@Clio said: @BSmith that's a lovely group! All shillings? I've been in the market for a nice 1763 for awhile now. Great group of G3. Do you collect mainly his stuff?
Clio, Thanks. Yes, it's a group of shillings, I'm trying to get all the Hanover portraits. My English collection started as
one from every Monarch but it expanded a little.
@messydesk said:
Cool stuff, although pedantry insists that I mention that anything dated before 1707 isn't Great Britain.
I might be even more pedantic, and say that the thread title isn't that specific
1707 was the date of the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which although called 'Great Britain', is a political entity that doesn't have sole claim to the name. 'Great Britain' is what we call the largest island in the United Kingdom (hence 'Great'), so could encompass coins from the whole history of mainland Scotland, Wales and England.
In reality it's even more complicated than that. We don't know what the 'Ancient Britons' called it - the Greeks and Romans wrote the first records mentioning 'Britannia'. The Romans, at least for much of their occupation, used Britannia to mean everywhere south of the River Forth (beyond which was Caledonia) - so excluded most of Scotland. But the Scots weren't into striking coins at that point.
England, on the other hand, was only named after the arrival of the Angles, the first recorded use being in Northumbria in the 700s. Even then, it wasn't unified until a couple of hundred years later. So if you wanted to see coins of England throughout history using political terms, you'd need to ask for coins of Britannia, England, Northumbria, Wessex, Mercia, East Anglia, the Danelaw, the Cantii, the Catuvellauni, the Iceni, the Corieltauvi...
Anyway, here's a coin from 'Britain'. Or at least, it has Britannia on it.
Antoninus Pius As, 154-155 Britain or Rome. Bronze, 8.6g. Laureate head, ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P XVIII. Britannia seated left on rock, resting head on hand; arms in background, BRITANNIA - COS IIII, SC in exergue (RIC III, 934).
These were probably either struck in Britain (from dies cut in Rome) or to circulate in Britain. It may have been struck in both Rome and Britain, with the British issues being lighter (8.8g), and stylistically inferior. Britannia is thought to either be in mourning (holding her hand to her forehead) or at peace - the Roman shield at her side and a Roman army flag nearby remind the local people of the protection given by the Roman army on the northern frontier.
By the way, the coins @Nap posted are spectacular. You won't see many better or rarer Saxon and Medieval British coins than that.
Sorry for the small pic, but this coin is actually a crown or 5/- dated 1707 and minted in Edinburgh - basically the first coin of the United Kingdom of Great Britain since this coin was minted right after the Act of Union of 1707. One of the agreed upon acts was that Scotland would retain a mint in Edinburgh in perpetuity. And actually did until 1816, but only officially with a mintmaster etc. But the last coins were struck in Edinburgh in 1709 and the mint functioned as little more than a formality for over 100 years.
In memory of my kitty Seryozha 14.2.1996 ~ 13.9.2016 and Shadow 3.4.2015 - 16.4.21
A couple of coppers. First up, a Charles II 1/2d previously somewhat generously graded by NGC as a 1673 MS65. I think the friction on the reverse lets it down. It is however, a 5 over 3 over 2 on the last digit and the first recorded example - so happy days.
Next, a couple of trial strikes of a 1689 farthing on a Charles II halfpenny. 3 examples of the true coin known, but here you buy one, get one free.
Finally, a pleasing example of a common coin, an 1836 groat
One niche interest of mine is the Saxon mints of Somerset. There are 11 mint locations attributed, but nobody has ever assembled all 11 in their collection. Lockett had 10 of the 11, but Frome was unattributed when he died in 1950. A few years ago, the only Petherton in private hands (from the Lockett sale) out of 5 known was gifted to the museum in Taunton. So unless someone can dig one up, completion remains a dream.
Of the 11 mints, only Taunton, Watchet and Ilchester could be described as relatively easily obtained, but even these are quite rare. Of the others, coins available of Milborne Port, Frome, Crewkerne, Cadbury and Axbridge can be counted on one hand, with Langport and Bruton only marginally more abundant. Petherton as stated above is currently unavailable.
