Charles I Crown - Double Strike?
Converse
Posts: 9
Again, many thanks for the input regarding the sticker. I did rub it a bit before reading the last post. But only lightly with a Q-tip. I now know better.
Here's my first attempt at including pics with a message. I hope it comes out OK. If not, I have them on a web page and can e-mail the site to anyone interested.
Please pardon the pics and their darkness. The coin has a nice silver color, evident in one or two of the pics. The others are off a bit with the coloring. Please also pardon my lack of knowledge and terms. I am still quite new to this but looking forward to learning.
Anyway, I believe this to be a nice Charles I Crown from 1642. But there are a few things that appear seemingly "off" about it. This is what I find when I bring up online photographs of the 1642 and 1646 crown. I will try and describe them as clearly as possible, although it gets a bit confusing. The pictures will hopefully explain.
ANY input would be most appreciated. I am very interested in learning more about this coin. I have done a significant amount of research but would like to hear what other, more knowledgeable, individuals think. If this is a double strike, was this common for the time period? Any input as to the different markings or double strike?
If you aren't familiar with this specific coin, a quick google.com search will bring up some detailed pictures of the 1642 and 1646 crowns and half crowns.
If you look closely at the obverse, it has clearly been double, if not triple, stricken. Striked? Possibly with another variation of this coin, or one similar?
The two marks to the left of the king on horseback, the head and helmet of the king, the tail, neck and legs of the horse all have what appear to be double (if not triple) images around them..
There appears to have been an original strike depicting the sword in a different position, further forward (much like that of the 1646 Crown or even those struck at an emergency mint at Shrewsbury in 1642), as you can see a sword handle. But it has been covered by the second strike, which is significantly further back, towards the body of the king.
The horse is supposed to be "shown trampling military arms underfoot" on the 1642 crown. As you can see there is nothing below his feet except a small mark, possibly from a previous strike? The “emergency” Shrewsbury coins did NOT depict anything underfoot either, but also do not have the line under the horse as the 1642 does.
The reverse is what I think may be the most interesting. With this, the idea of the 1646 Crown strike is no longer possible, as that has a completely different reverse.
The “declaration”, I believe only from the Oxford or Shrewsbury mints, has definitely been stricken twice and in both directions. This is most evident by the word “par” on the top left (upside down) and bottom right corners of the declaration.
The three marks which are supposed to be solely on the top of the reverse are also shown on the bottom. If you look closely, you can see what remains of the first strike and the date of “164?”, covered by another strike of these three marks.
Directly above what remains of the number 4 from the date, is the letter “V”. If I am not mistaken, on both the crown and half crown there is to be an “X”.
You can also see that the words along the edges are repeated on the top and bottom of the reverse.
Again, any input/information would be greatly appreciated. I just thought it looked interesting and would be fun to find out more about it and share the coin.
Regards,
Tim
Here's my first attempt at including pics with a message. I hope it comes out OK. If not, I have them on a web page and can e-mail the site to anyone interested.
Please pardon the pics and their darkness. The coin has a nice silver color, evident in one or two of the pics. The others are off a bit with the coloring. Please also pardon my lack of knowledge and terms. I am still quite new to this but looking forward to learning.
Anyway, I believe this to be a nice Charles I Crown from 1642. But there are a few things that appear seemingly "off" about it. This is what I find when I bring up online photographs of the 1642 and 1646 crown. I will try and describe them as clearly as possible, although it gets a bit confusing. The pictures will hopefully explain.
ANY input would be most appreciated. I am very interested in learning more about this coin. I have done a significant amount of research but would like to hear what other, more knowledgeable, individuals think. If this is a double strike, was this common for the time period? Any input as to the different markings or double strike?
If you aren't familiar with this specific coin, a quick google.com search will bring up some detailed pictures of the 1642 and 1646 crowns and half crowns.
If you look closely at the obverse, it has clearly been double, if not triple, stricken. Striked? Possibly with another variation of this coin, or one similar?
The two marks to the left of the king on horseback, the head and helmet of the king, the tail, neck and legs of the horse all have what appear to be double (if not triple) images around them..
There appears to have been an original strike depicting the sword in a different position, further forward (much like that of the 1646 Crown or even those struck at an emergency mint at Shrewsbury in 1642), as you can see a sword handle. But it has been covered by the second strike, which is significantly further back, towards the body of the king.
The horse is supposed to be "shown trampling military arms underfoot" on the 1642 crown. As you can see there is nothing below his feet except a small mark, possibly from a previous strike? The “emergency” Shrewsbury coins did NOT depict anything underfoot either, but also do not have the line under the horse as the 1642 does.
The reverse is what I think may be the most interesting. With this, the idea of the 1646 Crown strike is no longer possible, as that has a completely different reverse.
The “declaration”, I believe only from the Oxford or Shrewsbury mints, has definitely been stricken twice and in both directions. This is most evident by the word “par” on the top left (upside down) and bottom right corners of the declaration.
The three marks which are supposed to be solely on the top of the reverse are also shown on the bottom. If you look closely, you can see what remains of the first strike and the date of “164?”, covered by another strike of these three marks.
Directly above what remains of the number 4 from the date, is the letter “V”. If I am not mistaken, on both the crown and half crown there is to be an “X”.
You can also see that the words along the edges are repeated on the top and bottom of the reverse.
Again, any input/information would be greatly appreciated. I just thought it looked interesting and would be fun to find out more about it and share the coin.
Regards,
Tim
0
Comments
PS...Welcome to this great forum and it's wonderful members, there will be someone here to help....i'm just here to drool....
-Tim
Nice Crown!
myEbay
DPOTD 3
Nice coin. A double struck coin from this period is quite common. However, usually the reverse die hasn't been rotated 180 degrees between strikes. Ultimately, it probably works against the coins value and saleability. I believe your coin to be a 1643 from the Oxford mint as there definitely seems to be a '3' under that plume at right. This would explain your groundline. The crown is in fact supposed to have a V above the Declaration on reverse.
https://www.civitasgalleries.com
New coins listed monthly!
Josh Moran
CIVITAS Galleries, Ltd.
The plumes are the first thing to look at - the Oxford Plumes have two bars running through them whereas the Shrewsbury Plumes only have one. Also the horseman is definitely the Oxford type - you need to see them side by side as they are similar.
The good news is that these Crowns are very sought after pieces - furthermore (excluding the Rawlins Crown which really is very rare) of the 3 types of Oxford Crown you have a S.2947 (with grass below the horseman and dated 1643) which is the rarest and worth perhaps 50% more than a normal one.
The bad news is the 'double striking' which although interesting does seriously devalue this coin. Most double strikes are not really double strikes but the coin slipping during a single strike. To strike a coin of this size requires considerable force and given the times these were probably done in a rush.
Hope this is of help - the current book value in Fine is £1250 - I would value yours at less than this because of the double strike.
Thanks
Andy
Coin Books
Coin Accessories
eBay Auctions
Many, many thanks for your input. It is greatly appreciated. What a great first experience for posting.
I recently have been placed "in charge" of a coin collection belonging to my family. It consists mostly of foreign and ancient coins; gold, silver and bronze. I am currently researching them for inventory purposes, but we will also be looking into selling many of them.
In only a few short weeks of research I have found a good bit of information on many of the coins. But, I am thrilled to have found you guys.
I look forward to many more posts and pictures as I come upon some of the more interesting coins.
Regards and thank you all again.
-Tim
Boston, MA