Peckris

Welcome to the forums Tom

That's actually a very nice repro, especially the reverse. I'd be quite happy to have it in the absence of any decent James II silver. Not worth anything much, but nice.

Many dealers, including Chris Perkins who runs this site and Rotographic, will pay a price for pre-47 which is pretty constant between them (bullion value minus a margin for profit). Why not contact Chris as I'm sure he'd appreciate first refusal?

He must have used them as unofficial titles then, and Octavian decided to make them official when he became the Emperor Augustus.

You'd actually be better off getting Chris's "Check Your Change" as CCGB only covers predecimal coins and you sound more interested in decimals.

Well, I can only see the obverse but I would rate it VF at least. (The wreath leaves have some wear but there's very little anywhere else.) Perhaps GVF.

It's unlikely but not absolutely impossible. However I've never seen one in change. It would be a better move to get the two sets I think. The 1972 set is particularly desirable as only the 25p was ever issued outside the proof sets, so it's your only chance of getting a set of coins dated 1972. The 1982 BU set is much cheaper to buy so perhaps that's the place to start? The coins in BU sets are struck to a very high standard, though they aren't proofs. Oh, and Welcome to the forums , by the way

I can just make out the ghost of '183' under the portrait, but Sod's Law says the final digit is unreadable.

Goddards Silver Dip is ok for coins that have toned 'ugly' - the trick is to only immerse them for a few seconds, then once more if needed. Rinse thoroughly. No problem.

Very good question! Some get included, some don't. It's all down to who compiles the literature. This one has been in all the books for years, so it's widely recognised as a variety, when strictly speaking, it ain't. What makes die fill NOT a variety, when a die flaw is? A die fill is where a cavity in the die becomes filled with material so that for instance a part of the legend disappears. A die flaw is where the die becomes damaged i.e. a hole giving a dot or an extended legend I know what they are Gary! I just wasn't sure why one thing was classed as a variety and the other wasn't. But Rob's dealt with that in his inimitable way.

Spink doesn't list individual types for Roman - just one 'typical' coin for each denomination per emperor etc. The listing for Mark Antony doesn't feature your particular denarius but unless it's a rare type, the value in Fine is £50 and VF £125. I am surprised that's Mark Antony though? The obverse legend unmistakeably says ANTONIVS and there was no other Antony. However it also says AVG(ustus) IMP(erator), titles that weren't used until Augustus' time, who was still Octavian when M.A. was around.

Your arrow is pointing to "Soft spot" but you don't identify it any further than that - outside my flat there are many soft spots due to recent rain.

Very nice coin! Lovely tone.

Very good question! Some get included, some don't. It's all down to who compiles the literature. This one has been in all the books for years, so it's widely recognised as a variety, when strictly speaking, it ain't. What makes die fill NOT a variety, when a die flaw is?

Unless you post a link instead of just an item number I can't possibly advise you. Sorry.

Wow, detectors can find fake banknotes too?

Strange colour - you'd expect a KN to have the characteristic red colour. That one looks like my 19H, except mine has virtually no hair detail, the die was so worn! 1919H penny obv:rev.jpg Nice! Is it ever the case where the London mint supplied planchets to the either Heaton or Norton or is this just true the other way round? I'd not heard that they did, though I don't know enough about the Heatons/Royal Mint relationship in the 19th Century. However, given that Heatons were employed to take the strain off the RM, it wouldn't make much sense for the Mint to then undergo the huge effort of making planchets. Certainly if London supplied Kings Norton, they wouldn't mostly have that red terracotta colour.

Strange colour - you'd expect a KN to have the characteristic red colour. That one looks like my 19H, except mine has virtually no hair detail, the die was so worn!

Yes. I have about 3 or 4 collected from change in the late 60s, but I'd like one minimum EF. Ok - the common varieties of 1861 - 1863 are quite cheap in fairly high grade, or 1889 - 1893 are very affordable in GEF or better, with lustre. 1876H and 1882H are both readily available.

...and yet I had a BU '57 calm sea a few months back but it flew out of my Shop like it had wings. I think it lasted less than a day. It went to Canada, where someone obviously collects them! And Rob does, of course. And I do, but then I collect everything. I treasure my halfpennies! But for some reason, maybe genetic, the halfpenny boys don't kick up a quarter of the fuss those farthing boys make. Talk about 'inverse proportion'.

A real bargain!! ... except the postage is 44 times the sale price

Thanks Peck I also think I'm in the same ball park as you right now, I'll be trying to get my hands on the 1922 w/27 rev. however I won't be aquiring it anytime soon (while I have to buy luxuries like food and heating)! No - I meant the line is just below that particular one! I'll only get one through an immense amount of luck, I certainly couldn't afford one. As for post 1887-bronze, I would like to upgrade my 1926ME from VF+, and get a decent (e.g. EF) KN which means 1918, they being much more common. Apart from that, I'm more or less there now. I see! To be honest with you Peck, the 1922/27 is one of my least favourite variations on some of the better types out there so I'm happy to wait for this one I'm yet to obtain the 1926me, I recently just bought the original effigy so happy to wait while I enjoy this one! I have seen more and more recently that the 18KNs are popping up, and they seem to be getting better and better in grade. I think theres one going on Ebay which has some eye appeal and was around the £500 mark. I just tried to find the link for it but it seems someone may have already bought it.. Yes, in the past few years - well, certainly since eBay - the 1918KN has been re-evaluated as much more common than the 19KN, instead of a 'bit more common'. In that time, the 19H has gained a lot of respect as being very hard to find in high grade. Don't rush into your 26ME, but like me you might have to set your sights on a VF or VF+ example. (That's true VF by the way, not what some people would have you believe ). Supposed 'scarce' pennies you should find easily are 1950, 51, and 53 in high grade. If you're into the 'recessed ear' GV variety, the 1916 is easier than the 1915. On the other hand, there are varieties which don't interest me in the slightest : the two varieties of 1905, ditto 1937, especially as the differences are microscopic and neither variant is markedly rarer than the other. The 1940 'single exergue line' is tricky in BU, and of course 1932 and 1934 in UNC are also tricky. I'm still looking for a high grade 1946 'mint flaw' penny. OMG, the more we talk about pennies the more there is to say! The farthing boys had better come along and shut us up.

Prooflike, Dave. I have one (the common 1886 O) that ticks all the boxes - mirror fields and frosted designs - but I'm assured that many Morgans are like that, and are not proofs. Before the current craze for AT in some quarters over there, the desirability factor was how 'mirrored' the coin was, the more the better.

Thanks Peck I also think I'm in the same ball park as you right now, I'll be trying to get my hands on the 1922 w/27 rev. however I won't be aquiring it anytime soon (while I have to buy luxuries like food and heating)! No - I meant the line is just below that particular one! I'll only get one through an immense amount of luck, I certainly couldn't afford one. As for post 1887-bronze, I would like to upgrade my 1926ME from VF+, and get a decent (e.g. EF) KN which means 1918, they being much more common. Apart from that, I'm more or less there now.

Knowing absolutely nothing about the numismatic background to this, but knowing a bit of history ... I tend to agree with Gary. There wouldn't have been much need for coinage back then, apart from major projects (certainly not for day-to-day transactions). What they needed I would have thought would have been met by existing Saxon silver, plus whatever French silver they brought with them.