Coins / Recent messages

Two additions to images:
1. Preferably scan or photograph the coin NOT in the coin holder. this often gives strange "spots" on the coin, which are caused by the adhering of the coin to the foil.
2. Make sure that the entire coin is on the scan / photo. Some of the current coins have the "sides" flattened, which is a shame.
3. If in doubt, do not portray the coin. Several counterfeit coins are now depicted.

"Occasional Coins" are tokens. They can be entered at Coins, with face value “Penny”. If you look at the other "coins" with the face value "Medal", you will see more of similar things.

Where do I place “occasional coins” such as the Delft duit

What is the best way to clean the coins.
Below a link to a forum with some instructions on how to clean coins:
Forum of Muntuilen.be
Pay attention to whether cleaning coins makes sense in your situation. Coins do not always get better and a treatment can also (further) affect or deteriorate coins.
An alternative to cleaning coins is simply to replace the coin with a better one. With a batch of new coins, the less good ones are replaced by better ones. In this way a kind of natural selection takes place. This method may be more effective for coins with a low denomination.

Have taken over a collection of coins.
Now my question is:
I want to catalog them as much as possible CLEAN .
How do I best use the cleaning coins.
There are some that just turned brown.
Mvg: Henk (fikas).

I suspect that the years are stored as integers and that the years are sorted based on a series of absolute numbers (-2, -1, 0, 1, 2). For example, you could try to enter -50 with a 50 BC coin. You can then see in the corresponding overview (eg Roman Empire) whether the coin is displayed first. It is best to just experiment with what happens.
And indeed! Entering -15 for a coin tiered 15-13 BC. just works. This is also correctly indicated in all overviews and sorting by year…

In Catawiki, is it possible to enter dates before Christ in a way that can be sorted correctly?
That is a good question! If I look at the main page ( www.catawiki.nl ) then at the moment the oldest item is a coin that you entered today (from year 37). In other words no items have been entered from before Christ / the year 0. I suspect that the years are stored as integers and that the years are sorted based on a series of absolute numbers (-2, -1, 0, 1, 2). For example, you could try to enter -50 with a 50 BC coin. You can then see in the corresponding overview (eg Roman Empire) whether the coin is displayed first. It is best to just experiment with what happens. If there is no solution, the creators of the site will have to be approached to come up with a solution.

Nu ik van elke periode precies 1 munt heb ingevoerd zal ik onderstaand even de tijdvakken die ik heb aangemaakt vermelden. Ik heb hierbij de indeling aangehouden van de diverse delen van The Roman Imperial Coinage /> Romeinse Keizerrijk – Augustus tot Vitellius (31 v.Chr-69)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Vespasianus tot Domitianus (69-96)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Nerva tot Hadrianus (96-138)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Antoninus Pius tot Commodus (138-192)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Pertinax tot Geta (192-217)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Macrinus tot Pupienus (217-238)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Gordianus III tot Uranius Antoninus (238-253)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Valerianus tot Florianus (253-276)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Probus tot Amandus (276-293)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – De Tetrarchie vanaf de munthervorming van Diocletianus (294-313)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Constantijn en Licinius (313-337)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – De familie van Constantijn de Grote (337-364)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Valentinianus I tot Theodosius I (364-395)
Romeinse Keizerrijk – Het gedeelde rijk tot de val van de westerse delen (395-491)
En dan rest nu nog een niet onbelangrijke vraag die jullie mischien al wel zagen aankomen… ;-)
Is het in catawiki mogelijk om jaartallen voor Christus in te voeren op een manier dat er correct op kan worden gesorteerd?

