Can anyone tell me what year Gothic Florin this is?

[evansuk2000 5]

Any help would be great, and also was it an ok deal for £13?

[DaveG38 407]

Looks like 1872 to me.

[Rob 3,152]

1881. Spink books these at £20 in fine and bullion value is about a fiver, so anywhere in between is ok . You haven't paid over the odds.

[DaveG38 407]

1881. Spink books these at £20 in fine and bullion value is about a fiver, so anywhere in between is ok . You haven't paid over the odds.

Of course it is - the old eyesights failing fast!!

[scott 144]

yea its got clear details, when you get to that point it costs a bit more so I do think £13 is a nice.

[Peckris 579]

It grades at Fair/Fine so I'd say £13 was probably about right.

Quick Guide to Roman numerals:

19th Century dates all start MDCCC (M 1000 + D 500 + CCC 300)

X = 10, so MDCCCX = 1810, MDCCCXX = 1820, MDCCCXXX = 1830

L = 50, so MDCCCXL = 1840, MDCCCL = 1850, MDCCCLX = 1860, MDCCCLXX = 1870, MDCCCLXXX = 1880

I II III = 1 2 3, so MDCCCLXXXI = 1881 (etc)

IV V VI VII VIII = 4 5 6 7 8, so MDCCCLXXXIV = 1884 (etc)

IX = 9, so MDCCCLXXXIX = 1889 (though there were no Gothic coins by then, so you won't see that one! But it gives an idea of how unwieldy Roman numerals could get)

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule' (where V is 5 but 1 less is IV and 1 more is VI; same with IX X XI, XL L LX, XC C CX, etc), so their numbers would have been very long!)

[declanwmagee 122]

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule'

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ?

[Paulus 1,975]

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule'

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ?

I didn't know that either, when did it come in, anyone know? William IV is IIII on his coins ....

[Nick 329]

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule'

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ?

I didn't know that either, when did it come in, anyone know? William IV is IIII on his coins ....

According to Wikipedia: "Subtractive notation was rarely used in Ancient Rome but became popular in the 13th century."

[Peckris 579]

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule'

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ?

I didn't know that either, when did it come in, anyone know? William IV is IIII on his coins ....

According to Wikipedia: "Subtractive notation was rarely used in Ancient Rome but became popular in the 13th century."

Yes, the Middle Ages was the period I had down. Though IIII was certainly IV when clocks became popular from the 17thC - so why clock makers preferred IIII is anyone's guess.

[Nick 329]

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule'

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ?

I didn't know that either, when did it come in, anyone know? William IV is IIII on his coins ....

According to Wikipedia: "Subtractive notation was rarely used in Ancient Rome but became popular in the 13th century."

Yes, the Middle Ages was the period I had down. Though IIII was certainly IV when clocks became popular from the 17thC - so why clock makers preferred IIII is anyone's guess.

There are a number of suggestions here as to why clockmakers may have preferred IIII.

[Peckris 579]

It's also worth mentioning that Romans didn't use the 'subtraction rule'

Didn't they? That's interesting. So 9 would be VIIII then ?

I didn't know that either, when did it come in, anyone know? William IV is IIII on his coins ....

According to Wikipedia: "Subtractive notation was rarely used in Ancient Rome but became popular in the 13th century."

Yes, the Middle Ages was the period I had down. Though IIII was certainly IV when clocks became popular from the 17thC - so why clock makers preferred IIII is anyone's guess.

There are a number of suggestions here as to why clockmakers may have preferred IIII.

Interesting article -- I rather like the 'single mould' theory myself, giving the symbol I for use all through, the symbol V only in the second third, and the symbol X only in the last third.