Geoff T

I'm surprised you didn't see any pennies. They've been around a while and are pretty common. The 20p is more elusive and I've not seen the 50p myself yet. The £1 is out now too and I've had a few in change. The 2p and 10p are quite handsome when you seem them in the flesh. G

The Chair of South Manchester Numismatic Society, of which I'm Secretary, contactd the Royal Mint on this one. They replied saying that it affected a whole batch and the figures are between 100,000 and 200,000 coins. Geoff

This is why I'm developing quite an affair with George IV farthings. Given the small date run, the incidence of errors and varieties is remarkably high and by no means completely documented, so this one doesn't surprise me at all. I have inter alia an 1825 R over R in REX which I've not seen listed anywhere. Geoff

If this is an unofficial coronation medal it would be for George V, not Edward VII. Any chance of posting a picture? G

Hi Mark, Welcome to the love affair with half crowns - don't resist! If you've managed to get eveything from Edward VII in UNC then you're either very lucky or very rich, or both. A genuinely BU circulation 1911 is proving the Holy Grail at the moment. Plenty of them out there almost make it, but so far none has come up to scratch (or non-scratch). Plenty of 1911 proofs (which I have) too, but no really top notch circulation issues. I have seen a couple of near BU 1905s recently, but they came with a price to match. Fine if you're on a premiership footballer's salary, but I guess the average premiership player isn't up to appreciating coins. G

Half crown man as I am, I have to admit that what I find consistently pleasing are the farthings of George IV. It's the Britannia I think - so much detail in such a small image. Personally I can live without the OTT flummery of the Gothic crown, but I would put in another plug for the half crowns of William IV. A beautiful reverse, dignified without being over-fussy, and an obverse where the effigy shows a real person, not a pseudo Roman emperor. G

Missing "n" duly noted and edited Ausschnitt is masculine so den is correct, nicht wahr? Anyone who's spent time poring over manuscript letters in Gothic handwriting will know what I mean. Even when it's neat it takes some getting into. When it's not (like Brahms's handwriting) it can looked like a spider on acid. G

Vielen Dank fuer den Zeitungsausschnitt. Auch mir gefaellt die gotische Schrift - gotische Handschrift lesen ist aber nicht so einfach :-) Geoff

You wrote: [i would like to find out who does what and how they do it in order to store their coin collection in the best way. I know that coins should be kept in plastic bags / envelopes which don't contain PVC, or better, coins should be slabbed. But it's obvious that some coins don't have a great value, so getting them slabbed is a bit of waste of money. Is it necessary to keep the right humidity and the light protection?] Personally I wouldn't go near slabbing with a disinfected bargepole. Do you want your coins to be enjoyed for their visual and tactile appeal, or do you want to see them entombed in a little plastic coffin where you can gaze on the corpse? Slabbing "kills" a coin in more ways than one. Not only does it render it inaccessible, it also attempts to offer a definitive grading which can't be challenged. Where's the fun in not being able to hold your coin, or discuss its grading among friends and comparing opinions? Numismatics is an art, not a science; the questions are always more interesting than the answers. Geoff

The danger of trying to be over-precise is that you end up believing you own grading to be definitive and don't allow any room for difference of opinion. That's the mindset that's led to the dreadful practice of slabbing. The grading system we all use is uncomplicated and it does leave some room for dissent, but to me that's a plus factor, not a minus. Geoff

The cutting up of the coat of arms strikes me as being little more than a gimmick and, one which (if it lasts as long as the last set) we will be heartily sick of in 37 years time. The only good thing I can say is that it's not quite as bad as the Euro - but it is a close run thing. They're everything I feared they would be - an opportunity to produce something genuinely modern and exciting wasted on a weak compromise that's trying to look both ways at once. It's the 2005 sovereign all over again, except that this time they're not mere one-offs and they're intended for our pockets. I'm seriously underwhelmed. Geoff

Yes, this is correct according to the letters patent of 1971, which leaves the double florin in a curious position. Not struck as a currency coin after 1890. it appears never to have been demonetised, despite its brief life from 1887-1890. In 1971 the modern 20p coin was also eleven years away in the future. The letters patent also makes it clear that pre-decimal crowns - which since 1902 had been commemorative rather than currency coins - would continue at a face value of 25p. However, in practice crowns can be a problem, as too may people in positions where they should know better are confused by the co-existence of post-decimal 25p crowns and more recent crown-sized coins with a face value of £5. All are technically legal tender. I've only once seen a £5 given in change to someone, and they hadn't a clue what it was. Geoff