Now that I have entered exactly 1 currency from each period, I will list the periods that I have created below. I have followed the division of the various volumes of The Roman Imperial Coinage /> Roman Empire – Augustus to Vitellius (31 BC-69)
Roman Empire – Vespasian to Domitian (69-96)
Roman Empire – Nerva to Hadrian (96-138)
Roman Empire – Antoninus Pius to Commodus (138-192)
Roman Empire – Pertinax to Geta (192-217)
Roman Empire – Macrinus to Pupienus (217-238)
Roman Empire – Gordian III to Uranius Antoninus (238-253)
Roman Empire – Valerian to Florian (253-276)
Roman Empire – Probus to Amandus (276-293)
Roman Empire – The Tetrarchy from the currency reform of Diocletian (294-313)
Roman Empire – Constantine and Licinius (313-337)
Roman Empire – The Family of Constantine the Great (337-364)
Roman Empire – Valentinian I to Theodosius I (364-395)
Roman Empire – The shared empire until the fall of the western parts (395-491)
And then there remains a not unimportant question that you may have already seen coming... ;-)
Is it possible in catawiki to enter dates before Christ in a way that can be sorted correctly?

Couldn't you enter the coin type as face value?
Certainly, if that is allowed, please. I have now also done this.
bq.
What do you mean by “characters in the left field”, “right field” and the “cut-off”? Can you explain to me why these fields are important, and to what extent you cannot put them in the “details” field?
With late Roman coins (starting from the period described in RIC V , but especially from the time of Constantine the Great and Licinius) various signs are added by the mint workshops both in the left field, right field as in the crop.
Sometimes these mint marks are meant to be able to see in which city / city the coin was minted (this is often indicated in the cut-off, but also elsewhere), often they even indicate in which specific workshop (officina) of a city the coin is beaten. Other characters are used to indicate a value.
These things can be indicated under “details”, but then they cannot be searched and sorted by. Due to the fact that 1 character - and even where this character is located on the coin - sometimes makes the difference between a particular coin from the standard catalog (RIC - The Roman Imperial Coinage) and another that is otherwise completely identical, this is important for collectors of Roman coins.

First of all, thank you very much for introducing these antique coins. This is far from my familiar territory and it's nice to see someone filling up enthusiastically. I respect your knowledge of this particular area and can only unanimously respond to your suggestions regarding era, nominal value and descriptions.
As a "country", "Roman Empire" seems very logical indeed. This must remain a mandatory field.
The fact that the country as such no longer exists is no objection. The same goes for “Biafra” for example.
The periods indicated by you are exactly in accordance with the rest of the site “Country - Description (years)” and therefore fine.
Couldn't you enter the coin type as face value?
What do you mean by "characters in the left field", "right field" and the "cut-off"? Can you explain to me why these fields are important, and to what extent you cannot put them in the “details” field?

