TomGoodheart

I think this is a very logical conclusion. The stop variations seem to occur on similar coins so it's not as if they are to show different trial versions of a die. I suppose there would be an advantage to know how long a particular die has been in use and a differing combination of stops would make identification easier, but I am inclined to think the variations are more related to die makers rather than quality control at the Mint. A contemporary document detailing such features would be brilliant but I don't know of such a thing. And given that my impression is that the workings of the Mint in those days was kept under wraps, if not actually secret, it's likely that we're stuck with conjecture.

I'm thinking probably not! Any ideas on the 'irregularity' running from the harp and through the central crossbar? Well, any raised areas on the coin will be down to marks on the die, so maybe a dint or damage there? Eventually dies were hammered so much that they would crack, you can occasionlly see at least the start of that on coins. I'm thinking in this case, something was dropped on the die causing a cut. Interestingly your coin is from a different die from other coins I've seen with contraction marks used instead of stops on the reverse. I had assumed there would be only one, but apparently not .. curious.

Sounds idyllic. Happy Birthday Mrs P!

Not the actual inner circles, though they are often helpful when comparing the position of other elements of the design, like the mark of value or legend. However there are occasions where additional beads appear in the legend. They occur during certain types, but also on 'unusual' coins, such as those struck from Welsh silver and also some 'fine work' coins. I'm therefore tempted to think that they had some significance beyond aesthetics, but I'm not aware that there are any records that describe their purpose. What is a 'fine work' coin, you ask? They appear to have been carefully struck on specially prepared flans to a (generally) high standard. Such as this: Sometimes, but not always, the privy mark is unusual suggesting they were produced before other coins of that type.

Nice! And a decent price too. We bought my daughter a black one (we're metalheads, so what else!) a while back and it's very smart. Happy Birthday in advance. Hope you get loads of money!

Brilliant! .. though daunting in how much work it may involve! But certainly from examining shillings of Charles, it's a very useful thing to have a decent example of a number of different coins to compare and contract to one's own! An 'A' for effort (and ambition) Stuart!

I read that privy mark is the most correct. That's because only the Master of the mint and a few others were 'privy' to it's purpose and significance. The term 'initial' mark is a misnomer as it doesn't always occur 'initially', ie: at the start of the legend and while other coins carry a 'mint' mark, most English hammered was produced in one place, the Tower mint, but the marks still varied. However in terms of everyday usage, the phrase mint mark seems to have become the most popular, more so than privy-mark, at least that's what I tend to see in lists and dealer's descriptions. As to the sales ticket, you'd have to compare with other entries to see if they have similar descriptions for other sellers such as Dawson, cooke, Vosper etc. However if it's a hammered coin the liklihood is it just dates the ticket to before 1971.

Actually, that could be an advantage ... Tell you what. I'm such a nice chap (as you can see from my username!!) If anyone wants to sell give me their unpopular (gVF or better unless rare please) Tower shillings I will generously take them off their hands to help make room for more farthings or similar.. I'll even pay postage.

And in case you hadn't noticed Michael, I have a few shillings of Charles I for sale on the forum. Here: Chas I shillings

Yes, although it's imposrtant to distinguish between coins that have been professionally cleaned ('museum' cleaning) and those that someone has buffed up using some aluminium foil and spit (yes, people do that!) which effectively polishes (and rather ruins) them!

Apart from the type/variety rarities Rob mentioned, many of which are only known to exist in small numbers, I think the premiums come in more with the provincial issues, particularly the obsidional (siege) coinage. If you look at Newark coins they are, by comparison with Tower issues, generally way overpriced for the numbers available. However they have curiosity value and because many were pierced to be worn, appeal not just to coin collectors but medal collectors, civil war enthusiasts and so on. They have a sentimental premium that makes them more popular that rarer but lesser known coins. And of course demand determines price. That's the thing about collecting, knowledge is power. Not just knowledge about how many examples of a particular coin are in circulation, but what condition a type of coin is normally found in, when one was last available to buy .. it all helps you spot when rarities become available. Of course, many rarities just don't come on to the market. They pass from one collector to another privately, so knowing other colectors (and being prepared to share what you know!) all helps too.

And don't forget auction catalogues: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Spink-The-Lariviere-Collection-of-Patterns-of-Charles-II-and-Other-English-Sco-/271032527175?pt=UK_Coins_OtherBritish_RL&hash=item3f1acc2947

Hi Michael. There are a few fake (modern replica) shillings of Charles I about. Most are shown here on ForgeryNetwork.com As you'll see, they are quite convincing until you ralise that there are several identical coins which with hammered just doesn't happen. As for shiny, well, not all brand new looking coins are suspect. Hoard coins in particular may be 'museum' cleaned. Recently following their sale there have been a number of coins from the Bedale hoard on ebay and many of them are quite bright and in good condition. This coin from my collection is pretty much 'as struck' (though clipped) and presumably had been cleaned or found in unusual circumstances that somehow minimised toning. The half groats I'm no expert on, but if you spot a shilling and are unsure about it post a link here and I (and a few others I'm sure) will happily give our opinion!

