Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

basecamp

Coin aquisition of the week.......

Recommended Posts

 

3 hours ago, Rob said:
4 hours ago, scott said:

so how much is ot worth then, do these overstrikes count for anything?

Mostly not because dies were reworked until they fell apart. It is much cheaper to overmark than produce a die from scratch

 

The best examples of overstruck marks are probably the second coinage rose ryals and spur ryals of James 1 with i.m. cinquefoil where the obverse die is cinquefoil over trefoil over tower over mullet over coronet in the case of the former, and cinquefoil over trefoil over tower over mullet over key in the case of the latter, the two dies thus being used for at least nearly 4 years and potentially up to eight in the case of the rose ryal.

There is also a Charles I angel (Schneider obv.17) used over a 5 mark period - Triangle in Circle over Star over Triangle over Anchor over Tun. This being used for at least 3 years, but probably longer given only two obverse dies were used during the 3 year 'tun' period.

All three types are notable in being low mintage issues. Two or maybe three marks is the most you will see for widely used denominations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll also find, especially with the Elizabethan coinage, that the unadulterated mark is the rarer and more beautiful coin, on account of the younger dies, so rare on account of quality.

Equally, and following on from Rob's point, there are many examples where the single mark is in fact the harder to find.

value? I don't think gap filling is all that common in Tudor collections, or indeed are the people who collect hammered date runs to that level anyway. So, for me, no extra value in this case...it doesn't mean it's not rare, though, ironically. Scallop and A sixpences are far from being the common issue. The overmark? I think in this instance it makes it even less common.

viva la coin collecting!

what DID you pay, anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No harm done there, then! A clear date and rarer mark 6d with an interesting overmark. You couldn't ask any more from a tenner! ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Coinery said:

No harm done there, then! A clear date and rarer mark 6d with an interesting overmark. You couldn't ask any more from a tenner! ?

Thats a Tenner- Tanner then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good find Scott!  I've certainly noticed with the Charles I shillings, some overmarks such as rose over plumes that used to be considered unusual, on closer inspection are commoner, if not the norm for some busts. 

Trouble is, although I dare say one or two people might aim to collect all the privy mark variations, you'd need increasingly deep pockets.  And with the trend to collect by grade over variation, less people are going to be inclined to do a proper study based on their personal collection.  Another reason that comparing notes on forums like this is of such value to collectors these days!  :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, TomGoodheart said:

Good find Scott!  I've certainly noticed with the Charles I shillings, some overmarks such as rose over plumes that used to be considered unusual, on closer inspection are commoner, if not the norm for some busts. 

Trouble is, although I dare say one or two people might aim to collect all the privy mark variations, you'd need increasingly deep pockets.  And with the trend to collect by grade over variation, less people are going to be inclined to do a proper study based on their personal collection.  Another reason that comparing notes on forums like this is of such value to collectors these days!  :D 

You're not kidding. Just collecting a basic mintmark collection will set you back about 2 or 300K, even with the hard ones in any grade. Overmarks included - somewhere upwards of half a million, with the added monotony of the same die overstruck up to 4 times (see above). Ain't gonna happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My latest sixpence to add to the collection one of many I did not have a George V 1912 example. Pleased with it as a keeper, what are your thoughts please. these are the best pictures I can get I hope they do it justice.

IMGP5011.JPGIMGP5012.JPG

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May as well add this here

IMG_0693.PNG

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, azda said:

May as well add this here

IMG_0693.PNG

 

Lovely Pfnny Dave!  :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TomGoodheart said:

 

Lovely Pfnny Dave!  :D

 

Lol, fanks Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By coincidence another counterfeit 1707 halfcrown has just arrived - now with the correct Queen Anne obverse. Reverse are from the same die as the William III.queen-anne_1707_halfcrown.jpg

Edited by seuk
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TG - that appears a very pleasant 1866 penny. I see so many essentially uncirculated specimens of this date with obverse flan issues....This? None! I am sure lustre better in hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one of a group of four Montagu medalets I received last week in a swap made with Bill Snyder.

Montagu 3, of which I now own three examples, but this is the nicest. It once belonged to CW Peck too!

 

W&M-Peck636-from-Bill.jpg

2017-09-11 14.12.38.jpg

2017-09-11 14.12.25.jpg

Edited by Michael-Roo
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cu is exactly how I like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice mick. Good provenance also. I've got the W & M coronation medal in silver by Roettiers. Don't mind medals/ medalets when i can find good examples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Stu, and that coronation medal is a fine piece of work.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His previous listings made me laugh, this one just baffles. We've entered unchartered territory here…..

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/harfpenny-Charles-11-with-the-head-of-Victoria-bun-head-one-side-of-the-coin-/272842959385?hash=item3f86b52a19:g:KS0AAOSwE9lZtpgz

Apologies, this was intended for 'Ebay's worst offerings'. I've moved it.

Edited by Michael-Roo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael-Roo said:

His previous listings made me laugh, this one just baffles. We've entered unchartered territory here…..

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/harfpenny-Charles-11-with-the-head-of-Victoria-bun-head-one-side-of-the-coin-/272842959385?hash=item3f86b52a19:g:KS0AAOSwE9lZtpgz

Apologies, this was intended for 'Ebay's worst offerings'. I've moved it.

Harfpenny? Surely he means Arf-penny.. :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1825 sixpence, graded MS 65 and won at Heritage earlier today.

5in5Z0.jpg

XELWhQ.jpg
 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Michael-Roo said:

His previous listings made me laugh, this one just baffles. We've entered unchartered territory here…..

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/harfpenny-Charles-11-with-the-head-of-Victoria-bun-head-one-side-of-the-coin-/272842959385?hash=item3f86b52a19:g:KS0AAOSwE9lZtpgz

Apologies, this was intended for 'Ebay's worst offerings'. I've moved it.

 

That should read 'uncharted', not 'unchartered', but I'm sure you knew that…...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Michael-Roo said:

 

That should read 'uncharted', not 'unchartered', but I'm sure you knew that…...

I almost pointed that out twice, but thought I would leave it to someone else.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I almost corrected it twice but then, being busy with other things, forgot to do so. As it was still bugging me this morning I felt compelled to mention it… ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of compelled to mention;

Could someone please correct the title of this topic? Any casual visitor may think we're illiterate.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×