Catalogi vermelden geen nominale waarden maar beperken zich tot het munt-type. De waarde van de diverse munten is echter in de loop der tijden sterk gewijzigd.
De ideale situatie voor Romeinse/antieke munten zou daarom een apart veld voor muntsoort/munt-type zijn…
Ter verduidelijking onderstaande.
Ten tijde van Augustus en de eerste Julio-Claudische keizers waren er de volgende munten (met daarachter de nominale waarde in denarii, oftewel denarii communes), hoewel in die periode de standaard omrekeneenheid eigenlijk nog werd gegeven in Assen:
1. Aureus – goud – 25 DC (400 Assen).
2. Quinarius-Aureus – goud 12,5 DC (200 Assen).
3. Denarius – zilver – 1 DC (16 Assen).
4. Quinarius – zilver – 1/2 DC (8 Assen).
5. Sestertius – orichalcum – 1/4 DC (4 Assen).
6. Dupondius – orichalcum – 1/8 DC (2 Assen).
7. As – koper – 1/16 DC (1 As).
8. Semis – orichalcum – 1/32 DC (1/2 As).
9. Quadrans – koper – 1/64 DC (1/4 As).
Tegen de 3e eeuw waren de Quinarius, Dupondius, Semis en Quadrans verdwenen.
In de loop van die eeuw is zelfs de denarius verdwenen en werd de zilveren Antoninianus ingevoerd, met een waarde van 2 denarii (2 DC).
Met de munthervorming van Diocletianus in 294 n.Chr. is alles helemaal omgegooid:
1. Aureus – goud – 2400 DC.
2. Argenteus – zilver – 1/24 Aureus – 100 DC.
3. Follis (ook wel nummus) – brons + zilverlaagje – 1/20 Argenteus – 5 DC.
4. Post-reform Antoninianus – brons + zilverlaagje – 2 DC.
Tussen 301 en 308 zijn er eigenlijk nog steeds dezelfde 4 typen munten, maar de waarde is nu als volgt:
1. Aureus – goud – 2400 DC.
2. Argenteus – zilver – 1/24 Aureus – 100 DC.
3. Follis/nummus – brons + zilverlaagje – 1/5 Arg. – 10 post reform Ants – 20 DC.
4. Post-reform Antoninianus – brons + zilverlaagje – 2 DC.
Constantijn de grote gooide alles nogmaals om, en voerde enkele nieuwe gouden en zilveren munten in die echter geen lang leven waren beschoren en die ik daarom voor het gemak maar even weglaat…
Geleidelijk werd de Follis/nummus steeds kleiner (en met steeds minder tot zelfs helemaal geen zilverlaagje). Tussen 308 en 348 was en bleef deze munt eigenlijk de standaardeenheid (hoewel men nog steeds alles omrekende in DC)
Vanaf 348 tot 353 was de situatie als volgt (gouden munten weglatend):
1. Maiorina – brons – onbekend aantal DC.
2. Centenionalis – brons – mogelijk 100 DC.
3. 1/2 Centenionalis – brons – mogelijk 50 DC.
Daarna werd het een chaos en is er eigenlijk weining bekend over waarden en typen munten (of namen daarvan).
Verzamelaars en numismatici classificeren vanaf ca. 313 n.Chr de bronzen munten daarom vaak naar grootte en gewichtsindeling. Ze speken dan in afnemende grootte/gewicht van de munttypen AE1, AE2, AE3, AE4 (en soms onofficieel van de piepkleine AE5)...

Catalogs do not list face values but are limited to the coin type. However, the value of the various coins has changed considerably over time.
The ideal situation for Roman/ancient coins would therefore be a separate coin/coin-type field…
For clarification below.
At the time of Augustus and the first Julio-Claudian emperors, there were the following coins (with the face value in denarii, or denarii communes) after them, although at that time the standard unit of conversion was actually still given in Assen:
1. Aureus – Gold – 25 DC (400 Axes).
2. Quinarius-Aureus – Gold 12.5 DC (200 Axes).
3. Denarius – silver – 1 DC (16 Axes).
4. Quinarius – Silver – 1/2 DC (8 Axes).
5. Sestertius – orichalcum – 1/4 DC (4 Axes).
6. Dupondius – orichalcum – 1/8 DC (2 Axes).
7. Axis - Copper - 1/16 DC (1 Axis).
8. Semis – orichalcum – 1/32 DC (1/2 As).
9. Quadrans - Copper - 1/64 DC (1/4 Axis).
By the 3rd century, the Quinarius, Dupondius, Semis and Quadrans had disappeared.
In the course of that century, even the denarius disappeared and the silver Antoninianus was introduced, with a value of 2 denarii (2 DC).
With Diocletian's currency reform in 294 AD. everything is turned upside down:
1. Aureus – Gold – 2400 DC.
2. Argenteus - Silver - 1/24 Aureus - 100 DC.
3. Follis (aka nummus) – bronze + silver layer – 1/20 Argenteus – 5 DC.
4. Post-reform Antoninianus – bronze + silver layer – 2 DC.
Between 301 and 308 there are actually still the same 4 types of coins, but the value is now as follows:
1. Aureus – Gold – 2400 DC.
2. Argenteus - Silver - 1/24 Aureus - 100 DC.
3. Follis/nummus – bronze + silver layer – 1/5 Arg. – 10 post-reform Ants – 20 DC.
4. Post-reform Antoninianus – bronze + silver layer – 2 DC.
Constantine the Great changed everything once again, and introduced some new gold and silver coins, which, however, did not last long and which I will therefore omit for the sake of convenience…
Gradually the Follis/nummus became smaller and smaller (and with less and even no silver layer at all). Between 308 and 348 this currency was and remained the standard unit (although everything was still converted into DC)
From 348 to 353 the situation was as follows (omitting gold coins):
1. Maiorina – bronze – unknown number of DC.
2. Centenionalis – bronze – possibly 100 DC.
3. 1/2 Centenionalis - bronze - possibly 50 DC.
After that it became a chaos and little is actually known about values and types of coins (or names thereof).
From about AD 313, collectors and numismatists therefore often classify the bronze coins by size and weight. They then speculate in decreasing size/weight of coin types AE1 , AE2, AE3 , AE4 (and sometimes unofficially of the tiny AE5 )...

