Options
Help w/dating William III Six Pence (Maybe?)
ProfHaroldHill
Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭
I'm hoping it may be possible to date this from the style of the bust, the harp & size of crowns, (etc?) If I understand rightly, it has to be a 1696, 97, 98, or 99.
In the bottom pic, you can see what looks like the lower portion of a "loop", maybe a 6 or an 8(?) where the last part of the date should be.
I've researched online for a couple of days now, (which is how I learned there are different harps, crowns, and busts,) but I can't tell, "which of which, means what" so to speak! I *think* it's got the early harp style and "large" crowns, but that's all I've been able to figure out thus far.
I've only recently begun buying non-US coins in a more serious way, and would sincerely appreciate any help anyone can offer.
In the bottom pic, you can see what looks like the lower portion of a "loop", maybe a 6 or an 8(?) where the last part of the date should be.
I've researched online for a couple of days now, (which is how I learned there are different harps, crowns, and busts,) but I can't tell, "which of which, means what" so to speak! I *think* it's got the early harp style and "large" crowns, but that's all I've been able to figure out thus far.
I've only recently begun buying non-US coins in a more serious way, and would sincerely appreciate any help anyone can offer.
0
Comments
Sure is a pretty coin. With that toning, it almost looks like a copper piece.
The busts are differentiated by the hair detail and the drapery style. The harp is small (early) or large with a level top bar and higher rear end that stands proud of the top bar.
<< <i>Anyone think PCGS has the level of staff needed, to be able to date it? >>
What RobP said; and IMO PCGS does not have that level of attribution acumen for pre-milled British coinage. The guys in Sarasota might, but I doubt it unless they could really see the digit, and have experience with same.
What's lacking here is a publicly disseminated or published work akin to Noyes with Mark Goodman-quality plates of all known (discovered) die varieties, legend punches, etc. which could then answer the question of '95 or '96 without even the "16" being in evidence.
<< <i>
<< <i>Anyone think PCGS has the level of staff needed, to be able to date it? >>
What RobP said; and IMO PCGS does not have that level of attribution acumen for pre-milled British coinage. The guys in Sarasota might, but I doubt it unless they could really see the digit, and have experience with same.
What's lacking here is a publicly disseminated or published work akin to Noyes with Mark Goodman-quality plates of all known (discovered) die varieties, legend punches, etc. which could then answer the question of '95 or '96 without even the "16" being in evidence. >>
Dream on. The William III recoinage probably produced more varieties than all other periods put together. Mint worker illiteracy, the use of inverted Vs for As where they forgot to add the crossbar, the manufacturing of composite letters in the legend by adding a bar here or there all gave rise to an impossibly large number of die varieties. Jackson-Kent did a 10 year study into the recoinage in the 50s and 60s and at the end concluded he had barely touched the surface. One word of advice - don't try counting harp strings. 10 years of doing this led to the conclusion that nothing could be deduced from the varying number.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Anyone think PCGS has the level of staff needed, to be able to date it? >>
What RobP said; and IMO PCGS does not have that level of attribution acumen for pre-milled British coinage. The guys in Sarasota might, but I doubt it unless they could really see the digit, and have experience with same.
What's lacking here is a publicly disseminated or published work akin to Noyes with Mark Goodman-quality plates of all known (discovered) die varieties, legend punches, etc. which could then answer the question of '95 or '96 without even the "16" being in evidence. >>
Dream on. The William III recoinage probably produced more varieties than all other periods put together. Mint worker illiteracy, the use of inverted Vs for As where they forgot to add the crossbar, the manufacturing of composite letters in the legend by adding a bar here or there all gave rise to an impossibly large number of die varieties. Jackson-Kent did a 10 year study into the recoinage in the 50s and 60s and at the end concluded he had barely touched the surface. One word of advice - don't try counting harp strings. 10 years of doing this led to the conclusion that nothing could be deduced from the varying number. >>
Och, that can easily be deduced with a dozen pints of Guinness...............in one sitting! Slainte mhath!!!
<< <i>1st bust, early harp, so 1695 or 1696. Can't tell from the image whether it is a 5 or a 6, but you might be able to in hand.
The busts are differentiated by the hair detail and the drapery style. The harp is small (early) or large with a level top bar and higher rear end that stands proud of the top bar. >>
Thanks Rob , that's great information , krause doesnt really do great pics of these.I have a 1696 here but didn't think it the same bust , the nose seems different and more hawkish in the above example than mine.