A few examples as follows:-
Aethelred last small cross of Cadbury. This is the Lockett coin. Not a thing of great beauty, but beggars can't be choosers. It took me long enough to find this one.
Cnut quatrefoil type of Crewkerne. There are about 30 coins known for the mint across all types, with 5 in private hands.
Edward the Confessor pointed helmet type of Langport. When this coin appeared in a Kunker sale in 2014, it extended the opening period of the mint by another issue - i.e. anything from a couple months to 5 or 6 years depending on when in the period it was struck. This must have been unappreciated by bidders, as it clearly went under the radar, costing less than the price in Spink for a VF of the mint. It remains the only one to my knowledge.
A William II type 3 of Watchet. This is the only William II from the mint in private hands, though others are in museums, including a couple of this type. The most commonly encountered coins of Watchet are Aethelred Long Cross.
This is a collection I have been working on of Shillings by Monarch. I was hoping to save up and try and buy @Weiss 's 1697 but a friend asked for me and I don't think he's every letting it go Awesome pieces here all around folks. Really been enjoying seeing the posts.
@robp2 said:
One niche interest of mine is the Saxon mints of Somerset.
That is an amazing collection. If that’s your niche interest, I can’t imagine your main interest!
Thanks.
My main interest is as outlined in the 10 ways to be a better collector thread - British from Celtic through to the present day. However, I will choose to fill a Somerset mint gap over another as it's where I was born. Due to the problem of duplication, I have represented some mints with later issues. Taunton will hopefully be a Henry I and Bruton an early Edward the Confessor type for the same reason. Frome is represented by an EdC small flan type. There is too much rare mint congestion in Cnut's types, and William I PAXS is also problematic. I still have a long way to go.
As the main thing I am trying to do is not duplicate designs wherever possible, it means there are Hobson's Choice pieces for certain boxes. The easier to acquire and typically commoner bits will be filled in at a later date, when more of the scarce/rare items have been obtained. Some duplication is inevitable as a few mints are only known for one type, or at least only one type is available, e.g. Cadbury and Cissbury are both represented by last small cross.
Very nice there Rob. Really artistic engraving and nicely presented.
Here is one for the late milled fans; guess what it is and GTG if you like (might be hard to do as the reflections were Very difficult to photograph). The brush marks are not on the coin but rather the plastic perspex of the holder:
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
I bought the first two of these 6 coins back in 2017 on ebay. The 10 and 50 pence pieces were off the chart with the toning and I picked them up graded on the cheap. Fast forward to early 2020 I was able to purchase the 1/2/5 pence from a fellow collector that also has nice color. The 1/2 pence I purchased last week to round out the set, though it has minimal color, it is a high grade specimen. So here you have it, a 1981 Great Britain proof set the hard way. The only British coins I own.
Three no-brainer pattern/proof halfpennies for any collector of Soho patterns, all likely the only examples available to collectors.
An early Soho bronzed copper obverse uniface (Peck 1231). Possibly the only KH15 example available in any metal.
A late Soho 1806 proof halfpenny (Peck 1372) struck in silver from currency dies. 3 others in museums.
A Taylor 1790/1788 restrike mule in aluminium (Peck R24, but not known to him). At least half of Peck types R20-R29 in this metal are corroded, so speculatively they were all in the same location when damaged. Virtually all appear to be unique up to this point in time, with only R21 documented by Peck as known from 2 examples - his and the coin in the BM. However, both are now in museums. This was a particularly pleasing acquisition as the type was previously unknown to me in this metal when it appeared on ebay in 2009, though it's existence was speculated.
Here is one that is not everybody's taste but is 99% of the coin that a satin specimen of this year is, and IMO under graded for issue as these come simply awful for handling, wear, etc.(not that it matters). The luster is really something in hand:
Darn it, the focus sucks....
