TomGoodheart

Personally, I'm just not seeing the coins I want, in the grades I want Rob. I rather assumed that anyone with nicer pieces was either holding on to them, or perhaps selling privately. More likely the former. Maybe we need another collection or two coming to the market, however when I consider Bob L's coins, or even Alan Morris', the proportion of coins I'd really like to own as opposed to the overall number, was still small. I guess that's the problem with a 'maturer' collection .. I'm on the hunt for either nicer coins or the scarcer ones. However whereas in the past it was finances (or lack or willingness to spend the necessary) that limited acquisitions, now it's simple lack of material. And of course, that fuels the problem. Until I can upgrade what I have, I don't wish to part with any of my coins. In fact, if possible and unlike previously, I would prefer to add further to the collection without necessarily disposing of existing coins. But that means I have little to sell, ... assuming there are even specialist collectors in my field any more to buy what I have to offer..

Someone is going to be very unhappy in a few days ... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SCARCE-KING-CHARLES-I-SILVER-HALFCROWN-NEWARK-SEIGE-PIECE-OF-1646/122589512483?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649

Afraid my powers don't appear to allow me to edit posts Rob. Maybe @Nordle if he sees this?

Not sure how easy it is for Admins to reorder a thread (Chris or Matt might be able to), but I've pinned it so it will be easily found. OK, it appears I can remove comment posts from the Ticket thread and put them here to keep the 'original' tidy, so there's a result!

Good stuff!

Message sent.

I wrote to him on 13 June: "Sadly, your friend's item is a copy worth a couple of £ The plough mark unfortunately erases where the coin was stamped COPY, hence his confusion" I sent him a link to the Dorchesters listing too. Hopefully you'll have no problem getting your money back.

Are you looking at 'just' milled coinage Pavel? Because I've noticed that in the hammered section identification is very basic ..probably based on whatever information the original collector gave the coin before it was donated.

Stanley Gibbons up for sale Having accumulated Noble Investments, Baldwin's, Dreweatts & Bloomsbury Auctions and Malletts, as well as several additional philatelic interests and even gotten into wine dealing, it appears the beast requires feeding even more money to fuel expansion. Remarkable. And ... who the heck is going to buy it? Or will they, having spent years in acquisitions, break apart? An odd business strategy to my mind .. Views anyone?

The F. Elmore Jones Collection of English Coins. (Glendining). Auction (12 May 1971) – Anglo-Saxon Silver Pennies // Auction (13 April 1983) – Norman and Plantagenet Coins, Part I // Auction (10 April 1984) – Norman and Plantagenet Coins, Part II.

In the absence of images if you can read and tell us the legends on the reverse (non-head side) it might help a bit ..

Goodness, that's a puzzle Rob! My thought are that the crosses (?) inside the crown might be a useful indicator. In the first image and one on the green background they are more like open triangles. The others, they are filled in, suggesting to me some wear. Then possibly focus on the hair as it touches the crown. For example the small pic from a catalogue (top of second post) suggests some die fill/ wear in that area to me. Be easier if there were some obvious progressive die cracks but, beggars can't be choosers in these things! If that helps at all?

Just to let you know I've hidden your slightly over the top post Prep ( and I'm afraid 1949's quote of it). I appreciate some members have a blunt way of putting things that isn't too everyone's taste but I feel the response was a bit disproportionate. That aside this thread seems useful, particularly the discussions about cleaning, so if everyone has calmed down, feel free to carry on...

The new makers are good. I asked for a custom made drawer for my PN cabinet and they did a very decent job, even though it turned out to be a more complicated a task than I first imagined! Plus they use rather more environmentally friendly stains and varnish than in Peter's day.

LOL Different things appeal to different people prep. Nothing wrong with detecting - I can quite understand the thrill of the 'treasure hunt' as I enjoy beachcombing and get as much thrill from finding a bit of broken Victorian pottery or a fossil as I do a coin that fills a gap. So long as sites aren't damaged in the process and the details are recorded for the geeks amongst us of course. But I like coins for the design. They are little pieces of art (not to mention propaganda). And ultimately, it's nice when that art looks pleasing and the design is clear and you can appreciate the work that went into making the thing. Particularly the sort I collect, where it's all a hand process from die engraving to striking and a slip or off-centre hit can result in an unreadable mess! Yes, some dug coins can be in excellent condition (particularly ones buried as part of a hoard). But most just aren't. And if I had to choose between a coin that's been stuck in a pile of mud somewhere for 400 years or one that I know has been held onto by collectors I can name, I will usually find the latter more interesting, that's all.

I disagree. It's as much the history of the coin as the fact that it was minted sometime between 30 Jun 1631-21 Jun 1632 at the Tower of London from silver mined and refined in Wales at Thomas Bushell's mine near Aberystwyth. We know that because the reverse design bears the Prince of Wales' plumes above the shield; an agreed sign to show coins minted from Welsh silver. Beyond that, what do we know about any coin? Whose hands it passed through, how many loaves of bread or pints of ale it bought will always be guesswork and imagination. But who thought it worthwhile keeping to study, to show to friends, to save from the melting pot and pass on to others, these things are facts. Coin collecting has been going on for thousands of years, although until the 1600's probably only among the really wealthy. Without collectors, given that the majority of coin was collected up, melted and restruck in the Great Recoinages of 1696 and 1816, we would probably have but a fraction of the hammered coins that still exist today. They'd have just been chucked in the melting pot or made into jewellery or something. And without numismatic research we'd know little of how to tell when a coin was struck, which king it represents or where it was made. We'd have no easy way to tell if we have a typical example or something unusual. We'd have to guess at where the metal that our coins are made of came from, who designed them and in some cases who struck them. You want 'the guy that made the coin' .. well, that's part of the history that depends on collectors too. Facts are the history to me. Not the 'what might have been's or romantic guesswork about the soldier who received this coin is his pay and what he spent it on or whatever... But as I say, different strokes for different folks!

