Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Pavel

Seeking feedback for a coin reference site

Recommended Posts

Good day everyone. As you can see from my profile, I am new here.

First, I must say that I am not an expert in numismatics, and am not a great collector as such (more of a "hoarder" type). But, I am a web programmer so I decided to combine hobby with profession, and build a web site. Yes, I know about Numista but there are many things I don't like there.

So... I have been working on this: http://onlinecoin.club/

The main idea being - it should be general reference site which allows "deep research" - not just a list of coins but also cross-referencing (who was the monarch who issued that coin / what else was issued during that reign; which mint struck this coin / what else did that mint issue etc.), plus proper attribution - which fact came from which source.

As part of that, I am building a database of all people that might appear on coinage. And... here's where it became messy. For example, this is a list of effigies: http://onlinecoin.club/Info/Effigies/ (in the future, ideally I want a full list there of every monarch ever depicted on a coin). But... catalogues and most books are usually vague on who designed what, which effigy is displayed on a particular coin etc. For example, look at the post-1801 coinage of King George III:  http://onlinecoin.club/Info/Reigns/United_Kingdom/King_George_III/ - was it really that messy, so many different portraits used at the same time?

Can somebody spare some time and give me some feedback on what I have done so far?

The site is still under construction. British coinage is here: http://onlinecoin.club/Coins/Country/United_Kingdom/ (scroll down for pre-decimal). I am still working on the copper/bronze coinage so not everything is there yet.

 

ps I don't even want to go into the topic of sovereigns and half sovereigns, and how to untangle the post-1880 varieties which seem to be listed differently in British and in Australian catalogues (if anyone can tell me which Spink listing matches which McDonald number, I'll be eternally grateful...)

Edited by Pavel
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Construction of a reference site is usually the preserve of a specialist collector in that field. It has to be specialised because to incorporate it into a complete denomination database would be unwieldy and far to complicated for the average person. You essentially have two main targets - the general collector who is possibly looking for an example of each type and the specialist who will probably want more info than the programmer will ever know.

As a rule of thumb, for British coins, the basic paper references such as Coins of England, Freeman, Peck, Marsh, ESC, Davies etc will form the basis of the collection. Most people do not dig too deeply into the finer points of a coin's design, and though there are some that do, they are very much a minority.

FWIW I keep my info by denomination as this is the broadest category by which people collect. However, even that falls flat on its face when the coinage gets revalued, such as the 10% upwards revaluation of gold in the reign of James I. It would be perverse to list a coin issued with a face value of 11/- as a 10/- piece.

If you can't untangle the sovereigns and half sovereigns, then your referencing needs some adjustment. The point of any reference is that it should be systematic and flexible. The first to provide a logical sequence for the coinage, the second to allow for missed items/new discoveries to be incorporated without disrupting the existing layout.

The ultimate reference will list every die ever produced and the pairings arising. You would need a very large mobile library to carry the book around with you.

I know what you are trying to do, but the complexity will kill the project. You need to find a way of keeping similar things together to save reinventing the wheel with every entry, whilst at the same time having the ability to incorporate a variety which will fit into the sequence.

All collectors like a numbering system, as do cataloguers. If you don't have a numbering system, the work will be ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rob.

This being a web site, it is inherently unlimited so yes - it will become unwieldy but it can still incorporate as much data as you put into it... and inserting a new discovery is not a problem. Have a look at, say, the 1860 penny with all varieties as per Freeman - if a new one is found, I'll just add a new reference and one additional row in the database. (it is a web site only, no book is planned)

As for sovereigns - I have the basics in order. What I mean by "untangle" is this. The 1880 sovereign is listed in many catalogues and each one has a number of IDs (one per variety). So, is "Normal IEB (Melbourne Mint)" (McD 177a) the same as Spink 3867A? They are described differently and (for me at least) it's not easy to decide which variety in one of the books matches which one in the other.

Numbering system... I have thought about this, but the usual system (sequential) is 1) invented already, and 2) does have the issue with inserting new discoveries you describe. So, for a web site (where people will copy/paste IDs from somewhere) maybe you do not need a logical sequence? XYZ3-HHFD-OO7T will do nicely too? Guaranteed to be unique, and you can generate any number of them so each variety will have its own ID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you intend it to be used by collectors, or is it just an exercise in listing all the varieties you can find in one document? This matters. Collectors use standard reference numbers to talk about a particular coin. So penny collectors will use their preferred choice of reference together with the unique identifier listed for a specific penny. The references used tend to follow the latest acceptable tabulation from the collector viewpoint. It used to be Peck, then it was Freeman, then it was Gouby. There will be others, so your list will need to have the ability to sort by reference if it is to be useful.

Your 1860 pennies have not included the patterns, some of which were also Royal Mint products. It also raises the question of where to put undated pieces and those of uncertain denomination. I also note that you have listed them by Freeman number which implies you have settled on a predetermined sequence with a view to adjusting this rather than starting with a blank sheet.