• Rename the input field “country”
• Do not make the input field “country” mandatory
  For example, if you look on eBay ( http://munten.shop.ebay.nl/ ) you will see that a distinction is made created in the following categories:
• Ancient and Medieval Coins
• European non-euro coins
• Dutch non-euro coins
• Global Coins
  I am not saying we should use such a classification, but it does pay to think about how Catawiki for coins to organize to make it easier / more logical for the end user to enter coins.
  I cannot say anything about the face value of Roman coins because I am not familiar with it. How do catalogs state the value of a Roman coin? If the default is the “Denarii Communes” then I would indeed use it for face value.
  The proposal for the era makes sense to me.

Ik heb geen idee hoeveel verzamelaars van Romeinse en/of antieke munten er precies zijn in Nederland (mogelijk enkele honderden tot maximaal duizend?), maar om meer van deze Nederlandse verzamelaars te stimuleren om hun verzameling online te zetten lijkt het me leuk om een aparte sectie Romeinse munten toe te voegen aan het onderdeel munten op catawiki.
Mijn persoonlijke verzameling staat natuurlijk al online op mijn eigen website (http://www.chijanofuji.nl/Roman_Coins.html) en tevens op www.tantaluscoins.com (om precies te zijn op http://www.tantaluscoins.com/browse.php?uname=C…) , maar het zou fantastisch zijn als catawiki de drempel die er voor Nederlandse verzamelaars van antieke munten schijnbaar nog steeds bestaat te verlagen.
Momenteel lijken de invoervelden van munten nog niet helemaal te voldoen voor het invoeren van Romeinse munten.
Zo ontbreken er regels voor het apart aangeven van tekens in het linker veld, rechter veld en de afsnede. Met name voor laat-romeinse munten (vanaf de periode beschreven in RIC V) zijn bovenstaande velden een absolute must.
Ook een apart veld voor muntplaats, alsmede voor de legenda aan voor en achterzijde is eigenlijk nodig, waarbij ik tantaluscoins.com van mijn internetvriend Rasiel Suarez als voorbeeld zou willen geven.
Ik begrijp uiteraard dat het toevoegen van dergelijke velen extra werk betekent voor Rene en/of andere beheerders/programmeurs van de site, en ik verwacht niet dat dit op korte termijn gebeurt. Bovenstaande is alleen ter suggestie.
Ik zal als voorbeeld enkele munten uit mijn verzameling gaan invoeren aan Catawiki…
Verzoek aan de beheerders:
Aangezien er tijdens het Romeinse keizerrijk geen sprake was van de landen zoals we deze nu kennen vraag ik of het aub mogelijk is als land zowel in de titel als elders “Romeinse Keizerrijk” te laten staan, indien van toepassing (voor laat Romeins) gevolgd door de muntplaats.
Voor het veld “Nominale waarde” kan de waarde woden gehanteerd die de Romeinen zelf ook gebruikten, namelijk omgerekend naar “Denarii Communes”. Een eventuele omrekentabel kan ik wel posten indien daaraan behoefte is.
Voor het veld “Tijdperk” stel ik voor te beginnen met “Romeinse Keizerrijk” gevolgd door de aanduiding en jaartallen die ook door RIC worden gebruikt.
Zie nu mijn wijzigen bij catawiki nr. 247095 en mijn zojuist toegevoede munt: catawiki nr. 428839.

