Coinery

Bet Declan kept stum in the company of that lot? Good band, must catch them myself!

Welcome aboard potlings! I guess we don't need to introduce ourselves, as you've already had a good look around! You've done the right thing choosing pre-decimal, however, best education in coins you'll ever receive! It's true!

Yes, agreed!

Nice coin, and good price!

Oh, that's just horrible!

I totally agree with your last sentence. However, I can't follow the idea that a weakly struck coin, fresh out of the mint, couldn't attract the truth of its status as UNC?

Not true! I think it's very high grade with faults! If somebody advertised that as GEF (maybe even AU) with weak strike and a couple of detracting marks, I'd say their statement would be fair! CGS seem to have forgotten to factor the issues into their numerical stamp! But we all know why, don't we?

I'm going to go higher! The obverse eyebrow would normally be very much flattened if the wear on the ear was actually wear. Eyebrow looks good and, in view of the weakness in the reverse shield, I'm going weak ear, not worn. The reverse looks barely worn at all to me, I'd go GEF, maybe AU (but would like an in-hand look at the lustre on the high points for that)! From a CGS point of view, I don't think they should've graded it anything like that high if they are supposedly knocking coins down for strike and damage.......IMHO

Crickey Moses, nothing like waving a flag for bag marks! They're being stored in a box of sand, by the looks of it! Looks to be about 400 grit from the images?

I'll get my coat, then! I Q-tip everything with acetone, and have never seen a white-out, yet! Anyway, all that aside, thank-you for the info.

maybe I could stretch to hiring them at $3.50, then!

Hi John, Speaking for myself, I'm not really talking about 'cleaning' in the traditional sense. I'm more referring to decontamination, which is mostly about removing acid greases, etc. If I find there's a dirty black cotton bud at the end of it, so much the better. CuNi and 500 silver is also appreciative of a degrease too IMHO!

'Tom' does like his hammered shillings, Redd!The lis is most likely a contemporary counterfeit. There are a couple of lis shillings of Liz that are C'feits, but I can barely even make the bust out on your one.

I'm guessing the chap who's repeatingly selling copies at £19.99 on eBay, has the same copies as you've just purchased, Rob? So I'll not waste my time on that one!

Perhaps I could pay you $1.75 plus postage to have a look at them after you? I'm just saving up a few images from eBay past sales, and I'd feel confident in saying the better ones are cast complete with the full edge attached to the obverse, with the reverse inset into it.

I'm guessing that's M M Lis Tower? Doesn't belong to any of the three you've posted.Collectable coins, all of them. Have you been collecting long?

That's a Halfcrown, though, not a shilling? Did it say shilling on the flip? Edit: not the worst I've seen, either! Shame about the grazed AR and couple of scratches! A tiny bit porous too.

Not as far as I know?And you're right, it's already looking a possibility that some die reworking, or secondary sets, are involved. The vertical lines in the shoulder are preliminarily catching my eye, as the second from left one, does not reach to the bottom on some examples, and is faint and frail on others. What happened to the 'ridge' on the die we won't know, but it clearly looks to have been properly smoothed off at the mint at some point (if those coins do indeed turn out to be genuine)? It we could chronologically tie that in with other historical 'developments' on the die, I think it might be an interesting 'tool', as I'm thinking, this could potentially be an area that's ignorantly 'cleaned up' on a cast? I wonder what the lifespan of a cast is, how many coins might be expected from it?

To be fair, no-one has out and out claimed his coin is a fake, anyway...it was just thrown into the melting pot. Thanks, Nick!

A good observation, Rob, maybe guy could help us out with some edge images of his coin. Something we also need to determine is whether there are any milled examples of the Northumberland around? Is that image of the 1899 coin about as good as we're going to get, Rob? Could I have a copy? Also, Paul's reverse has what looks like some clear joins, not on the outer edge as usual, but on the inside rim, so maybe it's sunk inside a cast edge, possibly? Did you take any high-res photos yourself, Paul? I guess, if we start on the premise that only one genuine die existed, and maybe 'trust' CGS's judgement (for now, and assume they have slabbed only genuine coins), we should be able to determine, quite easily, from a number of coins, what are the correct letters and relative positionings? Most importantly, we will know the the progression of clogs and fractures across the series from doing this. This will be useful when dealing with any casts which aren't exposed by seams and/or weight. Did you weigh your copy, Paulus? I'm hypothesising here, but I'm going to suggest it's nigh on impossible to make a perfect cast, and most will require a tiny bit of tidying up. This is where we might find a common mistake? A wider curl, maybe a misshapen one? Or a letter that should be blocked, which isn't? Whilst I've not looked any further, yet, it does look (further to the blocked R) as though the 6-shaped (I wonder Paulus if this was the 6 they were talking about?) curl just to the left of the clasp has some tell-tale signs? What's going on at the top of the curl on Rob's image? Also it's far more evenly curving and of a consistent thickness on the Greuber coin? I think the fakers will have cleared a block, or created an extra small feature when cleaning up the cast. Of course, if more than one cast is made, there'll be other things to look for. So, I'm guessing we need to make a detailed analysis of all the quirks and differences of any, and all, Northumberlands shillings, and then disseminate the findings? Anyone got a Northumberland, and/or any quality images I could chop up with some software for group evaluation? Time to play CGS and the BNTA at their own game. When we've finally concluded, we could concisely present the facts and ask Chris if he could lock it on the forum so it doesn't get buried? Newcomers could always challenge the evidence of the locked post in the usual way.

I wonder if the loop of the 6 was a red herring from CGS? Interesting to see the open topped G of Georgivs. I remember that being a point of interest in the past!

Maybe we should make this our first 'proper' investigation into a fake series! I feel very uneasy with the statement 'send it to CGS for authentication'! It sends out a very bad message about how we view ourselves as serious collectors! I'd sooner clear it up once and for all on our own terms! It's not rocket science!

If you are serious then I am happy to send it to you on the condition that you put a fiver into a charity box when you get it. As a non-collector I don't really have any use for it and would prefer to give it to someone who is interested rather than just put it back into circulation. Hey, fishsticks, that's very kind, and I'll take you up on your offer! I'll donate £5 to charity, AND send you a fiver for a bottle of wine! Many thanks for your generosity. I genuinely don't know a great deal about the decimal coinage, and only gather it as a bit of fun. These oddities do become important to some people, eventually, but it'll unlikely be in your's or my lifetime. However, it's all a bit of fun, and I thank you again. I'll message you in the morning if that's OK? Have a good evening, Stuart

There's no doubt an indepth, and ongoing, die-study is required here! It would most definitely need to begin with a calculation of original dies, and then good access to an historical archive of images. Also, it would be interesting to know the date we were first plagued with this particular fake, and/or when they first became good enough to require an indepth die study?