Leaderboard

I just won 18 Postumus (A.D. 260- 269) coins from the Oliver's Orchard Hoard of 1983. The hoard was found while plowing a field and consisted of 1,559 coins, almost entirely of Postumus antoniniani except for 14 denarii of Septimius Severus.

awesome...how many forums are you going to join to advertise your coin for sale?

1862 2+G F38 Another rare slot in the collection filled

Hadrian Ӕ Tetradrachm of Alexandria Dated Year 20. AD 135-136 Obv: AYT KAIC TRAIA ADRIANOC CEB clockwise from top right, laureate head left. Rev: Date LK (year 20) to left of Nilus sitting left, holding reed and cornucopiae, crocodile beneath him. Emmett 1016

I wonder what Linda would make of this one. Perhaps missing waves......and lighthouse!!

Its a rotated die clash which this overlayed picture shows quite well.

In A.D. 286, the Roman emperor Diocletian put Carausius in charge of clearing out the Frank and Saxon pirates pillaging the English Channel. Carausius defeated the pirates, but then declared himself ruler of Britain, in effect, becoming a pirate himself. Carausius struck coins in his name along with Diocletian and Maximianus in hopes that he would be formally named as a co-ruler; which did not happen. In A.D. 293, Carausius was murdered by his chief minister Allectus. In A.D. 293, Diocletian appointed Constantius I his Caesar and he defeated Allectus in A.D. 296 and control of Britannia was restored to Rome. Carausius struck coins in the names of the Roman Emperors Diocletian and Maximianus. This presumptuous and ill-fated desire to be recognized is why the reverse legend of these coins end with AVGGG- - one G for each Augustus. These coins also have XXI in the exergue, which is likely a mark of value, meaning 20 parts alloy to 1 part silver. They also have ML at the beginning of the mintmark; which translates as "money from London." Carausius A.D. 291 Ӕ Antoninianus 24mm 4.3g IMP C CARAVSIVS P F AVG; radiate and cuirassed bust right PAX AVGGG; Pax stg. l., holding olive branch and transverse sceptre; S-P across fields. In ex. MLXXI RIC V London 143; RIC V.5 London 2197 Diocletian A.D. 291 Ӕ Antoninianus 21x24mm 4.4gm IMP C DIOCLETIANVS P F AVG; radiate and cuirassed bust right PAX AVGGG; Pax stg. l., holding olive branch and transverse sceptre; S-P across fields. In ex. MLXXI RIC V London 9; RIC V.5 London 3546 Maximianus A.D. 291 Ӕ Antoninianus 24mm 3.8g IMP C MAXIMIANVS P F AVG; radiate and cuirassed bust right PAX AVGGG; Pax stg. l., holding olive branch and sceptre; S-P across fields. In ex. MLXXI RIC V London 34; RIC V.5 London 3607 Allectus A.D. 293-296 Ӕ Quinarius 19mm 1.9g IMP C ALLECTVS P F AVG; radiate and cuirassed bust right. VIRTVS AVG; galley with five oars. In ex. QL RIC V London 55; RIC V.5 London 276 This topic is merely a gloss on a subject that has several good books written about it. Two suggested books-- Roman Britain's Pirate King: Carausius, Constantius Chlorus and the Fourth Roman Invasion of Britain by Simon Elliot Rebel Emperors of Britannia: Carausius and Allectus by Graham Barker and Sam Moorehead

Another possibility, given the stylised hands, which are very eastern/indian looking, is that it represents ‘fate,’ ‘meant to be,’ etc.? A word taken from Arabic/Turkish/Indian roots meaning ‘lot’ or unshakeable destiny. Here’s a clip I found on Google: ‘Historically (particularly in the Victorian era), people would smooth down one side of a circulating coin and hand-engrave it with names, initials, or symbolic words like Kismet. These were gifted to romantic partners as a physical representation of unshakeable destiny.’’ edit: and from Dictionary.com Kismet means fate or destiny. In Islam, kismet refers to the will of Allah. But it is popularly used to refer to something that one believes was “meant to be”— ...

I'm afraid I will have to agree with the vendor here. It is problem free - because the coin is too flat to see them.

Quite an impressive first post, to say the least.

... and it turns out the lines were some kind of glue/varnish residue. Same coin after an acetone bath:

It suddenly occurred to me the other day I had put a bid in for a nice looking penny on eBay. I had to put the bid in early as I had a long drive when it was due to mature. By the time I got home the auction was over. Now here is my conundrum. I could check with the web site to see if I had been successful or not. But if I did I might have failed in my bid and had lost the coin. However, if I don’t check it out I could still hold the winning bid, but I won’t know until I looked at the listing. Therefor, I might have won that coin, or not, until I find out one way or the other. I( I have lost the bid then I would be disappointed, so am I in a better position by not looking? Unless I have won it.

