THE NEW COIN CLUB
| # | Post |
|---|---|
| 3351 | Welcome to the Coin Club. We are an assortment of newbies, amateurs and experts with questions and answers for newbies, amateurs and experts in coin collecting, also known as numismatics. Whether you are just getting started, have been collecting for years or have simply found some old coins about the place that you’d like to sell, this is the place to ask your questions. No one has all the answers, and you may get five differing answers to the same question, yet each may be right in a manner of speaking, especially if opinions are involved. Opinions often vary. If you receive no answer to your query within 48 hours, please ask again. echoriath - 2014-03-06 01:00:00 |
| 3352 | echoriath wrote:
Share and share alike: http://www.calgarycoin.com/reference/peterwiremoney/peterwir echoriath - 2014-03-06 01:20:00 |
| 3353 | The Russian 1739 one appears to be a modern fantasy, sadly - see my e-mail for more. translateltd - 2014-03-06 07:49:00 |
| 3354 | This message was deleted. oldecurb - 2014-03-06 09:05:00 |
| 3355 | translateltd wrote:
Cool, thanks. I had a quick look through the email. Can't reply on this stupid smart phone. Lots of good info, and I look forward to learning more about the lot of them. My young fellow is actually studying Russian history at uni this term, so he's quite excited by the whole thing. He's finally getting into this idea of holding history in your hands with coins, even with replicas. Oh, the silver piece with the bloke holding the sword is in a holder labelled Pskov. I'll have to have a look around later. echoriath - 2014-03-06 12:20:00 |
| 3356 | echoriath wrote:
Good - my attribution was right :-) Your item G has badly blundered legends and I can't make out anything useful, unfortunately. Any clues on the holder with that one? translateltd - 2014-03-06 13:12:00 |
| 3357 | http://images.trademe.co.nz/photoserver/full/307387023.jpg A possibly new variety reported by an RNSNZ member recently - an "uneven gap" version of the 1969 Cook Bicentennial 50c. The coin on the top in each picture is the "normal" version with pretty much even spacing on both sides; the bottom coin has a narrow gap between COOK and BI, and a wide gap on the opposite side, between CENTENARY and 1969. The 'spacers' were presumably set incorrectly for the edge legend on the bottom coin. It would be interesting to see how many of these "uneven gap" coins are around compared to the normal ones. translateltd - 2014-03-06 14:51:00 |
| 3358 | translateltd wrote:
That should be 1769 of course. translateltd - 2014-03-06 19:15:00 |
| 3359 | Just got a note from TM saying the famous 1935 halfcrown that we discussed a little while ago has been removed for "breaching terms and conditions" - anyone see what happened? Apart from being a little ambitious, pricewise, I didn't spot anything actually wrong with the listing. translateltd - 2014-03-07 16:37:00 |
| 3360 | What am I missing on the NGC page when searching for British coins? I've scrolled through the list, but I cannot find the UK itself. I see "India - British" and some other British-involved options, but not the UK. I know, Tony Clayton's page is a huge help, and in some ways is easier to navigate, but I've not found mintage figures there. echoriath - 2014-03-09 00:02:00 |
| 3361 | echoriath wrote: Is this site any good? Has at least got mintage for most. Edited by wasgonna at 8:10 am, Sun 9 Mar wasgonna - 2014-03-09 08:09:00 |
| 3362 | [quote=echoriath I'd recommend getting the COIN News Yearbook - £9.95 from Token Publishing in the UK, plus about £2 postage. The "Blue Pages" in the middle do prices for a full run of British and Channel Islands/Scottish/Irish coinage, with mintage figures where known for milled issues at least. translateltd - 2014-03-09 08:14:00 |
| 3363 | echoriath wrote:
try http://en.numista.com under Great Britain oldman3 - 2014-03-09 13:41:00 |
| 3364 | horeke1 wrote: 35 - 2014-03-10 13:48:00 |
| 3365 | Presumably damage to the die: http://images.trademe.co.nz/photoserver/full/308007289.jpg The damage extends less obviously down through Britannia's wrist, across/below the middle of the shaft of the trident. echoriath - 2014-03-11 01:58:00 |
| 3366 | echoriath wrote:
It looked at first like delamination, but the rectangle would be coming loose if that was the case. If it's a solid lump, with damage further down as you describe, it sounds like the die had lost a pretty good chunk of metal before striking. translateltd - 2014-03-11 07:04:00 |
| 3367 | Yeah, it stands pretty proud of the surface, but I can't see it peeling away. The damage further down is not nearly so glaring. Ok, another identification query: How does one differentiate between the "b" and "c" versions of late 19th century half and one rupees? From memory, it's an 1892 rupee and 1899 half. I am vaguely recalling something about the front of Vicky's blouse having three or four sections, but maybe that is something else? echoriath - 2014-03-11 09:22:00 |
