DNW March coin sale, a curious sixpence.

[kal 22]

Previewing "British coins from various properties", a Charles II 'six pence' third hammered issue, struck on a thick flan, had a counter stamp which I thought familiar.  The coin is described as "with part of a hallmark stamped in front of face".   I found intriguing the footnote suggesting a metal trial independently stamped with a silversmith's mark.  This is the same stamp (KI within a shield-shaped indent) which is punched below the date of a Newark siege shilling of 1646 illustrated in Patrick Finn's list #15, 1999.  Patrick also notes the existence of an Ormond six pence (1643) counter-stamped on the reverse from the same punch.  This coin now resides in the the B.M.

It has been suggested, both by Nelson 1905 and more recently Finn, that the KI was a countermark used by the Confederate Catholics in Kilkenny during the Great Rebellion.  With the appearance of the DNW six pence coined early 1662, that theory no longer seems credible.

 

[Paulus 1,942]

Blimey that's interesting Kal, I wonder if there is an alternative theory?

[Rob 3,002]

Koin Industries logo?

[kal 22]

Update:

While looking through part 4 of "Numismata Antiqua", "Illustrated Catalogue of The Earl of Pembroke's Collection, 1746", I noticed on plate P4 T9 an illustration described as "Sixpence of Charles I with countermark" with the letters K1 below the mark of value.  There was no additional descriptive text but the collection was sold at auction on July 31, 1848 by Sothebys.  

[Rob 3,002]

lot 84, bought by Brown for £2/16/-. No further explanation. It was in a lot of two with the plume over Bell shilling on P4.T6

[TomGoodheart 373]

I wonder if it's more a 'collector's mark'?  Similar to the 'mullet' (which appears to have been made using a small Torx screwdriver) found more recently.

Edited February 21, 2016 by TomGoodheart

[TomGoodheart 373]

Example of the 'mullet' mark (so called by Lloyd Bennett) at top of the reverse:

 

[Nordle11 564]

Out of interest why would you counter stamp a coin as a collector, wouldn't it just devalue it completely?

[Paulus 1,942]

My thoughts also, but perhaps back in the day it was considered ok?

[TomGoodheart 373]

No idea.  But the 'Mullet Man' does.  Examples I've seen are all decent quality (or rare in the case of the queen Mary penny) too.

 

Edited February 21, 2016 by TomGoodheart

[kal 22]

On closer examination of the Pembroke engraving it indicates two countermarks - the addition of the letter "C" above the mark of value.  Even allowing for the lack of accuracy in these plates, the K1 shows no similarity with the previous examples mentioned.

The sixpence to me resembles a Briot first milled issue IM flower/daisy with an abbreviated obverse legend, the reverse showing, a Cross Moline over square top shield, but again with IM flower/daisy?  I can't think of a valid reason to add these stamps as they greatly devalue the coin.  

 

 

Edited February 21, 2016 by kal
would not accept illustration

[kal 22]

 have attached illustration to accompany previous post.

[Rob 3,002]

With a flower as the mark you only have Tower mint 1631 or Briot's first milled as the options because the Exeter rose marked sixpences are all dated 1644, and no other Provincial mint sixpences have this mark.

I would be tempted to go with Briot 1st issue also given the style of bust, but the punctuation on the obverse is wrong and there is no rev. flower as the mark. A regular Tower mint issue would fit the legends but not the general style of the collar which seems more akin to those of the last Bristol/A/B mint style, nor the reverse square top shield which only appears as the date above from 1625 to 1630 before reappearing in group E sixpences with the correct cross ends. 

Rose marked patterns do occur for shillings, so a sixpence pattern is not out of the question.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Rob

[TomGoodheart 373]

The bust and shield are wrong for the Rose mint mark, even given artistic licence ... so while it's not illustrated as Briot's characteristic harp, the Daisy mm seem the most likely option to me.

Curious ...

And a shame this doesn't have a KI (K1) mark ... http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1634-39-GREAT-BRITAIN-CHARLES-I-SHILLING-COIN-/191808545943?hash=item2ca8ae2497:g:KIAAAOSwKtVWxNnz  LOL

Edited February 21, 2016 by TomGoodheart