Loddy Heck!!! errrmmmm... This George V 1911 2 pence Maundy is also in nice condition as well 😕 I don't no how has happed but its in nice condition all the same. 👍

Just for the hell of it I messaged the seller yesterday evening to point out it was a replica (being polite!) and I see this morning that it has been taken down.

Here's my set. The halfpenny is the weakest of the three, but I only paid £43 for it and it's good enough for me. Weight of the halfpenny is 0.24g.

Yup, madness. I bought the Marshall coin in 2004 and I am perfectly happy with it - £87 delivered. I did have a go at the Lockett piece that was sold recently, but that made silly money,, and I like mine for the quirky shape and outrageously large distinctive tickets that came with the Marshall coins (44m dia).

Tower Mint Charles I, 4th bust, Group D 3a1 penny, mm. pellet/2 pellets (assuming no extra pellets off flan), inner circle obverse only, garnished oval shield with no CR, standard legends both sides CAROLVS D G M B F ET H REX / IVSTITIA THRONVM FIRMAT with single pellet stops both sides. S2846. The bust is not directly comparable with the larger denominations, but broadly follows a style which can be dated 1632-1635, with a preference for the last couple years. It is a single arch crown, but the Gp. E bust typically has a double arched crown and is in any case a very cosmopolitan mix of styles given the introduction of the 'Aberystwyth' bust from 1638. Pennies were struck with pellet(s) as initial marks for most of the reign from 1630 onwards, meaning there is much dating conjecture. Stylistic comparisons seem to give the best results. I will do a bit of digging through Dave Greenhalgh's reference collection when I have time and see if I can find a die match. Chas. 1 pennies are a bit of a b**ger to find in high grade, with yours being a typical example. Lots of mucky detail, but not much really clear. Your best bet for a good penny of the reign is the last bust which crops up more frequently in thoroughly acceptable condition. Typical examples shown of a few busts.

Hello Ancientart, welcome to the forum. I'm not suggesting your account or website aren't absolutely genuine, but to anyone reading this and visiting the website linked to above, I think caution should be exercised - the very generic looking website was created less than 6 months ago, the address is a PO Box (and has opening hours!) and the links to facebook, x, pintrest etc contain no content (yet). I'm sure Ancientart will build up a reputation in due course. 👀

It's not entirely bad, but there is certainly wear on the king's hair/beard/brow/cheek/tash/ear and on the lion's body/tail/feet and also on parts of the crown.

The other pick up today was this 1874 Penny. I think it is 8+G making it F77, but feel free to correct me if I am wrong. The lines in the fields, particularly on the reverse, are confusing. My original thought was die-clash, but I can' make out which parts of the design they could represent. The coin is currently taking an Acetone bath to make sure it is not some glue residue!

Retrospectively, only when you win. At the time it is useful to have a spare set of underwear to hand if a coin in demand has to be bought. Not so thrilling trying to explain that one.

just tacking on to this topic in regards to found in good condition,...... and theses six pence's dated 1911 George V and a young head Victoria 1887 fall into this category, I had these dates already paged however theses are in so much better condition, so need to show and switch them out... 👍

I had the good fortune to pick up a couple of these coins, recently, for a bargain £145 the pair. But when pawing over them, marvelling at how new they looked, in what appeared to be nearly full lustre, I noticed they were from the same pair of dies, and looking suspiciously similar. Further investigations revealed that all the other class VIs I could find out there were also looking lustred and from the same dies…beginning to feel suspicious at this point. UNTIL, that is, I discovered the 1969 Colchester Hoard was linked to a couple of the recent sales, leading me to explore that further. The hoard story is fascinating in that it was added to in at least two distinct lots, spanning at least 12 years, and is also thought to be linked to the 1902 hoard, found in the same street. The Edward I class VI coins, numbering nearly 2000, were ‘fresh from the Bury mint, and from the same pair of dies.’ There was previously only ONE known example of that type, so I can say with confidence that my own two coins will have made up a part of that hoard, explaining their fresh surfaces. The BNS article is well worth a read, as is a google search for the history and speculation surrounding the hoard itself. It has strong links with a Jewish family who were occupying the hoard location during that period. https://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital BNJ/pdfs/1974_BNJ_44_5.pdf

Not only the pennies were good. It was an all-round interesting sale given things like the unique 1847 6d and the Henry VI (restored) farthing. I picked up a couple things, so in a good mood today.

I don't think 1927 proof coins are unloved, I just think that a mintage of 15k for a proof coin is not low, and comfortably satisfies the demand of people who wants one. In addition the series also has a large number of circulating coins at UNC giving anyone an opportunity to get a type example. The 1887 proof crown on the other hand has a mintage of only about 1k (and there are far fewer circulating UNC examples).