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@7Jaguars said:
Here is one that is not everybody's taste but is 99% of the coin that a satin specimen of this year is, and IMO under graded for issue as these come simply awful for handling, wear, etc.(not that it matters). The luster is really something in hand:
Darn it, the focus sucks....
I have much respect for those when they look like that. 👍
Same with the Ike dollar, in high grade they are impressive.
Note the different orientation of bust to legend between the MS and Cam PF,. The CAM PF has top laurel pointing to center of "E". Also, note the "K" for Kuchler on reverse is incorrectly punched. These are early SOHO restrikes, post 1810, the year Kuchler died, he would certainly not have prepared dies with his own initial upside down and backwards.
Lastly, NGC sometimes mistakenly calls obvious proofs from original die pairs MS because they are not cameo. However, as far as I know, none of these are. All cameo proofs I have seen referenced have this orientation from recreated dies, though some do have the "K" on reverse in proper orientation.
This is a collection I have been working on of Shillings by Monarch. I was hoping to save up and try and buy @Weiss 's 1697 but a friend asked for me and I don't think he's every letting it go Awesome pieces here all around folks. Really been enjoying seeing the posts.
Clio, very nice group of shillings. They all have nice eye appeal and look good together as a collection.
If you ever decide to sell the James l, let me know.
PS - I believe the "hairlines" are actually on the planchet and do NOT go through the devices. This coin IMO under graded but GTG based on the reverse if you'd like.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
Yes, I agree they are not raised. What I noticed is the "polish" or hairlines disappear into the devices. From looking at some of the "MODEL" obverse and reverse patterns of the 20th C. and the rarer matte coins, I believe that the planchets were not well treated and esp on gold and even silver this phenomenon tends to exist. I believe then that these are planchet "preparation" (or crude treatment of more precisely) lines present before strike and not all are not struck out in areas of lesser die pressure such as the fields or flatter device areas; the reverse has few of these because of the design. Look carefully and I would imagine you might agree.
You may note that this is no ordinary florin (even though the date is, but in currency silver) BTW and is in fact struck in gold and a proof to boot - this was featured in Graham Dyer's monograph on gold pattern florins and half crowns of the 1920s.
I will get pictures of the obverse but coin is obviously locked up and away.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@7Jaguars said:
Yes, I agree they are not raised. What I noticed is the "polish" or hairlines disappear into the devices. From looking at some of the "MODEL" obverse and reverse patterns of the 20th C. and the rarer matte coins, I believe that the planchets were not well treated and esp on gold and even silver this phenomenon tends to exist. I believe then that these are planchet "preparation" (or crude treatment of more precisely) lines present before strike and not all are not struck out in areas of lesser die pressure such as the fields or flatter device areas; the reverse has few of these because of the design. Look carefully and I would imagine you might agree.
I don’t know if it was particularly poor treatment, as all planchets were reduced to the correct size in a way that left parallel marks. They were, though, supposed to disappear when the coin was struck.
Before mechanisation, planchets were filed by hand and you get some big scrapes (‘adjustment marks’) on coins from the 1700s.
Yes, indeed. I have been looking at this phenomenon and have discovered it on some circulation strikes as well - what looks like marks are indeed marks but not struck out all the way and seen on high points so make them look as though they have circulated.
There are definitely some borderline cases where actual post-strike wear can not be separated. I was trying to point out that it is a misconception that ALL planchet prep marks (or sometimes LACK of prep) are struck out. They do tend to be in areas of higher strike pressure. I am sure that Dan Carr may have a thing or so to say about this.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
I have a few British sovereigns (and some guineas) but this one is special:
British gold sovereign 1963
In the 1963 film "From Russia with Love" British secret agent James Bond (Sean Connery) is given an attache case with fifty British gold sovereign coins.
Attache case sovereigns with the head of Elizabeth II
James Bond offers his sovereigns to a Spectre agent
I wanted a 1963 British gold sovereign after seeing the film but the United States gold regulations (in 1963) and personal finances prohibited obtaining one.
