Ætheling

Yet again i fail to be impressed. There is a real lack of imagination or anything new here. Same old designs been regurgitated again and again. That's in reference to the gold fluffalo... well they do look fluffy.

With regards to the Linc cent 2009, i'm even more unimpressed. What i hope they would do for that would be to issue it with the original wheat reverse in the original alloy to mark it's 100th, then ceased producing the denomination altogether. Or come up with something totally different.

But yet again we've got to have about four different types. This is on top of the god knows how many nickels they've just released and all those State Quarters.

Can't they just go totally miles off the wall pick a completely new design for every denomination going that's never been done before ever and then stick with the new designs for say 20 years without a change. I dunno what's worse having a batch of designs that last 50 years unchanged or ones that seem to change every six months and all look like cliparts...

With coins you have to have enough change to keep it diverse design wise but not too much to lose all sense of stability. I figure a design change every 15-20 years is healthy, perhaps every 10 years if they can come up with good enough designs to warrant it. Changes more often than 10 years seems to be just changing for the sake of it, usually to cash in.

Well the work is really McDoo's. I just thought up the idea of having CP notes and how awesome it would be.

McDoo went one stage further and thought up the whole CP economy and is setting everything up. So it's to him that the credit really should go.

Just been looking through the minute remnants of the coins i'd had in my foreign junk box that i sorted out months ago. The vast majority went to Labmom.

The small bagful that remains are mostly Spanish, alot i got from my father are dated in the 1960s and 1970s upto 1980.

Then there's a gap until 1989 and these later coins are the ones i brought back with me after my last trip abroad in the summer of 1993. Now i remember clearly spending these smaller coins, the 25pta with the hole through the middle and the 5ptas and the 1pta.

The coins upto 1980 though are bigger. The question is when did the shrink the coins and when were the larger coins of each denomination demonetised?

Ah that would make sense. Thanks!

1934 is my choice as first year of modern with US coins. Although 1965 and the one i'd forgotten about 1974 are equally feesible.

Well i sent it off on either Thursday or friday last, i forget which exactly.

I've posted almost everything, except one for Kuhli which i need his address and another one for Trantor. I will remember to send the bicentenial quarter... i will remember!

I believe that coin copies are the numismatic equivalent of devil worship. It doesn't matter what kind of copy, whether ancient counterfeit (fouree), ancient imitation, modern replica, old modern forgery, new modern forgery, whatever, they're all exactly the same. Exactly. They're pure evil, and anyone who even thinks about collecting them should be reported to the International Bureau of Numismatic Standards and Puritanism, which has as its U.N.-chartered purpose the promulgation of what's collectable and what's not. Copies are not collectable, neither are they collectible, and above all else nobody here should ever write that they're collectuble.

One of us got it.

I had a feeling you'd be lurking somewhere!

Yeah on the holes, the dealers had about three of the Owls for sale and all three had these round drilled holes going half-way into the depth of the coin. The holes were on the reverse side with the Owl. I said "nice coins but i'm not keen on the drilled bits", the reply i got from the dealer there was that they were done to test the coin.

Now forgive me if i'm wrong here Mike and Reid, but surely doing so would have removed quite alot of silver from the coin and i presume ancient coins like medievals after them would have been traded on their respective weights rather than size? So drilling a hole like that would be less of a test cut and more of either putting the coin out of circulation for good or devaluing it to circulate as a lower denomination?

All mere speculation on my part since it's not within my field of expertise, you guys know your ancients so i defer to you.

I am thinking that they were probably used as jewelry or something?

So it all depends on how you wish to look at it. Would you call the lightbulb or the telephone a modern invention ? How about nuclear physics or the airplane ? They all seem pretty modern to me. But they all happened before or near the turn of the century - the last century.

 

I think perhaps the reason that Europeans choose 1500 as a dividing time line is because it does present a new time in the world. One that co-incides with the discovery of the New World. For after that - everything changed.

Welcome back GD always nice to see you round these parts.

Like i said the terms quite fluid, but i'd generally agree in a European context that modern is 1500, or to be pedantic 1501...

Mind you 1500 is only approximate anyhow. Some countries the change begins in the 1470s, others 1520s/30s and others still plod along merrily in the medieval period for a while longer.

Uh oh now you've done it.  You went and used the "R" (eid) word! 

 

Jim

Oh i know...

I'm waiting for Mike's reply on that one. Something like "well that's half the reason why the discussion keeps going round and round"

RCC versus Reid?