I find it interesting that some of the most immediate and negative criticism of the decision to remove Britainnia from the 50p coin is coming from the tabloids, notably those like the Daily Mail which will clutch at any straw which corroborates its obsessive Little Englander mentality. I see from its website that it already has a petition asking its readers to save this icon of Britishness from disappearing. They're already blaming Gordon Brown; anyday now I expect to read that the whole thing is a conspiracy masterminded by the EU to rob us further of our national identity. Apart from the fact that I could never bring myself to sign anything endorsed by the preferred tabloid of the narrow-minded, I have to confess that I'm not actually losing sleep over the thought that Britannia has been given the chop. Like any other design - indeed, like any other coin - Britannia is a phase in an evolutionary process. Value your past, celebrate it even, but accept that society always moves forwards, never backwards. I don't know what the new designs will look like, but my mind remains open. They might prove disappointing, particularly if they attempt to be simultaneously modern and heritagy in a 2005 sovereign sort of way, but they might also be excellent and worth getting excited about. I hope so. I retire to my corner and await your accusations of heresy Geoff

"Aye, but the good thing about dead celebrities is that when you get fed up with them, you can change them without offending anybody. I don't think it really matters that they have already been honoured in some way and if they are skipped, we might just end up with a few second rate celebrities gracing our coinage. Pure speculation of course as it's got as much chance of happening as England winning the Football World Cup again in my lifetime." This is what bothers me somewhat. For all that we Brits talk of heritage and tradition, we have this Philistine streak which doesn't actually value them. The average Brit has no sense of history beyond last week and no sense of heritage and culture beyond what the media tell them is important. Retaining a monarchy at least spares us the prospect of "the people's choice" landing us with a President Beckham and Pouty Spice on our banknotes. G

Now it wouldn't be like me to post something on here without a hint of controversy now would it, but I just happen to believe that our coinage is blighted by having to have a portrait of the reigning monarch on the obverse. On a personal level, I really don't wish Elizabeth Windsor or her family any ill will, but can't we have something/someone else for a change? And no, I do not want a portrait of Gordon Brown instead!

That depends on whether you shop at Tesco. As one totally opposed to the way Tesco is destroying our shopping streets and exploiting our growers and farmers I don't see myself buying crumpets or anything else there even if we go back to cowrie shells. I live almost next door to one of the largest in the country and avoid it like the plague. G

well im not really into all this coin collecting thing they not to bad a condition some of them sres little dirty Condition is everything in assessing the value of coins as modern as the ones you mention. They will however, have a minimum value for their silver content. Those up to 1919 will be 92.5% silver, the rest 50%. Grading coins to assess their condition can be a minefield for a beginner, but check out some of the links on this site for guidance in getting started. Ideally, if you can post pictures of your shillings it will be of great help to us in helping you further. Geoff

With the 1950 set the condition of the box tends to count for something too. It's plain card like the 51 and pretty hopeless as a secure container. An undamaged one might just go in your favour. Ceteris paribus, £70 from a dealer wouldn't be a bad exchange. Geoff

I'd endorse what Chris says. Although many of us do specialise, it's often by reading posts from people specialising in other areas that we broaden our knowledge beyond our own area. I know from my experience in musical academe that over-specialisation can lead to a blinkered approach which can prove highly negative. Geoff

Early strikes of the 1887 Jubilee head coins can have highly reflective, prooflike fields, but they're not proofs. I have the 1887 florin in this condition, as well as a genuine 1887 proof shilling, and when the two are compared side by side the difference becomes apparent. A genuine proof should have, not just sharper details, but sharper reeding (milling) round the edge. I don't think you have a proof there, and even if it were the obviously visible marks would detract from its value. Geoff

Hi - if belatedly. Nice to meet another half crown man on here. Geoff

Does Bamber GasShilling still compare the show, not watched it for years. Seriously, I don't think I have ever come across a TV program for numismatics, does anyone know of any good DVD's (preferably for GB coins). Bamber Shilling aka Gascoigne hasn't compered it for years. It's Jeremy Paxman now and the teams get the full Jezzer patronising approach. Mind you, the ignorance of some of today's students does beggar belief and you can't blame him sometimes for his attitude. BTW - I wonder how many people on here are too young to understand the Bamber Shilling monicker? G

Just spotted that an above post said: "I am sure it would have caused much confusion had they extended this to other denominations, ie look at Belgium and it's coins issued in Walloon and French." I think you mean Flemish and French. The Walloon Belgians are Francophones aren't they? G

Strictly speaking, this should be "from 1937 to 1966". There were no shillings issued dated 1967 and the 1970 proof is a curious posthumous one-off. Examples of the Edward VIII Scottish shilling exist, but not the English. Geoff

That's right, and if the date is 1887 or 1897 it's bound to be one of the many unofficial medals struck in honour of Queen Victoria's golden or diamond jubilees. Geoff I am not sure aboute jubilee, or it would be queen face or coat of arm, but here I can see the bridge and the someone's coat of arm. I can't make out the legend from the photo. If you tell me what it says I might be able to offer help. G