@7Jaguars said:
Ordinary date florin, but I like it:
PS - I believe the "hairlines" are actually on the planchet and do NOT go through the devices. This coin IMO under graded but GTG based on the reverse if you'd like.
Interesting piece. Looks nearly gold from your image. What is the grade? Hard to guess with the weird planchet. Otherwise I would've said 62.
It is gold, and that is the grade indeed, Sir. I still contend that the hairlines are planchet issues not all the way struck through after minting though. The ONLY other pattern gold florin has the same hairlines which does not prove anything but supports what I am saying to some extent, also graded 62. I have looked at the coin under 30x magnification on a stereo dissecting scope (I am a physician) and have noted that the margins of most of the "hairlines" are what I would term folded over and not sharp - as they would be with post-strike polish/micro-scratches. I do not see how the devices would not have significant hairlines continuing from the field into and over them, and the hairlines appear to halt at the edges of the devices.
Sorry for running off topic a bit there....
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
I presume you mean the shilling? The fields on that are brilliant, but doesn't fully show because the flan is a bit wobbly. It's a recurring issue with hammered coins. They were cut out of the strip using a 'pastry cutter' as you can see the same marks on the edge for a given punch. However, they appear to get stuck in the hole sometimes, requiring a bit of force to remove them. This I believe accounts for the 2 dimples on the sixpence reverse and to a lesser extent the shilling, because neither exhibits much wear. The shilling has little more than cabinet friction and is affected less due to the thicker flan.
I originally bid on that coin in St. James's 3, but Mark Teller bought it for £4K all in. It resurfaced in Goldbergs 2007 slabbed as MS63 so I bid the same as I was willing to go a couple years previously and was underbidder on the day due to a higher reserve, but presumably the vendor viewed this as the best he would get and I was subsequently invoiced at my maximum. Thankfully, someone I spoke to thought it wasn't worth bidding on due to the distortion. I don't have a problem with production issues that are idiosyncratic for the techniques used at the time.
Not the finest specimen but nearly as rare as hen's teeth. Emergency money issued by the British Lord Justices of Ireland during the Great Rebellion, formerly known as "Lord Inchiquin's money". Denominated by weight on cut bits of requisitioned house silver. C,f, excellent synopsis by DNW re: a gold pistole of same ilk couple of years back. The crown was 19 dwt 8 grains. Literally a handful still exist outside of museums, I found only 5 distinct examples auctioned in Continental Europe the past 20 years and none in the rest of the world. Latest a VF at DNW for a bit over US$9K all in 2021 and since sold privately for more.
A quick trip back to the earliest numismatic items from Britain.
A Gallo-Belgic gold quarter stater from some time after 150BC with geometric designs
From around the same time, a cast potin unit that was produced mainly in Kent dated to c.120-100BC. Allegedly a head on one side and a bull the other, but it takes a bit of imagination.
Moving forward over 100 years to the period leading up to the Roman invasion of Britain in AD43 there are many issues from the various tribal regions, including this Catuvellauni silver unit featuring the name SEGO, which is thought to be either a rival for the throne, or an under-ruler of Tasciovanus
Another one from the Catuvellauni, Epaticcus is thought to be a son of Tasciovanus. The workmanship on this boar's head minim is remarkable given the 8mm diameter.
No post would be complete without including an example of the Iceni tribe, who under Boudicca revolted against the Romans. A Saenu unit featuring the crescent moons and horse which adorn many issues of this time and area.
Comments
1430-21 Groat
1858 Florin
Spade guinea that I purchased on the BST years ago after returning to the USA.
Glad I started this topic some true beautiful coins!!!
1709E* shilling, struck at Edinburgh post-union.
1723 SSC shilling
1790 pattern halfpenny in silver, Peck type R44
Clio, Thanks. Yes, it's a group of shillings, I'm trying to get all the Hanover portraits. My English collection started as
one from every Monarch but it expanded a little.