Actually i get on alright with Reid, i think we've only disagreed the once which for me and him is very good going, and i can't even remember what that was about.

Having come across that debate before on RCC that's why i stated i thought it was a test cut. I went and had a look on Reid's site thinking he might have an explanation for it, but alas none to be found.

No idea, my knowledge of computers is you switch them on and they just about work. If they don't work that's when you call someone in to take a look.

To be honest that doesn't surprise me. Think of the years 1971 (or maybe 68?) to present, with about 50 or 60 different denominations in that time right from ½p to £1.

Red X's for me too!

I do have a very nice 1996 £1 coin in a First Day Cover.

And i think i had a 1997? £5 coin somewhere, the one with Philip and the Queen on. That's also in a First Day cover but not undamaged, it got like that when trying to get into the envelope that the FDC was in... god knows how they packaged that one.

But for what it's worth the coin will sell for as much in it or out of it.

Thanks Terry but i'll have to pass on it. Firstly because i'm only interested in France and Britain in this period and my Coincraft takes care of the latter better than anything going. The former i've now just got.

So i really don't need the rest.

Well the photocopy was 5 pages, which is less than one chapter (or less that 10% of the book) thus i'm well within legal limits. That and the copy is for my reference only and not for resale or any profit.

okay so i was wrong about the 12 pages... just a tad.

I'd love to help you out, AE, but all I have is 1901-present

I have every confidence someone will have one. There is one other library i might be able to try but it'd be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Seems alot to actually buy a whole Krause catalogue and pay nearly as much on shipping just to want say a dozen or less pages out of it. I live in hope.

Has anyone out there got an 18th century Krause catalogue?

I've been to the 'local' library today to look through their stuff, managed to photocopy the Third Reich section out of the 20th century Krause so i can see where i've got to go and a very, very rough idea of the prices.

But no luck finding the 18th century. I'd appreciate a list of all issues struck during Louis XVI's reign.

Gold, Silver and Copper.

So anyone with too much time on their hands that can help me out?

If i recall correctly i think i have some more lustrous somewhere from a few other places.

Oh and thanks to Trantor for the bottom two! Whilst i don't actively collect these coins it's nice to have them around.

Out of all the Elizabeth II obverses used over the years i think there is one that stands out beyond all of the others. The one that people just think of, the one that was used all across the globe, the one that Jersey until recently refused to lose. The one that still adorns the regular issue UK stamps all these years on after decimalisation first saw it appear. Which might not sound a great deal but when you consider the coins have changed obverses twice in this time period, it's quite an achievement.

So to the late Arnold Machin this thread of lustrous Machin bronzes is dutifully dedicated.

The first three are from Great Britain and are the halfpenny (demonetised in 1984 the last year of the Machin obverse in the UK), the penny and the twopence.

Here's a 2 cents from Fiji (i didn't have a clue where Fiji was until i looked it up, but then geography was never my strong point). Whatever i did when i scanned the UK ones i seemingly can't do now!

And a 1977 halfpenny from the Isle of Man.

Here's one i cherry-picked from circulation back in 1989. This must be my longest owned coin.

Five Pence

ok so this is a coronet

I have

That i like!

Wipes the floor with my Saint.

Cromwellian, even if I don't like the subject matter.

You don't like Cromwell either?

Me neither, he was an ultra religious fanatical fruit loop, who massacred the Irish, executed a king and banned Christmas. Such a charming fellow.

He died in 1658, he was dug up three years later, put on trial*, found guilty of treason, hung, drawn and quartered. His head was then placed on a pole outside Westminster Abbey where it stayed until 1685, upon the accession of James II it was removed and changed hands several times before being buried again in 1960.

*Actually i dunno if they bothered with the trial. I think they'd already decided he was guilty and thus decided to execute him pretty much straight away.

I bet Charles II was delighted when he ordered that one!

I agree....she changed for the worse on larger silver in 1887 and all copper/bronze in 1895.

I don't know Peter i bit the numismatic bug mostly because of the Jubilee portrait of her late Majesty, so i suppose i have alot to thank Mr Boehm for.

But i agree the Brock portrait of 1893 onwards was not so flattering, but it was really necessary by then i think. The Wyon portrait had gone on for long enough by 1887. Pity that the Gothic was lost though.

Still even Brock and Boehm did a better job at obverses than G. W. de Saulles. Although the latter can't be knocked on his reverse designs.