Leaderboard

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 🤩

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?

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

This was a recent pickup in a USA auction, I like the condition of the piece, it being much better than most farthings of that era - but I enjoy the additional cuds on Charles II's nose and Britannia's right arm from the die breaking down. Also it appears as though the numeral 1 in 1675 was repunched - almost appears to have been repunched over a numeral 5!

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

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.

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. 👍

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.

I am confident enough that it is a recessed ear, and that is good enough as it is going into my own collection. @Martinminerva also expressed the opinion that it was right in a previous post in this topic. I already have an example with the broken tooth in only slightly worse condition, so I will keep both to cover my bases. Neither will be sold until I pop my clogs, by which time I won't care anyway!

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:

I like this one 😂🤣

Ah. 🤡

Nice! 👌

Nice one Pete .

Nice one, Terry but why the different backgrounds to the photos ? If anyone else had put these pictures up on Ebay, I'd have smelt a rat !

It's not class 5; the portrait looks more like class 7 to me. I'm pretty sure that the reverse legend is IOAN ON CAN.T so it couldn't be class 5 anyway. Slevin's Short Cross Legends has a 7b2 with that exact reverse legend, but the A in CANT looks more like 7a (pointed) than 7b (vertical sides) than that example. Bizarrely placed reverse pellet stops are very common in classes 7a3 and 7b, so without a better ID of the portrait I can't be sure on the class, but the portrait looks more like a 7b to me, so it may be a 7b1/7a3 mule. Oh and Henry III, not John. Anyone else fancy a go?

Now you only need 27 other dates and about 35 different privy marks/ varieties

The true conundrum is whether or not it is the coin/variety that you are expecting. If you've been unsuccessful in your bidding, then it might have been or might not have been. If successful, then you won't know until you open the packet with the coin. If you don't open the packet then it might or might not be what is expected. What to do????? Final advice: "What, me worry."

On this coin there seems to be a circular mark on the bottom of the obverse that may be a die crack and could account for the double striking of the date.

Some lovely rare pennies sold at Sovereign Rarities this morning. Most of them have been on the market before with some increasing in price and some decreasing. The wonderful 1882 F112 BU sold for £12,250 which was cheaper than it realised in the Spink Gerald Jackson sale (June 2014 for £15,150)

The only example I have seen in hand which is completely unambiguous was the Adams coin. You will see that the underlying 3 determines the profile of the last digit with the 3 clearly present, but also clearly overpunched with a 5 given the vertical section to the left on the upper part of the digit. I have seen various others which purported to be over 3, but none with the same profile and arguably contentious. The 1845 over ? that I had stolen at the Midland last year looked to be to be more likely over a different font 5 than a 4 or a 3, but 4 would be a good call if not a 5. Not to say that the coins with a taller 5 are not over 3, but definitely a case of caveat emptor IMO. There are many coins listed as such, but most are reliant on the vendor's description. There is one coin listed on ebay that I thought unusual which is claimed to be 5/3, but it was the irregularity of the date which caught my eye. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/335246363284

Post-1752 Maundy coins were never intended for circulation so they are usually in good condition.

I'm not sure Ron Vibbentrop agrees...

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.

Which is where I got one for £180

Ah, sorry. I don't think it's a 5 either TBH.

I would say poor strike, as the lettering on the garter is perfect, and that's among the first areas to wear. Difficult to grade without seeing in hand, but I would say the second one is AUNC.

Seems ok for me now. I did block an IP range and there are about 200 guests online at the moment. As soon as you block one though, it does virtually nothing as they use a load of different IP addresses. Don't think it's malicious at the moment. Probably training an AI or who knows.

Oh, cool. I'd never noticed the cinquefoil stops on my 1845 crown. Learn something new every day.

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 👍

Plenty of silver types, of which I am looking for a specific one. Without trying to state the obvious, it has cast copy 'written' all over it in the form of casting pits. Even if it was genuine, desirable it ain't.

I don't think Charlie would be too impressed with truck loads of cupro - nickel dumped in front of the palace.

Thanks for coming to my defence, Blakeyboy, but I take no offence from PT/KB’s comment, I have absolutely no idea who Norris Cole is but also I have a 4yr old grandson so I am quite used to name calling.’ Stinky Grandon ‘ is his current epithet I believe, bless his little heart! Jerry