Rob

Thanks Richard

Hi All. Does anyone have any ancients literature to provide a reference for this Parthian piece. I think maybe Mithradates, but will happily bow to superior knowledge. Thanks.

An approximate multiplier is about x1000. Something that cost a quid then is a grand now. So a couple billion is probably in the right ballpark.

The images are useless.

Has anyone got a link?

Fascinating stuff, I wonder how deep your pockets would have to be today to gather such a collection I don't know, but I was discussing with my son yesterday how much it would cost to tick all the boxes in my list of desired coins following his recent interest in said collection. Given I aim to maximise diversity and with the caveat that I only collect British coins, this is the same as Brand except that he tried to add anything he didn't possess - worldwide. The 1200 criteria in my case came to an estimated £5m mainly due to the need for a few 'Hobson's Choice pieces such as an Edward III double florin (6/-), Cromwell 50/-, Henry VII sovereign (dragon mark), Edward VI 3rd coinage gold (Ostrich Head mark), Triple Unite (£3), Hywel Dda 1d (unique at present in BM) plus numerous Tudor and Stuart gold pieces etc. Clearly many of these are likely to be 'pie in the sky' pieces unless Mr Lottery pays me a visit. Multiply that 10 or 20 times for the British because he would have multiple dates of the same design, then another 10, 20 or more times for different countries and the number is mind-boggling. A billion? Five billion? Even more amazing is the fact he was adding to the collection in 5 figure quantities every year! How did he have enough hours in the day?

I will third the previous 2 posts. It has to be a misprunt.

Thanks Richard

You've got a long way to go. Fortunately I have only listed the metals used in British examples which now comes to a total of 50 if you include the various finenesses stipulated in the indentures. Luckily it has been possible to remove one metal from the list (antimony) as those listed in Peck as such have been shown to be a 2:1 tin/lead alloy. I'm 2/3 of the way there with nearly all the gaps being H8, Ed.VI and Elizabethan gold and silver types. This period is a minefield. If foreign coins were included, the list would be even longer.

Thanks David. Similar but not the same. Different writing on the reverse and the portrait is quite different even though similar in style. We're in the right ballpark.

Thanks. Didn't know that. It might make searching more productive as I usually give up after the first few pages of results.

To get back to the original post, I see that Richard posted it on CCF in the unknown section - having returned for an update it is no longer there. Why remove a valid question, or is the obverse considered overly pornographic? Do they have an aversion to awkward questions such as 'what is it?'

What are we talking - "average from circulation, i.e. Fair/Fine"? Yep. One single lot of one ok coin, plus 4010 in 10 lots of pure sh**e.

People who phone you up to confirm an appointment, but won't divulge any details of said appointment before they have your inside leg measurement, bank details & what you ate for tea last night. Three of these today and I'm rapidly getting p'd off. Like the bank person who had previously sent me correspondence, made a phone call out of the blue just before the New Year, but wouldn't discuss what she phoned about because I refused to give security info. I said that she could send it by post if important - nothing has appeared 5 weeks on. What a surprise. And this forum's search facility. I typed in Room 101 knowing that was the thread title and yet it gave me three pages of answers before appearing as the last item on the list. You would have thought that a specific title would show up first - or is that too obvious. It's been a bad day, and it isn't getting any better. Humph.

Thanks Richard

Looking at CCF, I doubt whether it would get past the site censors considering it would be a new member posting an image of something that looks like a knobhead. What a crazy list of things you can't do. Can't contact people, can't post images as a new member, can't link to sites (which b****rs up any link to photobucket), can't advertise things for sale. The coin looks above average for what is normally posted, so presumably you would get busted for that too. What constitutes a 'quality post'? What a waste of space. It just reinforces the opinions of people on here that this is one of the better forums on the web - now, if someone would answer the original question............ Oh, and Peter. The comment you made about the 1925 halfcrowns. It wasn't a few hundred, but 4011 of them in 11 lots in the Noble sale. Rare not, not even scarce in that grade.

Maybe they are in a rush to complete their registry set? Who knows? We don't know the reason for the bidding pattern. Maybe they knew each other and one was determined to stop the other buying it for personal reasons. The prices were way too high even for the label, so I'm sure some other factor was involved.

Having given it a bit more thought, I think both like or dislike should require reasoned qualification. Liking something by accident would be difficult. The button is marooned in outer space, or at least a long way from the text. Of far more use would be a better search facility. One that accepted fewer than 4 letters would be good. If it would permit you to search a phrase rather than a single word of at least 4 letters, I would use that too.

Whilst I think this is an example of silly bidding given the universal availability of the type, it is still important that you don't take the prices in any reference too literally. CCGB, Spink, CMV etc are all approximations to the truth. A factor of two with reference to the prices contained within the various tomes is not unreasonable. Most collectors are willing to pay a little bit extra for a coin they really want, and in any case, a yearly price guide is inevitably lagging the market. All prices need to be put into the context of the buyer. I know I'm not the only person on this forum to have paid multiples of book values for something I wanted for whatever reason.

Things have changed. I liked the last post and now I have the option to 'unlike' it. Silly phrase - should be dislike. More to the point, both options should be available from the beginning to enable all opinions to be voiced. All of this is totally superfluous.

'Ere. What have you got against the Daily Mail. They are a long standing manufacturer of Britain's finest branded toilet tissue. Anyway, all you lefties need a target, otherwise you would be rebels without a cause.

I imagine that there will be a few members who will be sorry to have missed those Rob. Edit: Sorry. I meant " .. will be few members .. " of course. Members have been spared an ordeal - none of the above has happened, nor is likely to happen.

Thankfully it states that I have reached my limit of quotes for the day. Phew.

I believe you failed to spot two men with a large void between their ears. That's stupid. However, I have a huge supply if the underbidder wants another example.

Or is it a token for a mineral Bath? I can't find anything on it either. Given the remit includes the suppression of vagrants, street beggars and imposters, I can't see it being anything to do with the baths even though they are less than 100yds away. The latter were frequented by the well to do of Georgian society and were unlikely to be affected by the lower classes