Options
How disciplined are you and how do you make difficult decisions?
RobP
Posts: 483 ✭✭
I would be interested to know how good forum members are at sticking to their collecting aims and how they resolve contradictory problems such as the one below.
I ask the latter because I am undecided whether to keep a higher grade Exeter crown (the one in the show us your hammered coins thread) or a lower grade (by nearly a grade), but much rarer reverse design crown. The obverse die is nominally the same in both instances.
It's all part of a larger picture where ideally I would like to get an example of each of the mintmarks used (Rose, Tower & Ex) and each of the general designs adopted for both obverse and reverse in the various denominations leaving aside minor die variations. The higher grade coin's reverse can be obtained by acquiring a Tower/Ex 1645 crown. The main problem is the relatively high grade of the 1644 versus the undated type and I do prefer coins in as high a grade as possible. Images attached for perusal.
Do I try to fill the criteria with the minimum number of coins possible or do I accept duplication of some features and have a larger (and more expensive to acquire) collection? Money is an object to some extent!!
Although the problem is ultimately my own, any thoughts on either the initial query or my dilemma are welcomed.
I ask the latter because I am undecided whether to keep a higher grade Exeter crown (the one in the show us your hammered coins thread) or a lower grade (by nearly a grade), but much rarer reverse design crown. The obverse die is nominally the same in both instances.
It's all part of a larger picture where ideally I would like to get an example of each of the mintmarks used (Rose, Tower & Ex) and each of the general designs adopted for both obverse and reverse in the various denominations leaving aside minor die variations. The higher grade coin's reverse can be obtained by acquiring a Tower/Ex 1645 crown. The main problem is the relatively high grade of the 1644 versus the undated type and I do prefer coins in as high a grade as possible. Images attached for perusal.
Do I try to fill the criteria with the minimum number of coins possible or do I accept duplication of some features and have a larger (and more expensive to acquire) collection? Money is an object to some extent!!
Although the problem is ultimately my own, any thoughts on either the initial query or my dilemma are welcomed.
0
Comments
Rarity always trumps grade in my book.
FOR SALE Items
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
<< <i>You're asking the wrong crowd here Rob. Unfortunately I'm always in the same dilemma, I like high grade examples, but I also like rare coins. If it was a very minor variety I would generally go for the higher grade, in this case though it's a variety that is easy to see with the naked eye, and I would be sorely tempted to go with rarity. But I would probably keep both and just eat hamburger for a couple of weeks. >>
It did occur to me to keep both and that is what my daughter suggested. :-)
I don't want to go down the die combination collecting route as you are on a hiding to nothing. There are 33 die combinations of Truro & Exeter Crowns. 1 in Besly's article doesn't exist (D28), but a replacement has been discovered (C7var). Add this to the 68 half crown die combinations in Besly's article plus recent discoveries and you will appreciate this is a non-starter. There are 4 obverse dies for the crowns, but 31 reverses!
2 weeks ago I made a concerted effort to find the provenance of the higher grade piece which is a C9. Wind the clock forward and I now have an 85Kb Excel file with nearly 300 illustrated Truro & Exeter crowns and their provenances across all 33 varieties where proven going back to 1900, but still no more info on it other than it was in Alan Barr Collection lot 49 (2004). The lower grade one is somewhat easier being ex-Banes 152 (1922), Morrieson 441 (1933) and Paget 108 (1946). It is likely to be ex-Whittaker (1894) too but haven't got there yet. It is also probably as good as they come assuming that the ANS is unwilling to give up its own piece (ex-Lockett 2507).
For the record, I am acquainted with a collector of 70 years experience who only recently completed the crown dies. I don't have that amount of time left.
The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it. Resist it, and your soul grows sick with longing for the things it has forbidden to itself.
He was probably also a coin collector.
is that you end up being governed by inferiors. – Plato
I would consider my collecting process as "undisciplined", or rather, that my budgetary limit is my discipline. Given half a chance, I'll happily spend money on coins that catch my eye until all the money is gone, whether I "need" the coins to fill gaps in my collection or not, but I won't go into debt just to buy coins.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded one DPOTD.
As a certified lunatic collector there is no one way to look at our changing habits in what we should collect, keep, exchange or sell.