I have no idea how many collectors of Roman and/or antique coins there are exactly in the Netherlands (possibly a few hundred to a maximum of a thousand?), but to encourage more of these Dutch collectors to put their collection online, I think it would be nice to have a separate Roman coins section to the Coins section on Catawiki.
My personal collection is of course already online on my own website ( http://www.chijanofuji.nl/Roman_Coins.html ) and also on www.tantaluscoins.com (to be precise on http://www.tantaluscoins.com/ browse.php?uname=C… ), but it would be great if catawiki lowered the threshold that apparently still exists for Dutch collectors of antique coins.
At the moment, the coin input fields do not seem to be fully sufficient for entering Roman coins.
For example, there are no rules for specifying characters separately in the left field, right field and the trim. Especially for late Roman coins (from the period described in RIC V ) the above fields are an absolute must.
Also a separate field for coin location, as well as for the legend on the front and back is actually necessary, whereby I would like to give tantaluscoins.com from my internet friend Rasiel Suarez as an example.
I understand, of course, that adding such many means extra work for Rene and/or other site administrators/programmers, and I don't expect this to happen any time soon. The above is for suggestion only.
As an example, I will enter some coins from my collection to Catawiki…
Request to the administrators:
Since during the Roman Empire there was no mention of the countries as we know them today, I ask if it is possible, please, to leave the title "Roman Empire" as a country, followed if applicable (for late Roman) by the mint.
For the field "Nominal value" the value can be used that the Romans themselves also used, namely converted to "Denarii Communes". I can post a conversion table if needed.
For the “Era” field, I suggest starting with “Roman Empire” followed by the designation and years also used by RIC .
Now see my change to catawiki no. 247095 and my just added coin: catawiki no. 428839 .

It is often thought that a collection is automatically insured under the home contents insurance. However, this is often not the case. Certainly not when it comes to a valuable collection.
That is why it is interesting that Catawiki works with an insurance broker that specializes in insuring art and collections. This intermediary can give you independent advice about your collection in relation to the coverage of your home contents insurance. And about the possibilities of taking out a specific Collective Insurance. If you fill in this form , an agent of the intermediary will contact you to discuss your specific situation.
Insurers often require you to map out your collection. That is of course already possible with Catawiki.
Fill in the form immediately at www.catawiki.nl/verzekering

To protect your glass plate, you can also place a transparent (transparent plastic for printing for projectors) on it, so you cannot scratch it when opening or closing the scanner by sliding it

Place multiple coins - whether or not in coin holders - on the scanner to work efficiently.
Then when you turn the coins over to scan the backside, make sure you get the right backs to the right coins when you “cut”.

Hi Eric,
Thanks for the clarification, the latter had not yet occurred to me
gr. Danny

Saturday September 19, 2009 it's that time again! De Muntmanifestatie is the largest coin fair in the Netherlands. You can enjoy everything that has to do with coins for no less than 7 hours. The rooms open at 10 am and there is plenty of free parking space, right in front of the Van de Valk hotel at the A28 in Assen. Highly recommended for every euro collector.