Penny collectors on this forum have already identified a number of dies not included by the established references. where do these fit in as they are nominally already assigned a P, F or Gouby number. I wrote an article in the 2011 BNJ which expanded the list of 1860 & 1887 Weyl pattern pennies, halfpennies and Farthings by more than two dozen previously unknown types. 1887jubilee on this forum is currently writing a book where he has identified a few hundred varieties just for the year 1887.

For numbering systems, I have spent a lot of time thinking about this and it raises a lot of problems. The established references all use their own numbers and it is these that collectors refer to, so I think it needs to have a logical format if it is to satisfy both the collector propensity to speak in reference number and have the flexibility to incorporate new pieces. An alphanumeric string with logical identifiers is probably the best way to go about it, or at least that's how it appears to me. The old Coincraft system was good up to a point in this regard as Ruler and Denomination were part of the 'numbering'. The next level is to find a logical means of conveying the variety - e.g. plain, milled, lettered or grooved edge.

If the document is to act as a concordance, then all varieties will need to be incorporated somehow into the list. There is still a lot of food for thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Rob, there is an awful lot of food for thought.

Being a programmer, I started with the "get the low-hanging fruit first" approach - that is, list by most popular references, then add other references, then (if needed) solve whatever issue arises further. Having Spink and Krause references added, I guess everyone will find what they need...

Varieties that are not listed anywhere are currently a problem for me. One, I have no literature from which I can get them. Two, it's very slow going even without them. I guess I'll have to address that later, when I am done with the "standard" entries.

Re identification system. There can be two general approaches. First, the one you describe - where the "reference" describes the coin. Now, you will need to "encode" in this an awful lot of variables - country, denomination, monarch, year, mint, die variety, edge, composition, even thickness (think "piedfort"). You will end up with one pretty long and unreadable string of letters or, if you do not abbreviate too much, with a literal description of the coin which will defeat the purpose. Not to mention that some of these elements may be up for debate. Why are British coins listed under "Great Britain" in Krause and not "United Kingdom"? Why are Australian sovereigns under Australia and not New South Wales and South Australia - where they were actually issued? Who was the "monarch" in Fiji in 2009 when they had Queen Elizabeth II on the obverse of the coinage, but had been a republic since 1987?

In short, this leads us to the second approach - just forget about a descriptive ID... Most of them are meaningless anyway. Whether it's 3856 in Spink or KM # something in Krause - it tells you nothing by itself, you need the "book" (or online source) to look it up. Well, if you are looking it up anyway - why not just assign a random mix of letters? This does not imply any ordering, and (from a technical point of view) "encodes" much better (you can number more things in the same space using letters and numbers as opposed to just numbers).

Edited by Pavel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spink and Krause is only a small part of the reference problem. For a general collector this is probably all they need, but by deliberately listing all Freeman varieties you have forced the need to incorporate the other references too, so to be useful these must be searchable and sorted by names. Very few specialists use Spink and Krause other than as a tool to remind them of the current going rate for the common variety. They have their own database of pieces that have come to market and prices realised. So you have two distinct camps. The danger from your perspective is to be too complicated for the generalist, and incomplete for the specialist. As we all know, any reference is outdated the moment it goes to print.

The Fiji example shows you can't have a one size fits all template. Each country to its own. A monarch may or may not be appropriate. What to do with double obverses and reverses? If a Taylor restrike was struck between 1862 and 1885, yet has the effigy of George III, what do you call it? The date is certainly wrong. George V pieces dated 1936 were mostly struck after his death and therefore technically Edward VIII. Again?

You will clearly have to shadow a previously adopted format/list, but suspect you will end up with a compromise.

You will also have to proof read the information. All that is written is not true. The Weyl pattern article was researched and written because the coin I had purchased was roughly x3 too heavy for aluminium as described. Yes, the aluminium ones existed, but subsequently it became apparent that a whole raft of other ones were out there. The P2114 (F839) Moore pattern penny described by Peck as struck in antimony, is not. Freeman's Coin News article show that he analysed the coin and found it to be two parts tin to one part lead, though failed to change the book text for whatever reason, which means that even now it is listed as antimony. I analysed my own P2114 and can confirm the tin/lead content, though the ratio looks to be considerably higher than 2:1 given the very weak lead peak at 2.3keV (the other lead peaks are over 10keV and left off the graph), but as this wasn't run against a standard I cannot give a definitive figure. In fact, it is difficult to know how Peck was sure this coin was struck in antimony as analyses for tin and antimony tend to give remarkably similar results with the same patterns seen, separated by only 100eV. The odd coin purporting to be in Cu-Ni should not be magnetic ;) .These are not the only examples.

Lead-Antimony comparison P2114.docx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest with you, I was hoping to find some middle ground between "general collector" and "expert" material - i.e. something that would give the general collector enough to do a quick lookup, but also enough for the expert to go on. Obviously, a site cannot be an authoritative source for anything, but can at least provide pointers to sources.