The forum may give us the view of different collectors but I realized a long time ago it is like the "blind leading the blind" each individual has his own
agenda and this is always changing.
What wuld happen if the collector who has every variety offered u the complete set - u would say no?
j
www.petitioncrown.com
ps. join me on the bench for disturbed people, those that collect peices ot metal
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't want to go down the die combination collecting route as you are on a hiding to nothing. There are 33 die combinations of Truro & Exeter Crowns. 1 in Besly's article doesn't exist (D28), but a replacement has been discovered (C7var). Add this to the 68 half crown die combinations in Besly's article plus recent discoveries and you will appreciate this is a non-starter. There are 4 obverse dies for the crowns, but 31 reverses! >>
Any research as to why the disparity in numbers of obverse and reverse dies?
I'm pretty much sticking to that goal, with only an occasional deviation.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
To answer your question- discipline can mean more than one thing- it could be focusing on the goal of completing a set or it could mean focusing on the coin, the buying opprotunity and weighing the what the chances are that you will find that coin again for the price in an acceptable quality for the grade state of preservation
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Not very when it comes to coin collecting although I try to be. As you know I am trying to focus on fractional farthings and World gold coins.
You think World gold in itself would be a vast enough area to choose from but oh no I had to go and buy a William III sixpence as I liked the look of it. Now I'm considering collecting nicely toned British coins as well.
I would say keep them both Rob but try not too loose site of your original goal and don't diverse down the road of trying to collect them by variety, because as you say that's more then a lifetimes worth of effort and you will be busy enough with your original collecting aim.
Having said all that if you really want to choose, I would go for the rarer one.
<< <i>Rob
As a certified lunatic collector there is no one way to look at our changing habits in what we should collect, keep, exchange or sell.
The forum may give us the view of different collectors but I realized a long time ago it is like the "blind leading the blind" each individual has his own
agenda and this is always changing.
What wuld happen if the collector who has every variety offered u the complete set - u would say no?
j
www.petitioncrown.com
ps. join me on the bench for disturbed people, those that collect peices ot metal >>
Hi Jeff,
Leaving aside the blindingly obvious fact that I couldn't afford such a collection, I believe I would still say no because acquiring a complete set is not the full story. Everyone collects coins that they like, and as we all know no two tastes are exactly the same.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I don't want to go down the die combination collecting route as you are on a hiding to nothing. There are 33 die combinations of Truro & Exeter Crowns. 1 in Besly's article doesn't exist (D28), but a replacement has been discovered (C7var). Add this to the 68 half crown die combinations in Besly's article plus recent discoveries and you will appreciate this is a non-starter. There are 4 obverse dies for the crowns, but 31 reverses! >>
Any research as to why the disparity in numbers of obverse and reverse dies? >>
I believe it is all down to the fact that the reverse dies were (literally) hammered to destruction. The obverse is on the pile and the reverse on the trussell which is the die that gets clouted with a hammer. Consequently you need more reverse dies as they take the full impact of the strike, though the number of reverses does seem a bit excessive to me too.
To put the series into context, here is a little of the chronology, some borrowed from Besly's article in th 1992 BNJ. All dates are old style.
Sir Richard Vyvyan struck at Truro from November 1642 until the Royalists captured Exeter in Sept. 1643. In this time the crowns struck were all apparently from dies A-1 which has the sash in two stright lines behind the king & reads BRIT in the obverse legend. The reverse was an oval shield similar to the dated piece but undated. The contraction punctuation was semi-colons with the comma appearing as a small T.
In Sept. 1643 the mint moved to Exeter and by general consensus B-2 was the first pair of dies produced here based on the use of the same legend contractions but with a new horseman sporting a sash tied in a large bow. This reverse with the barrel garniture is the only one of the 31 to exhibit this. Because of the use of the semi-colon stops I think these dies could possibly have been produced at Truro, but not used until the move to Exeter. The absence of any supporting documentation means all opinions are conjecture.
This obverse B die was modified by the repunching of the T shaped comma with a stop. The residual tail of this can be seen most easily on the stop between FRA and ET on obverse C. This is the only change and its reason unknown, though a reasonable assumption would be that the T shaped comma was an identifying mark for Truro and which on the the mint's removal to Exeter required a change. Obverse C was paired with reverses 3-7 which were undated and 8-15 which were dated 1644. It is therefore reasonable that the undated ones were used from Sept. 1643 and the dated ones introduced after the following 25th March when the New Year began.This single obverse die was used throughout the year 1644, but a new obverse die was prepared towards the end of the year with a different horseman whose sash was in two flowing lines and which has the Tower mark. The reverses all have an oval garnished shield which starts off larger at about 24mm high, but reduces to 21-2mm from reverse 13 onwards.
