Mystery Monarchs

SimonW

Does anyone know why PCGS doesn’t list the monarch on the holder for British coinage? I mean, I realize they also don’t do it for Spanish colonial coinage either…but still. Seems like conventionally people identify British coinage more by the ruler than they do by the year even! It really bothers me…am I the only one who doesn’t like this? Such a little thing that would make a big difference for many collectors. I’m a dedicated PCGS guy, but I really prefer the way NGC does it. Thoughts? Post a coin if you have it.

John Conduitt

I agree. I presume it's a hangover from the America-centric focus, where there isn't a ruler to tie the coin to. Even so, the labels are so poorly designed. Undue prominence is given to the TPG name (which is already on the shield) and the grade (who cares on a hammered coin). There's almost nothing else but the year and the Spink catalogue number, which can be very ambiguous/imprecise for hammered coins, as it is on that Henry III penny - the dates are the entire span of the long cross coinage when the coin is 1249. They don't even bother explaining that 'crown' on the Charles I shilling is the mintmark, or to write out the word 'shilling'. And why is it 1d (or 'D') and not 1s? Even 'Great Britain' is factually incorrect. Anyone with OCD is just going to have to crack them out. NGC's are awful too, just not quite so much. All that space for a label and you need another label.

SimonW

@John Conduitt said it better than I did! Yes!!!