I might be even more pedantic, and say that the thread title isn't that specific
1707 was the date of the formation of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which although called 'Great Britain', is a political entity that doesn't have sole claim to the name. 'Great Britain' is what we call the largest island in the United Kingdom (hence 'Great'), so could encompass coins from the whole history of mainland Scotland, Wales and England.
In reality it's even more complicated than that. We don't know what the 'Ancient Britons' called it - the Greeks and Romans wrote the first records mentioning 'Britannia'. The Romans, at least for much of their occupation, used Britannia to mean everywhere south of the River Forth (beyond which was Caledonia) - so excluded most of Scotland. But the Scots weren't into striking coins at that point.
England, on the other hand, was only named after the arrival of the Angles, the first recorded use being in Northumbria in the 700s. Even then, it wasn't unified until a couple of hundred years later. So if you wanted to see coins of England throughout history using political terms, you'd need to ask for coins of Britannia, England, Northumbria, Wessex, Mercia, East Anglia, the Danelaw, the Cantii, the Catuvellauni, the Iceni, the Corieltauvi...
Anyway, here's a coin from 'Britain'. Or at least, it has Britannia on it.
Antoninus Pius As, 154-155
Britain or Rome. Bronze, 8.6g. Laureate head, ANTONINVS AVG PIVS P P TR P XVIII. Britannia seated left on rock, resting head on hand; arms in background, BRITANNIA - COS IIII, SC in exergue (RIC III, 934).
These were probably either struck in Britain (from dies cut in Rome) or to circulate in Britain. It may have been struck in both Rome and Britain, with the British issues being lighter (8.8g), and stylistically inferior. Britannia is thought to either be in mourning (holding her hand to her forehead) or at peace - the Roman shield at her side and a Roman army flag nearby remind the local people of the protection given by the Roman army on the northern frontier.
By the way, the coins @Nap posted are spectacular. You won't see many better or rarer Saxon and Medieval British coins than that.
@BSmith nice! I am doing a very similar set. I'll share a few of mine soon. Just doing one Shilling per monarch.
https://numismaticmuse.com/ My Web Gallery
The best collecting goals lie right on the border between the possible and the impossible. - Andy Lustig, "MrEureka"
Sorry for the small pic, but this coin is actually a crown or 5/- dated 1707 and minted in Edinburgh - basically the first coin of the United Kingdom of Great Britain since this coin was minted right after the Act of Union of 1707. One of the agreed upon acts was that Scotland would retain a mint in Edinburgh in perpetuity. And actually did until 1816, but only officially with a mintmaster etc. But the last coins were struck in Edinburgh in 1709 and the mint functioned as little more than a formality for over 100 years.
Not a coin, but similar subject, Queen Anne era, London, 1705 tablespoon in Britannia standard silver:
with it’s original owner’s family crest
My YouTube Channel
My precious!
A couple more. The penny is an extremely lustrous 1853 PT, the gold St. George is a gold Wyon Crown:
Well, just Love coins, period.
A couple of coppers. First up, a Charles II 1/2d previously somewhat generously graded by NGC as a 1673 MS65. I think the friction on the reverse lets it down. It is however, a 5 over 3 over 2 on the last digit and the first recorded example - so happy days.
Next, a couple of trial strikes of a 1689 farthing on a Charles II halfpenny. 3 examples of the true coin known, but here you buy one, get one free.
Finally, a pleasing example of a common coin, an 1836 groat
@Cucumbor Nice group! Love seeing a bit of hammered, classics, and the modern. Always liked that shield design.
https://numismaticmuse.com/ My Web Gallery
The best collecting goals lie right on the border between the possible and the impossible. - Andy Lustig, "MrEureka"
Gaming tokens:
Here's another scarce one (1930 Proof of Record Halfcrown):
Well, just Love coins, period.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Btw a 1887 crown in PCGS 66 went for over $9300 in a Heritage recent auction
Pop 1
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
I want to know who is buying at that level? Beautiful design with however a number saved in superior preservation.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I love the 1804 cameo!