Does seem a bit excessive. Many of them have the same 43.173. or 43.172 IP address range. I'll see what I can do.

Comparing it to my pair of 1844 crowns I'd say that's the top part of a cinqfoil. The star is larger and goes almost to trhe top of the N and I whereas the cinqfoil is smaller and goes about halfway up the letters.

That's the man. Splash out on literature. Spend 3 beers worth on a book instead of 1. As an aside and not referencing you as a subject, it never ceases to amaze me how many people consider spending as much as a lunchtime beer with a snack on literature is viewed as excessive and wasted money, when what they spend on coins has several zeros added to the same amount. It seems weird to me that people frequently won't buy the required tools to give them the knowledge required to increase their collection value, which is what they are trying to achieve. Bizarre. Not everything is on the internet, and that which is, is becoming increasingly untrustworthy. Everybody needs to tread more carefully than they used to with AI. A potentially useful tool that you can be guarantee to be abused.

1863 Slender 3 F44 Well I just can't believe my luck on this one, I never thought I'd ever manage to get my hands on one of these 🤩

Very nice! Interesting that you think the halfpenny the weakest…I’d be really happy with your halfpenny, and especially the halfgroat (really nice), it’s the penny I see as weakest. Lovely set, and a bargain-priced halfpenny

Here is mine, and nice tone in the hand. Auctioneer’s photos. Jerry

You’ve compiled a highly eclectic collection of coins! Great stuff!

I also recently discovered these 2 commonwealth coins amongst my box of Hammered Coins, rubbed but nice to have all the same, ......£737.48 😲 gosh!

So one of my other areas is French coins. I love their big silver coins. From 1974 to 1980 (killed by the Hunt Bro's attempt at cornering the market) they had a 41 mm & 30 gram .900 50 Francs coin. I still need a 1979 for that series and was looking on ebay. Now melt for them today is $60 USD and I see one at $72. Ok, reasonable. But bad feedback. Look at his other listings and lots of obvious fakes - an 1812 Napoleon 5 Francs for $65 (!) and even more humorously, a Kingdom of Hawaii 1883 (46,538 remain of 499,000 minted) in seemingly UNC condition. If real, an easy $1600 coin. $65 as well. Yeah, I think I'll get my 50 Franc coin somewhere else... The original I looked at: https://www.ebay.com/itm/800122943117 Clicking on the seller's other items is when the "fun" begins.

Polish! Russians have even weirder letters ;).

Finding good graded coins has been good of late, another box of coins processed and this 1915 Shilling George V although heavily tarnished its quite a good grade, the lions nose seems a bit rubbed, but the rest seems un touched, vast improvement on the one I already had.... 👍🙏

1.3 g 18mm

I'm sorry to say Paddy I think Its a 7+G . The outer Ribbon is too narrow and has a large gap between the two ribbons Ribbons on the 8

well its a start

I have a 1927 set in an identical box even down to the remains of tape on the back of the box. I don't know if any 1928 proof sets were ever issued but this looks like a cobbled together set of 1928 coins presented in a 1927 proof set box to trap the unwary at a high price.

It's not a common flaw and I am not certain if I have seen it before. In this grade, the flaw wouldn't make a difference. Both the obverse and reverse designs are really nice.

You're seeing things. Another classic case of pareidolia, methinks. On a genuine die 5, the die number is much larger than your "blob" and also slightly to the right of a border tooth. Your anomaly is to the left... See below:

I never logout so can't comment on that. However if I try to see messages or notifications, it just spins forever without letting me in to see anything. Also, I can't seem to 'Like' posts - there's just a warning message about 'reacting to this content'.

Hello Paddy, quite right, I managed to find this on the web that someone else was looking into, a useful picture of the difference between the Cinquefoil and the Star 👍

Fortunately with his (or her - Linda??) outrageous prices, most people are fly enough to not fall for such bull, but I do see this one has sold: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/358558956337?itmmeta=01KS30XZG90WV7QVHWDYHQTRTW&hash=item537bc77b31:g:74IAAeSwAllqBx9t Obviously, post mint damage. Part of me thinks if some idiot has £500 to throw away on this sort of rubbish, more fool them, but I do take the point that naive people might get burnt. Don' know what the solution is. Ebay aren't ever interested in reporting items like these...

Could be double struck with another coin trapped in the dies, but equally could be another coin in a different metal in close contact with it in wet, acidic conditions leading to electrolysis (2 different metals in near contact under those conditions will generate a potential difference. Think in terms of a battery. Given the level of corrosion seen, either is possible.

I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:

Ah, the Villy Hall, imagifole, chittery-chattery and sip tilty-elbow from fine chiney tea-cuppers. deep joy