Oh yes, the German States you mention stand together in the era German States

Hoi Danny,
Bedankt voor je input.
Het leek me logischer om ‘provinciaal’ als tijdperk te benoemen, want het is immers een afgebakende periode in de tijd.
Als je tijdperk Nederland Provinciaal kiest zie je links de mogelijkheid om te kiezen voor de verschillende gebieden “landen”.
Munten van bijvoorbeeld Gelderland vallen al onder Nederland Provinciaal > Gelderland
Door deze methode is het niet nodig om naast “Land”, “Tijdperk” en “Serie” nog een extra veld “Categorie” aan te maken, wat bij het invoeren vaak tot verwarring zal lijden en dus tot fouten of incompleetheid.
Hopelijk is het zo duidelijk,
Eric

Hi Danny,
Thank you for your input.
It seemed more logical to me to refer to 'provincial' as an era, because it is, after all, a defined period in time.
If you choose the era Netherlands Provincial , you will see the option on the left to choose the different areas “countries”.
Coins from Gelderland, for example, already fall under the Netherlands Provincial > Gelderland
With this method it is not necessary to create an extra field “Category” in addition to “Country”, “Era” and “Series”, which will often lead to confusion when entering and thus to errors or incompleteness.
Hope it's so clear,
Eric

Could another category Netherlands be added provincially?
(I see this is there, but this is under time frame, I would find it more convenient if it is (also) a subcategory of the Netherlands.
now there are, for example, Duit van Gelderland listed under “Landen” as “Gelderland”.
very confusing and not straightforward.
this possibly. Also do for Germany, but then the federal states where you can place coins from, for example, Prussia, Bavaria, Danzig, Hamburg, Munster, etc. These all fall outside the existing categories. I would like to supply a list with the sub-areas of the Netherlands Provincial (Gelderland, Overijssel, Holland, Utrecht etc. and the federal states of Germany. so that the coins of Gelderland under the Netherlands Provincial & gt; Gelderland are
and coins from eg Prussia under Germany & gt; Prussia stands
let me know if anyone thinks this is a good idea and if it can be implemented.
and another suggestion for the Netherlands Provincial:
can also see the coins of the Cities separately.
so the Netherlands Provincial & gt; Gelderland & gt; Zutphen
to give an example
Greetings, Danny

1. Gebruik een muntencatalogus om informatie over de munt te achterhalen.
2. Gebruik de (gratis) functie “Find My Coin” van Numismaster om informatie over de munt te achterhalen:
   - www.numismaster.com
   - Klik op “Find My Coin”
   - Kies een categorie ( meestal World )
   - Vul enkele velden in ( country, denomination, date )
   - Klik op “Find My Coin”

1. Use a coin catalog to find out information about the coin.
2. Use Numismaster's (free) "Find My Coin" feature to find out information about the coin:
   - www.numismaster.com
   - Click on “Find My Coin”
   - Choose a category (usually World )
   - Fill in some fields ( country , denomination , date )
   - Click on “Find My Coin”

1. For the portrait of a king / queen, president, pope, etc., indicate who is involved in the series. For example, Albert I , Beatrix , Elizabeth II , Wilhelmina , Willem II , etc.
2. For images, describe the main subject in the plural and starting with a capital letter . For example: Flowers , Palm Trees , Fish , Lighthouses , etc. Exceptions are subjects of which only one exists, for example : Sun .
3. Keep the description general. A robin and a pigeon should both be described as Birds .
4. For multiple subjects, describe all subjects separately. For example: One side of a coin can depict a queen, while the other side can depict an animal and a plant. Multiple subjects can be added using the button “Add Extra Series”.

Series refer to (part of) the subject depicted on a coin.
Some collectors have a collection area / purpose to collect coins with a specific subject. For example: Kings, birds, flowers, ships, etc.
By indicating relevant series per coin, all coins with a certain subject can easily be displayed.

1. Wipe the scanner glass before use.
2. Place several coins - whether or not in coin holders - on the scanner to work efficiently. Do this with caution to avoid scratching the scanner glass.
3. Set the scanner (software) to a high DPI (300 or higher). This ensures a good quality of the scan.
4. Scan the coins in color.
5. Use software to “cut” the individual coins from the scans.