Edward III Groat, but what class and...?

Sylvestius

...where to begin? Right someone is asking about this coin but it's caught me out.

From what i can assume it is an unrecorded variety of some sort? (or a continental copy or something similar)





Obv reads: EDWAR o D o GRE (yes E) o REX o ANGL (reversed N) o F (backwards) o FRANC (open C) o D o HYBE`(with the apostrophy) cross 1 pommee.

Reverse; Usual reading of the London mint; the C in CIVITAS is closed.


The m's are Lombardic, the N's are Roman reversed, backward F's standing in for Z's. Annulet stops. (o)




Can anyone help with classification?

I was under the impression it was a Series C Pre Treaty Edward III Groat. Indeed the overall appearance of the obverse appears to resemble that kind of issue, the lombardic m's, wedge tailed R's and the reversly barred N's, and the Cross 1 pommee mintmark. All those are correct.

The problem is though;

1) The reading is wrong, i'm guessing this is where the unrecorded variety may come in? Certainly the backward F's were seemingly not used until the Post Treaty period, (the DNS HYB in the legend is more of the Pre Treaty period though), Quite why it's GRE and HYBE though with a D missing from Edward is bizarre. The only issue i can find of Edward III with the D missing is that issued during the Treaty period with Aquitaine in the legend.

I'm also sure that the C in CIVITAS being closed whilst that in FRANC being open suggests a mule.

I Just looked the Open/Closed C situ up in the North catalogue (probably one of the hardest catalogues to use)...

But it looks as if the C situ is exactly the opposite to N.1147.

N.1147 = All C's closed but the C in CIVITAS

The one pictures above = All C's open except for the one in CIVITAS


Ever heard of one like this?

lordmarcovan

You're way ahead of me in your research. I'm clueless on this one without opening Spink, which I'd imagine to be a moot point after all the reading you've done.

I just wanted to ask what the lighter-colored stripe across the reverse was all about- the coin hasn't been creased, has it?

Sylvestius

Well i checked CoinCraft and North. I haven't got a Spink (well not since 1985) so it might be worth checking that one for anything.

I have no idea what the line is, the guy who owns it asked it it could have been gilt at one point and the gilting has come off. I think it more like one of two things;

1) It's just fake and the silver plating has rubbed off.

2) More likely but i don't know how is toning, i've seen US coins with stiped toning like that so maybe it's just the way it was stored.

The guy who has got these coins seems to be interested in hammered and he's looked into it (i think he has a few hammered coins) so surely if it was fake he would have figured it out by now.


My guess is it is either a continetal cope (silver and all, maybe he should weight it?) or if it is geniune then it's probably a muled specimen. Perhaps the obverse is and unrecorded one from just before the Treaty and the reverse is from after the Treaty.

Now all i need to know for an hypothesis like that is what the lettering is like on the Post/during Treaty groats, are the C's open/closed? Do any have annulet stops?

I'm afraid groats are an area i find very difficult and the North catalogue makes about as much sense as mud, without the CoinCraft i'd be lost.

lordmarcovan

Could've been a stripe of paint, maybe, or the coin was strapped down to something, somehow?

Just idly browsing Spink, over the groat section, I see that they say "a large variety of mules exist between styles and issue."

Sylvestius

In my experience a tone like that is not uncommon actually, i've seen pennies with tones like that, i wonder if it was one from a hoard, that would explain that much.

I know that mules are not uncommon by any means with regards to the obverse/reverse matchups.

But the fact that no other Edward III Groat listed comes anywhere near on the obverse legend, now that's something.

Maybe we've got a previously unknown class/variant... maybe a unique one at that.

coachleonard

and it's really nicely round for a 14th century hammered coin!

coinkat

I don't know by looking at the scan... This looks like a coin that needs to be seen first.

Aethelred

<< <i>I don't know by looking at the scan... This looks like a coin that needs to be seen first. >>



I'd also at least like a better photo!

Sylvestius

I'll see if i can get hold of a bigger photo.