Peckris

By that logic they would have to disregard the majority of overdates and legends repunched.

I'd back up what Coinery says. Roman coins are amazingly cheap when you consider how ancient they are - so that's a good choice. If you don't have much income, I'd concentrate on the base metal coins of the later Empire (3rd Century onwards) which means denominations such as follis, AE3 and AE4 (those are generic names for small bronzes). You can find Constantine commemorative types (e.g. 'URBS ROMA') in decent grade (VF) for around £20-£25. If you can run to a bit more, the silver denarius of the 2nd Century on can be had in VF for around £30-£50 each. And the silver-washed antoninianus (3rd Century on) for even less. If you prefer the larger penny over the halfpenny, most regular issues back to 1935 can be picked up fairly easily in UNC, or for a fraction of the price in EF. However, halfpennies are better value for money, being less popular than pennies.

Good! I hope it's not the same one as me If it's not milled, you have NO competition from me

Like you, I can't find any reference in Peck, or any clues there. My guess - and that's all it is - is that it's a private pattern, possibly as a decimal cent (or fraction thereof). Or - I've Googled - it's a gaming token? One of the same date and obverse, but different reverse, was sold for a modest amount on eBay: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1846-UNIDENTIFIED-UNOFFICIAL-FARTHING-GAMING-COUNTER-QUEEN-VICTORIA-MULE-/370855482414?clk_rvr_id=528453006097&nma=true&si=7HXyv184ZyMDPNWGxeVTNP3wf84%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Thanks for the info cristatus, would in interested to hear your final thoughts, as I've got to be a little more organised now myself! My own simple folders with 1567, 1568, etc just ain't good enough any more!I still operate standard excel spreadsheets. One up from the well thumbed note books which still abound. In theory I keep spread sheets printed in my file which I amend manually as I buy/sell/improve ETC It still works for me.(Windows 95 I started?) If I do up grade I will run both systems. I have to say, the only long-term effective software for collecting is a spreadsheet or a database manager. You can buy these "off the peg" software creations, and maybe they will suit you perfectly ... until they don't. Then what do you do? You have to have something that is expandable for YOUR needs, and only spreadsheets or databases offer this amount of flexibility.

I think you are right about the 6/8 Penny Colin. They just don't become available that often. I have been thinking about a offer on it my self. BTW...the 1877 Narrow date now resides in Great Britain! Ha,Ha! No wonder you made a trip around the British Isles. I hope you brought it with you to save the hefty tax bill that e buyer would incur lol Azda, I had booked the trip to Great Britain, prior to obtaining a suitable offer for the 1877 ND, but did take it with me for personal delivery, as a result of the offer. I also want to let you all know how beautiful your country is! My wife and I were just amazed at the beauty of the hills (Mountains), Lowlands, etc. I also had a chance to partake of freshly cought "Haggis" on two (2) occasions! All I have to say about it is you would have to be mighty hungry to eat it on a regular basis! Ha,Ha. Here are a couple of pictures to show how it was served. You can dress it up as nouvelle cuisine, but at the end of the day, it's still a haggis

On a non-CGS basis, right? Do you mean removed from slab before despatched?! I am certainly not expecting any premium from forum members just because some of my coins are slabbed, you lot know better! No, I meant at non-CGS slab prices!!

lol I hear that 'Mrs C' has a few gold and silver coins tucked under the floorboards! Mrs Cunningham? ("Oh James, I heard you were a cunning linguist!" )

LMAO

On a non-CGS basis, right?

I'm guessing you'd lose a lot of the resolution though, wouldn't you?Yes, but it's better than nothing. Really? That's strange. On Macs you can capture an on-screen image and you lose none of the resolution. (None of the DISPLAYED resolution that is - if the displayed image is 300ppi then yes, you'd lose that, but since the images on eBay are for records only, you wouldn't them any higher than your monitor can display anyway. In other words, 72 or 90 ppi will remain 72 or 90 ppi forever, however many times you capture it with a screenprint.) It is input resolution that is potentially lost, not output resolution (which is by definition fixed by the display). As an example, if you have an image that is four times the width and height of your screen (in pixels) then to display it full screen, only 1/16 of the total pixels are used to generate that image. A screenshot will therefore lose 15/16ths of the available data - therefore resolution has been lost. That's exactly what I was saying. But eBay images don't come into that category, except maybe Auctiva full size enlargements, but those might not be download-prohibited anyway? Of course, I'm talking about full size desktop computer monitors here, not iPhones and the like.

I'm guessing you'd lose a lot of the resolution though, wouldn't you?Yes, but it's better than nothing. Really? That's strange. On Macs you can capture an on-screen image and you lose none of the resolution. (None of the DISPLAYED resolution that is - if the displayed image is 300ppi then yes, you'd lose that, but since the images on eBay are for records only, you wouldn't them any higher than your monitor can display anyway. In other words, 72 or 90 ppi will remain 72 or 90 ppi forever, however many times you capture it with a screenprint.)

I'm guessing you'd lose a lot of the resolution though, wouldn't you?If it's an image that's on your computer display and not intended for anything else (i.e. not for printing or anything), you'd lose no resolution at all. It remains at 72ppi however many times you screen-print it. (Assuming that Windows PrtScn doesn't inherently lose quality - the Mac equivalent doesn't). Well I'd normally use Chrome's 'View Source' tool but there is an extension you can install with Chrome (the internet browser) called 'Allow Right-Click'. However, on this occasion, I did not need to do either on Chrome or, I checked, Internet Explorer. I use Chrome also, but in this case I could right click on the images and save to file without any trickery. Worked in IE and Firefox too. Auctiva images are a little more tricky, but you can use "View Page Source" or "Inspect Element" in Chrome to get at the images. In Safari's 'Show Web Inspector' command, and clicking on 'Resources', I found this : $(KGrHqF,!ncFI+EeibZWBSSqBzGbq!~~60_12.JPG and when I clicked on it (it was in blue) it brought up the image which I was then able to drag to my desktop.

Brilliant!

A scrap metal Victorian florin!! (Pure silver, by the way).

ahh, dear! Bring back the 'misheard lyrics' segment of Never Mind The Buzzcocks, I say. (Their treatment of Wuthering Heights is on YouTube..)

Ah, a man after my own art... or a blustery Wuthering Heights night! ...sweet Roland rolled in Brie he had distemper like my jealous eel.... ♫ ♫ ♫

Peck, freeman, groom, are a good starting point, covering the period 1558-to modern decimal! And don't forget our Colin's website! (It will probably be in his signature?)

When standing in a hole it's best to stop digging.

1. EF 2. GEF 3. probably GEF or even AU (wouldn't be so high if a penny) 4. GF / NVF 5. VF/GVF (or NEF) 6. reject due to scratches below chins (EF/?? weak reverse, worn or weak strike?)

Ah, a man after my own art...

Traditionally there was a huge gap between VF and F. The top three grades - based on their descriptions - were quite close together, but F lagged some way behind them, often referred to as "the minimum state acceptable to collectors". Now there seems a more even spacing, which in practice means that the standards for EF and VF have dropped. (and even for F, some would say).

My thoughts too!

For that price you did EXTREMELY well! You could pay twice that for a coin like it.

I'd say the obverse was VF if you're being strict, but the reverse is clearly better. GVF at least. Do bear in mind that 1758 is by far the commonest date for shillings and good ones come up quite regularly. But that one would fit nicely in my own collection if the price was right.