Here you go. I can guess from the dint in this coin that it was dug up. When and where is now lost to time. However I do know (with Rob's help) that it was owned by the architect Frederic Walters (1849-1931) and when his collection was sold in May 1913 it was bought by the firm of Baldwins on behalf of the collector Grant Francis. Francis used the coin (2, IIb,2 above and the background to the pic of my coin) to illustrate the type in his paper in the British Numismatic Journal (1918) in which he attempted to order and classify the known varieties of silver coinage of Charles I. His numbering system is still used by some collectors today. Francis' collection was sold by Glendinings in March 1920 and the coin ended up in the collection of Richard Cyril Lockett. A collection so large that it took 11 sales over 6 years to dispose of them all. My coin was bought by Baldwins in October 1956. Sadly, there the trail goes cold until the coin turns up again (unprovenanced) with the dealer Mark Rasmussen in April 2004. I bought it subsequently from another dealer the next year, but only really managed to piece together some of the collector history fairly recently. Having illustrated catalogues helps, as does coin 'tickets' which are little pieces of paper that collectors use to describe coins in their collection. While having a ticket with a coin is not absolute proof that the coin in your hand is one described in a book or catalogue, it helps. Rob's Rawlins crown example is of a coin sufficiently well known and recognised that one can track it through the hands of collectors with some degree of certainty.

I have a few coins that were detector finds prep. One that was hidden away as part of a hoard on land owned by a Royalist, sometime around September 1642. However, the majority were probably found by workers tilling fields, digging foundations or other building work, since they were found before detectors were in common use. I know this because I know when they were bought, came up for sale or whose collections they were part of. As for found in drawers .. very few I imagine. Although I do have one that was found, with others, in an old disused safe! Personally I always like to know a bit about the background to my coins and if they belonged to earlier collectors then that makes them more interesting to me. Digging up my own? Not so bothered. But, each to their own!

You managed to start separate topics for each page Michael, so I merged them for you. Hopefully it reads more easily now! Richard

Toning is a natural process. It can be attractive, or not. However, cleaning coins to remove it will generally ruin them from a collectors' point of view. Best left alone! Welcome by the way! What other coins have been handed down to you?

I shan't add long lists (I tried, unsuccessfully, to edit the pyx dates list to make it smaller!) but if you do decide you want to specialise on the period, there are a few auction catalogues and a book that have a good number of illustrations of coins of the period and which I find helpful for reference. Just let me know Sword.

Yes, as Rob says about the issue date. All pyx listed as follows: Lis 7 Jul 1625-29 Jun 1626 Cross Calv 29 Jun 1626-27 Apr 1627 Negro Head 29 Jun 1626-27 Apr 1627 Castle 27 Apr 1627- 3 Jul 1628 Anchor 3 Jul 1628-26 Jun 1629 Heart 26 Jun 1629-23 Jun 1630 Plumes 23 Jun 1630-30 Jun 1631 Rose 30 Jun 1631-21 Jun 1632 Harp 21 Jun 1632-11 Jul 1633 Portcullis 11 Jul 1633-27 Jun 1634 Bell 27 Jun 1634-18 Jun 1635 Crown 18 Jun 1635-14 Feb 1636 Tun 14 Feb 1636- 8 May 1638 Anchor 8 May 1638- 4 Jul 1639 Triangle 4 Jul 1639-26 Jun 1640 Star 26 Jun 1640-15 Jul 1641 Tri in circ 15 Jul 1641-28 May 1643 (P) 29 May 1643-15 Jul 1644 (R) 15 Jul 1644-12 May 1645 Eye 12 May 1645-10 Nov 1645 Sun 10 Nov 1645-15 Feb 1647 Sceptre 15 Feb 1647- mid 1649 Charles I is both a good reign to start with (in terms of volume of output and variation of designs and denominations) and challenging (like all hammered coinage, finding a decent strike on a nice round flan, with little wear when, by their very nature hand struck coins were of variable quality; the sheer number of different designs (including some real rarities) if you want a comprehensive collection ...) However Michael Sharp's article Rob mentions is a very good start. You can read it here as a pdf: BNJ 1977 Sharp Article. The scanned plates aren't brilliant but will give you an idea. The (Sharp) group F coins are illustrated in Plate VII, nos 44- My example is #52 And... welcome to the dark hammered side!

Looks a decent purchase Sword. These aren't the easiest coins to find with a pleasing portrait. Very often the King's face has some weakness. And it's always nice to have some provenance for a coin too. I've bought quite a few times from Lloyd and several of those coins were ex Alan's collection. I've not been disappointed with my purchases.

I think it's a 'simple' problem of multiplicity. So many different devices and operating systems (Windows in various incarnations, Apple OS's, Android, Linux and probably others) it's perhaps not surprising that it's a challenge to get a site to work on all of them. However I no longer use my phone to access the site at all (due to the problems Coinery mentioned) and it's slightly annoying to miss out on some of the features ... including some of the administrative powers I used to have on the old site. I don't know if it's poor programming or just the best compromise that can be reached, given the difficulty. But I suspect it can only get worse with time ... and if it does I shall probably just give up. Hopefully that's an incentive for the designers to get a grip on things, though I'm not holding my breath on that.

LOL Not sure I'd use it either Rob. More a case of FOMO!