One niche interest of mine is the Saxon mints of Somerset. There are 11 mint locations attributed, but nobody has ever assembled all 11 in their collection. Lockett had 10 of the 11, but Frome was unattributed when he died in 1950. A few years ago, the only Petherton in private hands (from the Lockett sale) out of 5 known was gifted to the museum in Taunton. So unless someone can dig one up, completion remains a dream.
Of the 11 mints, only Taunton, Watchet and Ilchester could be described as relatively easily obtained, but even these are quite rare. Of the others, coins available of Milborne Port, Frome, Crewkerne, Cadbury and Axbridge can be counted on one hand, with Langport and Bruton only marginally more abundant. Petherton as stated above is currently unavailable.
A few examples as follows:-
Aethelred last small cross of Cadbury. This is the Lockett coin. Not a thing of great beauty, but beggars can't be choosers. It took me long enough to find this one.
Cnut quatrefoil type of Crewkerne. There are about 30 coins known for the mint across all types, with 5 in private hands.
Edward the Confessor pointed helmet type of Langport. When this coin appeared in a Kunker sale in 2014, it extended the opening period of the mint by another issue - i.e. anything from a couple months to 5 or 6 years depending on when in the period it was struck. This must have been unappreciated by bidders, as it clearly went under the radar, costing less than the price in Spink for a VF of the mint. It remains the only one to my knowledge.
A William II type 3 of Watchet. This is the only William II from the mint in private hands, though others are in museums, including a couple of this type. The most commonly encountered coins of Watchet are Aethelred Long Cross.
This is a collection I have been working on of Shillings by Monarch. I was hoping to save up and try and buy @Weiss 's 1697 but a friend asked for me and I don't think he's every letting it go
Awesome pieces here all around folks. Really been enjoying seeing the posts.
https://numismaticmuse.com/ My Web Gallery
The best collecting goals lie right on the border between the possible and the impossible. - Andy Lustig, "MrEureka"
That is an amazing collection. If that’s your niche interest, I can’t imagine your main interest!
Thanks.
My main interest is as outlined in the 10 ways to be a better collector thread - British from Celtic through to the present day. However, I will choose to fill a Somerset mint gap over another as it's where I was born. Due to the problem of duplication, I have represented some mints with later issues. Taunton will hopefully be a Henry I and Bruton an early Edward the Confessor type for the same reason. Frome is represented by an EdC small flan type. There is too much rare mint congestion in Cnut's types, and William I PAXS is also problematic. I still have a long way to go.
As the main thing I am trying to do is not duplicate designs wherever possible, it means there are Hobson's Choice pieces for certain boxes. The easier to acquire and typically commoner bits will be filled in at a later date, when more of the scarce/rare items have been obtained. Some duplication is inevitable as a few mints are only known for one type, or at least only one type is available, e.g. Cadbury and Cissbury are both represented by last small cross.
Very nice there Rob. Really artistic engraving and nicely presented.
Here is one for the late milled fans; guess what it is and GTG if you like (might be hard to do as the reflections were Very difficult to photograph). The brush marks are not on the coin but rather the plastic perspex of the holder:
Well, just Love coins, period.
I bought the first two of these 6 coins back in 2017 on ebay. The 10 and 50 pence pieces were off the chart with the toning and I picked them up graded on the cheap. Fast forward to early 2020 I was able to purchase the 1/2/5 pence from a fellow collector that also has nice color. The 1/2 pence I purchased last week to round out the set, though it has minimal color, it is a high grade specimen. So here you have it, a 1981 Great Britain proof set the hard way. The only British coins I own.
Excellent 1981 Great Britain Proof set good to see someone else on the Great Britain Decimal Sets.
Thanks, I see you dominate the proof set category on the registry. Do you live in the states?
No mate down under Australia
Three no-brainer pattern/proof halfpennies for any collector of Soho patterns, all likely the only examples available to collectors.
An early Soho bronzed copper obverse uniface (Peck 1231). Possibly the only KH15 example available in any metal.
