maybe.

That's the man - well done sir.

There was a guy in Essex who was knocking out repros of rarities a few years ago. As I recall he produced a 1945 silver threepence, a 1952 halfcrown and a 1954 penny, plus I'm pretty sure a 1933 penny. Whether this is one of his I'm not sure.

Just to add a little to the idea that this item is for 'professional' or 'serious' coin collectors. As I said in the opening post on this, I thought that the 1893 set came in a black case. London Coins have sold one or two and sure enough they have all been black, with one exception. However, I've also found this on the 'Coinageofengland' website http://www.coinageofengland.co.uk/case-28493.htm Looks suspiciously like the type for sale, and if that's the case, then this was made in the 1950s by Hearn, admittedly for a 1893 Proof set, but it's hardly contemporary, and therefore, hardly for the 'serious collector, as they would presumably want the real thing. LOL.

The : points pretty much directly to the centre of the tooth. If yours points more or less to the edge of the tooth then it's the common 2+B variety.

Got the usual line out of the king's mouth I see. Straight out of the chinese presses that one. Made to deceive and dangerous to the integrity of the hobby.

It's coming from China - I need say no more.

I do love an optimist, but at £1,175, even with free postage I don't think anyone but an idiot would be tempted. Apart from the price, I thought all the 1893 proof set boxes were black, not red, but I may be misinformed about this. http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1893-Proof-set-case-empty-/221612357570?pt=Coins_BritishProofs_RL&hash=item33992037c2

You can ask the mint by all means but don't expect a reply this side of doomsday. I asked them several months ago whether they had any records from 1695 regarding the DEI GRATIA halfpenny that appears in the latest Coin News. I had an acknowledgement back, but that was it - I'm still waiting, so if you do ask them don't expect anything quickly.

Can anybody help me with advice about varieties of the 1862 penny? I've just bought a second one, in rather better condition than the original, though still not fantastic, and I have noticed several differences beteen the two. Basically, the new one appears to be the 'standard' 1862 version, whereas the original has three (so far) points of difference: 1. On the reverse, the 6 and the 2 are more narrowly spaced and the pointings to the border teeth are different. 2. On the obverse, the gap between the top of the head and the raised ring is a little smaller. 3. On the obverse the first T in BRITT is distinctly misaligned with the I and the other T. To avoid any doubts, I don't think, based on Freeman's identifiers, that I have got examples of Obverse 2 and Obverse 6. As far as I can judge, I seem to have two Obverse 6 examples, except that they differ from each other, so does anybody know of any varieties for this type?

Oh if only it were, but sadly both of mine are, I think Obverse 6 - there's no sign of W Wyon on either of them. In my case, the gap at the top of the bust is only marginally smaller on one example compared to the other, say 0.8mm against 1.00mm - in other words a tiny difference. The misaligned 'T' is similar in range to yours, but in mine the left hand cross piece of the 'T' drops downwards, not the right hand side as on yours. Finally, the 6 and 2 in the date are wider on one example than on the other. If I could get my camera working I'd put up a photo or two. If not I'll see what I can do otherwise.

Good question Dave. I would guess that's post mint damage? I just wondered if there is any scenario in which the doubled letters could have occurred at the same time as the damage. Looking at it, I'm equally curious about what could have caused those two dents, as much as the letter doubling.

What impact would these theories have about the damage to the hair? How does that factor into the explanations or is it totally unrelated?

Oldest for me was a George IV 1826 shilling in GVF. I used to work on the till at J Lyons Western Road shop in Brighton and one day a man passed me the coin in payment for a cup of tea. I queried what it was, but gave him 6d change anyway and then swapped the coin for a shilling of my own. The 1826 shilling still resides in my collection - I don't think I would swap it for a better grade given its origins.

I've just bought an upgrading 1930 halfcrown and for the first time, I've properly studied the reverse design. I'm curious about the shield design, which has an odd indented loop at the top left of the shield, but nothing similar on the right. Does anybody know what this was meant to signify? When I look at it, the design now looks oddly uneven, so there must be a good reason for this loop. Here's a typical example to remind everyone:

That's true, although medals and awards are very personal to the individual or family, whereas toys, coins etc. generally aren't. Like others on here, I've got my dad's few medals from WW2 and an uncle's medals from WW1, neither of which are in any way rare, and I neither want to part with them for sentimental reasons, nor do they inspire me to collect any others. I certainly can't see why anybody else would take an interest in them or want to collect them.

Yes, I believe his turn round times are quite long, but his prices are quite reasonable.

Before you make your mind up about whether to repair or not, you might like to consider the work of the American who runs this service: http://www.crs-stockton.com/index2.html The before and after photos are impressive, BUT I have not seen his work on anything hammered, so can't say how he would perform on your coin. Let's just say that he has done a fantastic job on the coins shown on his website. If you didn't want to use this guy, then I would certainly echo the points on here about not having it crudely plugged, as that will only make things worse.

1970 was a lithographic edition of the 1964 book. Better quality print and paper, but the same contents. There is also Peck's addendum in the 1967 BNJ. Thank you for clarifying this. I've had a look at the BNJ addendum and it's clear that Peck hadn't seen the DEI GRATIA coin back then, which has meant I have had to tweak my article a little to reflect the discovery date of the first one to between 1967 and 1973, not 1964 and 1973 as I had first thought. So thank you also for this reference.

I've just noticed the title of this thread and it implies that Peck's book was available in a 1970 edition. Is that right? I thought there was just the first and second, with the latter published in 1964. It's important to know as I make reference to this in my piece for Coin News on the DEI GRATIA halfpenny, and I wouldn't want to get it wrong.

That's also a very nice bust, are they your images, Mark?I once knew a girl named Liz and she had a really nice bust!!!

I do see your point, although I think you'd have to be very gullible to believe that these were genuine. What I have never understood is the 'happy bidding' comment, something I've seen on many ebay auctions and never really figured out. It's winning, as cheaply as possible, that makes me happy, not bidding.

I'm not a Roman coin collector, nor do I know anything about them (the Romans bypassed me in school history) so I'd be grateful for any advice about this coin. I bought it in a job lot of early milled material the other day. For all I know it might be a modern repro. Does anyone know what it is and what it's worth? Diameter is 33mm and it appears to be made of brass or bronze. Edge is very uneven. Weight is 26 gms. The obverse inscription appears to be : IMP CAESNERVAETR IANO AVGGERDACR roughly!!