| 3368 | Oh, and thanks to oldman and wasgonna. I will be checking out both of those sites. I note PCGS is expanding across the pond, but some aspects of their European site leave a lot to be desired. echoriath - 2014-03-11 09:24:00 |
| 3369 | Ah, just found where the mint mark is. echoriath - 2014-03-11 10:15:00 |
| 3370 | The member deleted this message. muzz8 - 2014-03-11 20:42:00 |
| 3371 | muzz8 wrote:
I do have JUST such a catalogue..... Edited by echoriath at 9:25 pm, Tue 11 Mar echoriath - 2014-03-11 21:25:00 |
| 3372 | Oh, did you want to KNOW the value? Being variety 219a (large gap between P in PEACE and the emu's back), in F-gF the book value is $60-70*. Do I sound like an expert on tokens or WHAT? (Thanks, Martin) *A Study of Australasian Trade Tokens - An Illustrated Reference by Simon Gray echoriath - 2014-03-11 21:27:00 |
| 3373 | muzz8 wrote:
Hi muzz chefman1 - 2014-03-11 22:02:00 |
| 3374 | Do I sound like an expert on tokens or WHAT? No you don't chefman1 - 2014-03-11 22:04:00 |
| 3375 | chefman1 wrote:
Fair enough. I should have added that muzz's token is in less than fine condition. But, hey, at least I know how to use quotes. echoriath - 2014-03-11 22:12:00 |
| 3376 | echoriath wrote:
Sounds very convincing to me :-) You can never have too many coin books! translateltd - 2014-03-11 22:15:00 |
| 3377 | echoriath wrote:
lol chefman1 - 2014-03-11 22:19:00 |
| 3378 | Hurry, hurry, don't miss out. 705575872 gammoner - 2014-03-11 23:20:00 |
| 3379 | gammoner wrote:
:-) He could at least tell us how many there are. translateltd - 2014-03-11 23:38:00 |
| 3380 | translateltd wrote: gammoner - 2014-03-12 00:01:00 |
| 3381 | This message was deleted. muzz8 - 2014-03-12 07:04:00 |
| 3382 | Hi there. Could anyone provide any information and translation on the following USSR medallions/medals? They are both quite large (hence medallion) and the one on the left appears to have an Arctic CCCP base theme. It is also significantly heavier then the other one and has a lot of detail including a micro sized name or Russian word. http://images.trademe.co.nz/photoserver/full/308207918.jpg The second medallion is a lot lighter and less detailed and I'm guessing, due to the dates it may be a commemoration item of the 1917 Russian Revolution? http://images.trademe.co.nz/photoserver/full/308208032.jpg massived - 2014-03-12 14:06:00 |
| 3383 | Apologies for the pic's displaying on the side for some reason. Top item is the more detailed and heavier CCCP medallion. Bottom one is the lighter 1917-1977 medallion. Thanks for any assistance. massived - 2014-03-12 14:08:00 |
| 3384 | Your 1977 one is from Ukraine - it says 60 years / Soviet / Ukraine / 1917-1977 / Kharkiv. Other side (thanks to Google Translate) says MONUMENT IN HONOUR OF THE PROCLAMATION OF SOVIET POWER IN UKRAINE. Probably not a good time to promote this one just now :-) The Russian one at left says "NORTH POLE" at the bottom of the side with the four heads; on the other side it says SOVIET (something) IN THE CENTRAL ARCTIC 1937 / 1987. Hope that's a start, at least :-) Edited by translateltd at 4:41 pm, Wed 12 Mar translateltd - 2014-03-12 16:27:00 |
| 3385 | Here's an article (in Russian) on the north pole station - it mentions the date 1937. Maybe copy-and-paste into Google Translate to get the gist of it? http://barentsobserver.com/ru/arktika/novaya-rossiyskaya-dre translateltd - 2014-03-12 16:31:00 |
| 3386 | Great, Thank you! massived - 2014-03-12 16:52:00 |
| 3387 | translateltd wrote:
The (something) is RESEARCH, now I've researched it ... translateltd - 2014-03-12 16:53:00 |
| 3388 | echoriath wrote:
You're missing the Great bit! If you type 'g' and 'r' in quick succession on the drop down it will take you straight to it. chrisr5 - 2014-03-12 20:04:00 |
| 3389 | chrisr5 wrote:
Hello Stranger, how thing's?? chefman1 - 2014-03-12 20:26:00 |
| 3390 | chrisr5 wrote:
Ah, no, I knew that bit about (quickly) typing the name of the desired country, but what I was finding was United Kingdom and then only Euros and their parts. Maybe I never looked for Great Britain. Now I'll reveal some real ignorance. I know calling a Scotsman or an Irishwoman a "Brit" will likely upset them (and yet not a Welshman?), but what's the difference between England, Britain, Great Britain and The United Kingdom? It's clearly no longer united, and maybe it's not as great as it was, so are England and Britain interchangeable? I can (and likely will) google it, but I thought I'd think this thought out loud. I'll leave the Commonwealth discussion for another day. And yes, long(ish) time no see (in here), chris. As if you could have ANYthing more important than hanging out with your fellow numismatic nerds.... echoriath - 2014-03-12 21:38:00 |