A late Soho 1806 proof halfpenny (Peck 1372) struck in silver from currency dies. 3 others in museums.
A Taylor 1790/1788 restrike mule in aluminium (Peck R24, but not known to him). At least half of Peck types R20-R29 in this metal are corroded, so speculatively they were all in the same location when damaged. Virtually all appear to be unique up to this point in time, with only R21 documented by Peck as known from 2 examples - his and the coin in the BM. However, both are now in museums. This was a particularly pleasing acquisition as the type was previously unknown to me in this metal when it appeared on ebay in 2009, though it's existence was speculated.
Here is one that is not everybody's taste but is 99% of the coin that a satin specimen of this year is, and IMO under graded for issue as these come simply awful for handling, wear, etc.(not that it matters). The luster is really something in hand:
Darn it, the focus sucks....
Well, just Love coins, period.
I have much respect for those when they look like that. 👍
Same with the Ike dollar, in high grade they are impressive.
My YouTube Channel
Note the different orientation of bust to legend between the MS and Cam PF,. The CAM PF has top laurel pointing to center of "E". Also, note the "K" for Kuchler on reverse is incorrectly punched. These are early SOHO restrikes, post 1810, the year Kuchler died, he would certainly not have prepared dies with his own initial upside down and backwards.
Lastly, NGC sometimes mistakenly calls obvious proofs from original die pairs MS because they are not cameo. However, as far as I know, none of these are. All cameo proofs I have seen referenced have this orientation from recreated dies, though some do have the "K" on reverse in proper orientation.
Clio, very nice group of shillings. They all have nice eye appeal and look good together as a collection.
If you ever decide to sell the James l, let me know.
Ordinary date florin, but I like it:
PS - I believe the "hairlines" are actually on the planchet and do NOT go through the devices. This coin IMO under graded but GTG based on the reverse if you'd like.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Not as nice as some of the older ones, but just showed up in today’s mail
Consider posting the obverse on the 1922 Florin... Are you sure the reverse just is not die polish?
Edited to add... after a more careful look, the lines do not look raised so that does not seem likely
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Yes, I agree they are not raised. What I noticed is the "polish" or hairlines disappear into the devices. From looking at some of the "MODEL" obverse and reverse patterns of the 20th C. and the rarer matte coins, I believe that the planchets were not well treated and esp on gold and even silver this phenomenon tends to exist. I believe then that these are planchet "preparation" (or crude treatment of more precisely) lines present before strike and not all are not struck out in areas of lesser die pressure such as the fields or flatter device areas; the reverse has few of these because of the design. Look carefully and I would imagine you might agree.
You may note that this is no ordinary florin (even though the date is, but in currency silver) BTW and is in fact struck in gold and a proof to boot - this was featured in Graham Dyer's monograph on gold pattern florins and half crowns of the 1920s.
I will get pictures of the obverse but coin is obviously locked up and away.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I don’t know if it was particularly poor treatment, as all planchets were reduced to the correct size in a way that left parallel marks. They were, though, supposed to disappear when the coin was struck.
Before mechanisation, planchets were filed by hand and you get some big scrapes (‘adjustment marks’) on coins from the 1700s.
Yes, indeed. I have been looking at this phenomenon and have discovered it on some circulation strikes as well - what looks like marks are indeed marks but not struck out all the way and seen on high points so make them look as though they have circulated.
There are definitely some borderline cases where actual post-strike wear can not be separated. I was trying to point out that it is a misconception that ALL planchet prep marks (or sometimes LACK of prep) are struck out. They do tend to be in areas of higher strike pressure. I am sure that Dan Carr may have a thing or so to say about this.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I have a few British sovereigns (and some guineas) but this one is special:
British gold sovereign 1963
In the 1963 film "From Russia with Love" British secret agent James Bond (Sean Connery) is given an attache case with fifty British gold sovereign coins.