This die (obv. D) was used only on coins dated 1645, but the old C die was used until early 1645 as examples are known with muled marks Rose/Ex dated 1645/4 and 1645 (as are Tower/Ex coins with obv. D). This conveniently dates the two EX dies to the period around March-April (New Year) 1645. A 1645 Rose marked reverse die was also produced early in 1645 and found only muled with the new obv. D, though why 2 or possibly 3 marks should be used in parallel is unclear. Later 1645 coins are all marked Tower both sides.
Many of the dies show signs of degradation. e.g. In the case of the reverse 9 die as illustrated, this is characterised by a flaw which spreads inwards from the inner circle between the 1 & 6 as well as filling the space between the numbers. Other reverses such as 21 has a flaw in the same region, 22 has a marked flaw by the S of CHRISTO. This suggests a fairly short die life because they were only used for a short time, yet still show a traceable development of a flaw which will untimately be terminal.
Hopefully this brief summary will give an idea of die use at Exeter. Leaving aside the A-1 combination used at Truro, Exeter used the B obverse for a very short time only (possibly as little as a month or so). Die C was then probably used for 18 or 19 months from Oct.1643 until very early in 1645, probably late April. The Tower marked obverse D was used for about a year from New Year-ish until Exeter fell to Parliament on 13th April 1646.
<< <i>To answer your question- discipline can mean more than one thing- it could be focusing on the goal of completing a set or it could mean focusing on the coin, the buying opprotunity and weighing the what the chances are that you will find that coin again for the price in an acceptable quality for the grade state of preservation >>
Hi Coinkat,
Many thanks for your and everybody else's inputs.
Based on the recent survey I conducted and leaving aside those now resident in museums or otherwise unavailable collections, I could identify 8 individual coins of dies B-2 from illustrations out of a total of 373 (about 2%). This must be a close representation of the numbers available in decent grade, though there are certainly unillustrated and therefore not included examples of all types in mediocre or fair condition found in catalogues. On this basis alone the B-2 has to stay, so as JCM noted, it looks like hamburgers for the immediate future.
All joking aside- just set your own perameters in terms of what is in and out of your collection. As an example, I would rather have the W&M Crown varieties to say the set is complete- not sure I well get them in the right grade
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>I would consider my collecting process as "undisciplined", or rather, that my budgetary limit is my discipline. Given half a chance, I'll happily spend money on coins that catch my eye until all the money is gone, whether I "need" the coins to fill gaps in my collection or not, but I won't go into debt just to buy coins. >>
I was going to type something, but what Sapyx said is exactly what I would have said, so I shall just quote him.
I have purposely chosen NOT to limit myself, why would I want to do that? This is a hobby, and it's supposed to be fun. Putting limits on things just to put a limit for limit's sake, would suck the fun out.
I will say, I could have a lot more fun if I had more money to spend
<< <i>
<< <i>I would consider my collecting process as "undisciplined", or rather, that my budgetary limit is my discipline. Given half a chance, I'll happily spend money on coins that catch my eye until all the money is gone, whether I "need" the coins to fill gaps in my collection or not, but I won't go into debt just to buy coins. >>
I was going to type something, but what Sapyx said is exactly what I would have said, so I shall just quote him.
I have purposely chosen NOT to limit myself, why would I want to do that? This is a hobby, and it's supposed to be fun. Putting limits on things just to put a limit for limit's sake, would suck the fun out.
I will say, I could have a lot more fun if I had more money to spend
The last sentence sums it up for just about everybody. Whether you are spending a few dollars or a few thousand based on your financial situation, the purse is the inevitable limiting factor. In the case of the coins in question, any half decent example will set you back a 4 figure sum. Consequently, the decision whether to get the minimum number of coins required to cover the various features (4), or whether to get an example of each substantive type (9) focusses the mind. The cost of the 5 coin difference equates to another piece or pieces that would be equally desirable.
Gary