| 3391 | muzz8 wrote:
No harm, no foul. Just a bit of fun. echoriath - 2014-03-12 21:39:00 |
| 3392 | translateltd wrote:
Nah, once I had a closer look at the edge, I saw that it IS delamination. The rectangle might pull loose with enough effort. The damage does extend down the centre as I described. Perhaps the flaw is below the surface further along? I'll post pix when I get a chance. echoriath - 2014-03-12 21:42:00 |
| 3393 | This message was deleted. oldecurb - 2014-03-12 23:16:00 |
| 3394 | echoriath wrote:
Thanks! Yes he keeps us quite busy. Britain is the island and of course some the (British) isles - excludes Ireland of course. Britain predates the English - it's the Celtic name for whole of the place. You can call it Breton, Britain, Prydain if you want. That part includes Wales, Scotland and England and the isles (excluding Ireland). So a Scot or Welsh (Cymraeg if you will ;-)) person has no need to take offence at being called British. Calling them English however might be seen differently......... As Bruce says it was part of the act of the union in 1700 and something that made it the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (and later just Northern Ireland) that brought in the UK bit. Roughly speaking - Post Roman occupation, Celts are left Romanised but lacking in ability to defend as they have relied on the Romans for this. Vikings and other raiders cause hassle, depopulate large areas and take up some land themselves. Angles, Saxons and Jutes followed later by Normans push the Celts and previous invaders to the lesser inhabitable places of the UK. Wales eventually conquered by Edward I and finally ceases to exist as a separate country when annexed by Henry VIII (himself of Welsh descent). Wales and England are just England. The High King of Ireland has issues running the country and he invites the England over to help him out. England through wrangling and so on becomes the overall ruler of Ireland. Ulster being the biggest problem they proceed to start the plantation of Ulster (Henry VIII again I think) - colonising with Scottish and English people. Numerous troubles over the years with rebellions that get viciously put down by various rulers notably Oliver Cromwell (cue song by Elvis Costello about Oliver's army being here to stay) and of course numerous troubles years later when Ireland eventually cedes but Ulster stays with the UK as the majority are now loyalists (to the UK not Ireland). I've got an interesting Republic of Ireland florin which has been counter stamped UDR by the loyalist paramilitary group btw. Scotland ends up with a common king with England - James VI of Scotland becomes James I of England. Both countries however remain separate. Until Scotland up on becoming nearly bankrupt throws in it's lot with Britain. Something to do with a failed invasion of part of South America iirc. To summarise Scotland and Ireland and England are separate entities united as none ever totally 'conquered' the other. ETA - of course Republican Ireland is no longer a part of this. For the numismatic lean you see this on florins - early florins have the thistle, rose and clover of Scotland, England and Ireland. During Elizabeth's reign Wales gets recognised again and the leek as their symbol gets onto the florin. Edited by chrisr5 at 12:01 am, Thu 13 Mar chrisr5 - 2014-03-13 00:00:00 |
| 3395 | Jeez, ask a simple question..... Thanks for the explanation. It's all clear as mud now. (And I have no idea where the angry emoticon came from on post 3390. Bloody technology has a mind of its own sometimes!) echoriath - 2014-03-13 01:07:00 |
| 3396 | chefman1 wrote:
All good thanks, as echoriath was hinting at, new arrival is keeping us busy. Hope you're keeping well. chrisr5 - 2014-03-13 03:29:00 |
| 3397 | echoriath wrote:
LOL, the answer was probably more thn you were looking for. Never noticed the angry face. chrisr5 - 2014-03-13 03:32:00 |
| 3398 | Bump gammoner - 2014-03-13 09:18:00 |
| 3399 | Bump gammoner - 2014-03-13 09:19:00 |
| 3400 | chrisr5 wrote:
Just to make it longer still, the "Great" in Great Britain refers to size rather than quality, something people misunderstand these days. The union with Scotland made the kingdom a greater whole (no puns, please) than it previously was. If I have it right - and I'd need to check some coins to be sure - the Latin abbreviations changed from ANG (England) to MAG BRI (Great Britain) at the time. I read somewhere recently (or did I see it on QI?) that the finickiness over England/Britain/United Kingdom is comparatively recent, and "England" would have happily covered the lot until the early 20th century. translateltd - 2014-03-13 09:53:00 |