Attache case sovereigns with the head of Elizabeth II
James Bond offers his sovereigns to a Spectre agent
I wanted a 1963 British gold sovereign after seeing the film but the United States gold regulations (in 1963) and personal finances prohibited obtaining one.
Until recently.
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
Interesting piece. Looks nearly gold from your image. What is the grade? Hard to guess with the weird planchet. Otherwise I would've said 62.
https://numismaticmuse.com/ My Web Gallery
The best collecting goals lie right on the border between the possible and the impossible. - Andy Lustig, "MrEureka"
It is gold, and that is the grade indeed, Sir. I still contend that the hairlines are planchet issues not all the way struck through after minting though. The ONLY other pattern gold florin has the same hairlines which does not prove anything but supports what I am saying to some extent, also graded 62. I have looked at the coin under 30x magnification on a stereo dissecting scope (I am a physician) and have noted that the margins of most of the "hairlines" are what I would term folded over and not sharp - as they would be with post-strike polish/micro-scratches. I do not see how the devices would not have significant hairlines continuing from the field into and over them, and the hairlines appear to halt at the edges of the devices.
Sorry for running off topic a bit there....
Well, just Love coins, period.
I rather like this one, the seeming hairlines are on the plastic. GTG if you please on this one....
Well, just Love coins, period.
Can't compete with that!
Three Civil War coins struck at York in 1642-3. A halfcrown, shilling and sixpence respectively. Sorry, no threepence.
Wow, very nice. The reverse of the 6d looks prooflike...
Well, just Love coins, period.
I presume you mean the shilling? The fields on that are brilliant, but doesn't fully show because the flan is a bit wobbly. It's a recurring issue with hammered coins. They were cut out of the strip using a 'pastry cutter' as you can see the same marks on the edge for a given punch. However, they appear to get stuck in the hole sometimes, requiring a bit of force to remove them. This I believe accounts for the 2 dimples on the sixpence reverse and to a lesser extent the shilling, because neither exhibits much wear. The shilling has little more than cabinet friction and is affected less due to the thicker flan.
I originally bid on that coin in St. James's 3, but Mark Teller bought it for £4K all in. It resurfaced in Goldbergs 2007 slabbed as MS63 so I bid the same as I was willing to go a couple years previously and was underbidder on the day due to a higher reserve, but presumably the vendor viewed this as the best he would get and I was subsequently invoiced at my maximum.
Thankfully, someone I spoke to thought it wasn't worth bidding on due to the distortion. I don't have a problem with production issues that are idiosyncratic for the techniques used at the time.
yes shilling of course!
Well, just Love coins, period.
Not the finest specimen but nearly as rare as hen's teeth. Emergency money issued by the British Lord Justices of Ireland during the Great Rebellion, formerly known as "Lord Inchiquin's money". Denominated by weight on cut bits of requisitioned house silver. C,f, excellent synopsis by DNW re: a gold pistole of same ilk couple of years back. The crown was 19 dwt 8 grains. Literally a handful still exist outside of museums, I found only 5 distinct examples auctioned in Continental Europe the past 20 years and none in the rest of the world. Latest a VF at DNW for a bit over US$9K all in 2021 and since sold privately for more.
A quick trip back to the earliest numismatic items from Britain.
A Gallo-Belgic gold quarter stater from some time after 150BC with geometric designs
From around the same time, a cast potin unit that was produced mainly in Kent dated to c.120-100BC. Allegedly a head on one side and a bull the other, but it takes a bit of imagination.
Moving forward over 100 years to the period leading up to the Roman invasion of Britain in AD43 there are many issues from the various tribal regions, including this Catuvellauni silver unit featuring the name SEGO, which is thought to be either a rival for the throne, or an under-ruler of Tasciovanus
Another one from the Catuvellauni, Epaticcus is thought to be a son of Tasciovanus. The workmanship on this boar's head minim is remarkable given the 8mm diameter.
No post would be complete without including an example of the Iceni tribe, who under Boudicca revolted against the Romans. A Saenu unit featuring the crescent moons and horse which adorn many issues of this time and area.
