My best gold.

[Gaz T 130]

Any information on this coin would be much appreciated. 

A very nice Charles l double crown I have. 

I have been told that the reverse die is the same as number 200 in the famous Schneider collection but the obverse has the mintmark in a different place. Could this be an over mark ? 

Would this be quite a rare double crown with the overmarks and its condition ? 

[Rob 3,000]

The reverse die is the same as Schneider 200, but the obverse is a different die. Schneider 200 obverse appears to be an anachronistic use of earlier punches, which he classed as IIb, the bust being 6a, as opposed to this coin's bust 7a, which became standard in 'Bell' and was used through to anchor. It is the commonest of the types. Looking at the picture, there may be a trace of a bell, but it isn't clear enough to confirm. The very close proximity of the stops either side of the crown would support the overmark, a bell being narrower. Sorry, I don't have a database of this type to compare dies, but it isn't the same obverse as Schneider 198.

The value would depend more on condition than on marks for this period as there was a steady output of gold. With 204lb of gold in the crown pyx as opposed to half that for the two periods before and two after crown. It wasn't until triangle that the figure reduced significantly (to 41lb).

For further reading on Schneider's Tower gold article see the BNJ vols.28-30.

Nice coin.

 

[Gaz T 130]

16 minutes ago, Rob said:

The reverse die is the same as Schneider 200, but the obverse is a different die. Schneider 200 obverse appears to be an anachronistic use of earlier punches, which he classed as IIb, the bust being 6a, as opposed to this coin's bust 7a, which became standard in 'Bell' and was used through to anchor. It is the commonest of the types. Looking at the picture, there may be a trace of a bell, but it isn't clear enough to confirm. The very close proximity of the stops either side of the crown would support the overmark, a bell being narrower. Sorry, I don't have a database of this type to compare dies, but it isn't the same obverse as Schneider 198.

The value would depend more on condition than on marks for this period as there was a steady output of gold. With 204lb of gold in the crown pyx as opposed to half that for the two periods before and two after crown. It wasn't until triangle that the figure reduced significantly (to 41lb).

For further reading on Schneider's Tower gold article see the BNJ vols.28-30.

Nice coin.

 

Thanks Rob you absolutely amaze me with your wealth of information.  

Couple of pictures of the over marks. 

[Rob 3,000]

That's as clear as a bell (sorry), so overmarks both sides. That narrows down the striking period a lot. Presumably to the weeks following the change of mark.

You always need decent pictures to give a meaningful reply. (Those who just post a message saying 'I have a coin. What is it?' please take note.)

[Gaz T 130]

11 minutes ago, Rob said:

That's as clear as a bell (sorry), so overmarks both sides. That narrows down the striking period a lot. Presumably to the weeks following the change of mark.

You always need decent pictures to give a meaningful reply. (Those who just post a message saying 'I have a coin. What is it?' please take note.)

Sorry ? will try to get a better way of taking pictures. 

[Ukstu 436]

2 hours ago, Gaz T said:

Any information on this coin would be much appreciated. 

A very nice Charles l double crown I have. 

I have been told that the reverse die is the same as number 200 in the famous Schneider collection but the obverse has the mintmark in a different place. Could this be an over mark ? 

Would this be quite a rare double crown with the overmarks and its condition ? 

That's stunning. Great find Gaz well done. 

[Gaz T 130]

1 hour ago, Ukstu said:

That's stunning. Great find Gaz well done. 

Thanks. One of my best finds ?

[Unwilling Numismatist 505]

Gaz, if you have a scanner that may be a better option for pictures. As coins are reasonably flat (normally) any scanner should be able to do a reasonably decent job of getting a good image.

Really nice find btw.

Edited October 22, 2017 by Unwilling Numismatist
half concentrating

[Gaz T 130]

24 minutes ago, Unwilling Numismatist said:

Gaz, if you have a scanner that may be a better option for pictures. As coins are reasonably flat (normally) any scanner should be able to do a reasonably decent job of getting a good image.

Really nice find btw.

Thanks, only way of photography at the moment is my phone as the computer has died a death. Have a good camera but no way of getting the pictures to my phone ?... need to invest in a new computer, then I should be sorted ?

[mrbadexample 985]

Well that's a fairly hefty start to your posts Gaz, what are you going to follow that with? 

[Gaz T 130]

1 minute ago, mrbadexample said:

Well that's a fairly hefty start to your posts Gaz, what are you going to follow that with? 

Sorry. ? 

Metal detecting is an amazing way of collecting coins. Coins that I would never have been able to afford. The double crown was found about 2005 on plough land, I had a 50/50 agreement with the farmer  so had the coin looked at by mike vosper coins via internet who gave me a valuation of 600 pounds.. so even though it was found it still cost me 300 that was a lot of money to find for a coin. 

But finding it was such an amazing buzz.

[Unwilling Numismatist 505]

I'd have to say, I'd have bought the farmer out too.

Unfortunately 10+ years of detecting and no gold for me yet!.Had a couple of really nice lizzie sixpences and oodles of romans though

 

Still jealous of this as a detecting find though!

as mrbadexample says, what are you going to follow this post with

[Gaz T 130]

Still trying to get some good pictures, how do you guys take clear close ups ?

I have a canon sx500 is, is this no good for close ups?

thanks for any help.