TomGoodheart

Though maybe not this one for a while? S.2787 Sharp C2/3 .

I know.. I've shared all of these before: . Another G1/2, S.2799 .

More of a chocolate brown in the hand... S.2784 Sharp B2/1 .

One of those 'sharp as a knife' but with all the faults of hammered coinage (double striking, breaking flan, weak patches where the flan is thinner in parts...) S.2799 Sharp G1/2 .

I have two, neither perfect. The first is decently struck but has graffiti on the obverse and on a wibbly flan: The other is nice and round but less well struck on the reverse (corroded, maybe?): .

They're getting better at faking those NGC slab labels too! Nice to see enthusiasm for hammered gaining ground here.

Thanks Rob. Silly money IMHO. Odd about the legend error on a (presumably) specially prepared die though! .

Out of curiosity, anyone note what Lot 145 went for? Charles I (1625-1649), Silver “Fine Work” Shilling? .

BBC article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-32485012 And the site of the new National Civil War Centre itself. .

Welcome Leendert! What coins do you collect? .

Yeah, what Rob said! The Pyx details are the basis for stating that coins with particular privy marks were issued between such-and-such dates. But sequencing bust designs is not such a precise science. For simplicity I assume Francis and Sharp did their homework and rely on their views! .

I believe .. S.1154, Aethelred II last small cross type. Mint? ... Exeter, I think (EAXEC[...] )... though again with the proviso that I have no experience with the series! .

It causes an injury that bleeds internally but the skin closes over it. Hit the right spot (kidneys) and fatal through blood loss but little external trace. .

HistoricCoinage is your man. But my guess would be if you wanted to buy one you'd need £350+ for a similar coin. The legends are a bit blundered and the flan a bit wavy, but the portrait is nice.

Personally I've seen horrible coins on which the seller has claimed to have used the foil and spit technique. "Just a gentle clean". My preference is therefore, unless you are keeping the coin, in which case drill a hole through it for all I care, leave it alone and let the buyer bugger it up improve it if they wish ... .

Hi dvw. Welcome .... and just to let you know, I've deleted your duplicate thread for neatness!

Ah, just saw this. OK, on the plus side, as I've mentioned before it's a difficult privy mark to find on nicer coins. Trouble is, despite the crispness of the strike, it's not a very nice coin ... I'd have guessed it would have sold in the £60 range myself. But then this is eBay we're talking about, so pretty much all sense and predictability goes out the window! Someone obviously rated it ... rather too much IMHO. But then I suspect I've shown off coins I've bought that you've all been polite enough not to go WTF at! Hammered coinage, .. well, it's perhaps an acquired taste. And what appeals to one may well not appeal to anyone else! Either that or there's more to this shilling than meets the eye... .

Spink Live??? Hahahahaha! I still can't get archive results when I log in. Their website just doesn't work for me. So if I wanted a coin I certainly wouldn't risk it! As for Slaney ... nothing I can afford want .... .

Ah, sadly she had to close the account in France. So she just has a bundle of cash! Oh, well .. she's off to Germany soon so will no doubt find a use for some of it! The rest I guess we'll see what rates we can get and decide whether to hold on to it or deposit it in her UK account. .

Anyone know a good way to turn cash € into ££ and get it into a UK bank account without losing too much on the exchange? Daughter finally received her French housing benefit, but her bank there doesn't do international transfers so she had to accept cash .... .

My understanding is that the photos remain the property of the photographer unless (as is likely in this case) they are an employee or the auction house buys the rights as part of their contact. The rights to the photographs would only pass to the buyer of a coin to use commercially if Spink agreed to this .. which I'm not sure they would be inclined to do. That said, I believe photos may normally be used for personal or educational use. But that doesn't seem to be the case here. .

My thought too!Well, in a bit of a threadjack, my view is it's worth remembering there are no fixed prices for coins. Yes, due to popularity and availability Spink does influence what people demand or are prepared to pay, but in the end it's down to buyer and seller on the day. For some coins such as a 1727 shilling it's possible to establish, for a given condition, a narrow price range below which one would have to be very fortunate to find an example and above which it would be foolish. But with hammered coinage it's much more difficult to be precise. On a given day a buyer might be prepared to pay a lot more, or a lot less, for a particular coin, whatever the 'book' value. The Americans (primarily) have tried to pin things down somewhat by use of third party grading and 'Red Books' etc, but that only works with modern machine made coinage .. and even then there will always be disagreement! The 'best' solution is a good knowledge of your chosen coinage and the market. However that's not easy. I collect one denomination from a narrow range of years but I have over 1500 records of Charles I shillings and their price alone. And that doesn't include the examples I decided were too worn or horrible to bother about. And yet prices at auction can often surprise me, either seeming far too much or conversely cheap for a given coin. To me the usefulness of Spink is to find out more about coins that I don't know well. The when I've pinned down type and variety I can use auction records and dealer listings to get a better idea about prices. Even then, what one coin sells for today is no guarantee what it will sell for tomorrow. There are fashions in coin collecting as with anything else and what is popular today, tomorrow .. who knows! .

I'm guessing it appears in List 2 or 3 (1992/93) neither of which I have sadly. The numbering is consistent with the then lists. By list 5 he used larger numbers and had switched to tickets with a blue imprint of a dolphin on them. I don't know if any other members might have those lists. Rob's most likely but as we know he's a bit busy at present! While up-to-date price guides might be helpful, old sales catalogues and auction listings are often just as valuble (if not more, when trying to establish provenance!) .

I should have added that the 'Henry penny' is of the short cross type which was issued from 1180-1247 and so could be from the reigns of Kings Henry II, Richard, John or Henry III. Which one is determined by differences in lettering and portraiture ...

The larger is an Edward London groat and smaller, Henry London penny ... which Edward or Henry, I shall leave to my esteemed fellow members to decide I'm afraid! .