Well, I never thought it's going to be easy...

About varieties - yes, they will have to be searchable and order-able somehow, but I have yet to figure out how to do that. Searching within texts is easy, but how do you translate what a "variety" is into searchable text? Not trivial...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2017 at 10:07 AM, Pavel said:

Good day everyone. As you can see from my profile, I am new here.

First, I must say that I am not an expert in numismatics, and am not a great collector as such (more of a "hoarder" type). But, I am a web programmer so I decided to combine hobby with profession, and build a web site. Yes, I know about Numista but there are many things I don't like there.

So... I have been working on this: http://onlinecoin.club/

The main idea being - it should be general reference site which allows "deep research" - not just a list of coins but also cross-referencing (who was the monarch who issued that coin / what else was issued during that reign; which mint struck this coin / what else did that mint issue etc.), plus proper attribution - which fact came from which source.

As part of that, I am building a database of all people that might appear on coinage. And... here's where it became messy. For example, this is a list of effigies: http://onlinecoin.club/Info/Effigies/ (in the future, ideally I want a full list there of every monarch ever depicted on a coin). But... catalogues and most books are usually vague on who designed what, which effigy is displayed on a particular coin etc. For example, look at the post-1801 coinage of King George III:  http://onlinecoin.club/Info/Reigns/United_Kingdom/King_George_III/ - was it really that messy, so many different portraits used at the same time?

Can somebody spare some time and give me some feedback on what I have done so far?

The site is still under construction. British coinage is here: http://onlinecoin.club/Coins/Country/United_Kingdom/ (scroll down for pre-decimal). I am still working on the copper/bronze coinage so not everything is there yet.

 

ps I don't even want to go into the topic of sovereigns and half sovereigns, and how to untangle the post-1880 varieties which seem to be listed differently in British and in Australian catalogues (if anyone can tell me which Spink listing matches which McDonald number, I'll be eternally grateful...)

You've obviously put a lot of hard work in, so kudos to you for that.

As you say, the British copper & bronze is still a work in progress, and you may need some specialised advice and pictures for the rarer varieties. Just shout up. There are many penny/halfpenny/farthing specialists here, who can help you with those. 

But yes, well done. I can definitely see a lot of potential for future use and reference there.

 

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

As you say, the British copper & bronze is still a work in progress, and you may need some specialised advice and pictures for the rarer varieties. Just shout up. There are many penny/halfpenny/farthing specialists here, who can help you with those.

Yes, I definitely need lots of images (and not only of the bronze coinage - silver and gold too). I have been using the web site of Museums Victoria (Melbourne) - they have generously allowed republishing under a CC licence; but their collection has some strange gaps. They inherited the archive of the Melbourne branch of the Royal Mint which got lots of specimens sent to it, so if you search their collections you can find amazing stuff (like some 1840s patterns). And then, they either lack some very common coins, or they have an example which they purchased - in terrible grade :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Pavel said:

To be honest with you, I was hoping to find some middle ground between "general collector" and "expert" material - i.e. something that would give the general collector enough to do a quick lookup, but also enough for the expert to go on. Obviously, a site cannot be an authoritative source for anything, but can at least provide pointers to sources.

Well, I never thought it's going to be easy...

About varieties - yes, they will have to be searchable and order-able somehow, but I have yet to figure out how to do that. Searching within texts is easy, but how do you translate what a "variety" is into searchable text? Not trivial...

That's the rub. You can't be all things to all men. Sit in the middle and you p' off both ends of the spectrum. There might be a workaround if you could tag the basic item (as a search option) and then fill the varieties as fully as possible. Specialists are never happy because they are always on the lookout for unrecorded material. The merely recorded therefore becomes run of the mill. Miss out what to them is a glaring variety and the work will always be suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pavel said:

Yes, I definitely need lots of images (and not only of the bronze coinage - silver and gold too). I have been using the web site of Museums Victoria (Melbourne) - they have generously allowed republishing under a CC licence; but their collection has some strange gaps. They inherited the archive of the Melbourne branch of the Royal Mint which got lots of specimens sent to it, so if you search their collections you can find amazing stuff (like some 1840s patterns). And then, they either lack some very common coins, or they have an example which they purchased - in terrible grade :-(

Are you looking at 'just' milled coinage Pavel?  Because I've noticed that in the hammered section identification is very basic ..probably based on whatever information the original collector gave the coin before it was donated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TomGoodheart said:

Are you looking at 'just' milled coinage Pavel?

For now, yes. There's enough there to keep me occupied for a long time...

Eventually, I'll get to the hammered coins though. Personally, I find them very interesting but gave up on trying to learn about them after a brief passage in a book I was reading. It was written by Gregory of Tours who said, among other things, something to the effect of "we ran out of money so we then melted some gold plates and struck some coins". So, this small town bishop has his own backyard mint and strikes coinage with a mintage of "several plates worth of gold". Try and systematise that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×