Well, I see Paul Withers did the illustrations for the book. Why not contact him (Galata) and see if he can put you in touch?

Perhaps by 'uncirculated' he means the scratches go straight across rather than around in circles?

I'd grade that NEF pies. As in Nearly Entirely F*cked. Sad.

That might actually be the simplest and safest option. Within the US they will re-holder a slabbed coin in one of their new 'edge view' holders for $7.50. Why not contact them? http://www.ngccoin.co.uk/services.asp Though looks like you will need to send the coin to Germany or Switzerland ...

I happen to have one that could come with my ticket if you're interested ... For me provenance (particularly in the form of previous collector's tickets) has a number of attractions. Mainly it's an additional link to the past. It's nice to have a coin that was also owned by another collector, particularly if they are reasonably well known such as John Brooker. It's also reassuring if your coin was illustrated as it makes it rather more likely to be genuine when you have a photograph with which to compare your purchase .. and to back up your coin if you ever came to sell. Whether provenance is worth additional cash money however .. rather depends on the coin and your own sentiments. While some coins from old collections may be very decent, but not all are. Yes, most likely they will have been the best example that collector could find at the time, but time and in particular metal detecting, have brought many coins to light that are as good or in some cases better than those available to collectors 100, 50 or even 20 years ago. I buy what I like. If that coin has an interesting provenance and I'm not paying through the nose for it, all well and good. But I'm not obsessive about it. I lack an ex Lingford coin. Similarly Lockett. And I sold my Carlyon-Britton coin .. (it ended up with Rob). There's currently a coin once owned by Grant Francis I'd rather like if I could track it down, but that's more because it's a nice coin. The provenance would just be the cherry on top!

Mmm ... not sure about unfrosting, I seem to remember there's some stuff for polishing up perspex (it too goes opaque when glued) but have never tried it. Anything like Brasso/ jeweller's rouge will surely have an abrasive effect, which you won't want? And for future reference .. to clean off sticky sellotape, either those alcohol wipes or that alcohol hand cleaner you can get (the sort used in hospitals) should be safe. Failing that, a little WD40 on a tissue or cotton wool.

Here, here! Then we can produce our own fake coins instead of having to import them from China!!

Mmmm .. I kinda agree. People seem to forget that the reason Germany is the financial anchor of Europe while other countries such as Greece struggle is largely because Germany makes things while Greece/Portugal and even Spain grow stuff and make money from tourism. Where countries do make stuff they are often offshoots of German companies such as Seat cars. And all the while our government (not just this one either) seem to be bent on making more and more graduates. Presumably they hope we can build a knowlwdge based economy, but forget that millions of people just aren't suited to making webpages, writing software or working in service industries where they often spend the day trying to sell more services over the phone. Or the fact that other countries also offer degrees and if nothing else their graduates speak two languages (English being one) in addition to their discipline. We need polytechnics and technical colleges and apprenticeships to capitalise on the skills of people who are good with their hands, that think practically and need to see the product of their labour. And on a vaguely related theme (and because I found it interesting): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17126713

I think that's fine if you have deep pockets. There's one occasionally posting member here who buys nothing but the very best examples of everything and of course, as such, they all have amazing provenances. But for the average collector on a budget, if you have the choice between a handful of provenanced coins or five or ten times as many, albeit in most cases slightly lesser coins, it's going to be difficult to resist buying the cheaper coins without the history. The additional problems as I see them are that there are many uninspiring coins that have nevertheless been part of a major collection. Is it better to buy a coin lacking eye appeal for the provenance over one without history but clearly nicer? Plus, although nowadays most coins tend to be illustrated in catalogues, more than 20 years ago, that wasn't the case. It's my experience that grading companies (and even some dealers) have not been good at retaining old tickets with coins. Without either a photograph or some other support, such as a ticket, it's very difficult to be certain about an individual coin's history. The vast majority of coins now on the market probably have little or no evidence of where they were before their last sale. Buying only coins with history will compound the challenge of finding an example for most collectors. What the answer might be, I'm not sure. I quite agree that the best answer is to only buy coins that can be trusted, which is those that have a history prior to any known fakes, from reputable sources. But modern (post 1800s or so) machine made coins are by their very nature much more alike than the earlier, cruder, efforts. Making distinguishing between one made in 1869 and 2009 very difficult. And of course, it's not just milled. Most of us here know of the run of replica coins that were on ebay a little while back. I myself nearly bought two of them, one believing it was the coin from Rob's website until it dawned on me that I'd seen that particular coin too many times for it to be true. Fakes are a real pain.

If you know a coin has been on a dealer's books for six months or more than I'd say there's a good chance you could haggle for a bit of a discount. For regular coins I was always told the higher the price, the more liklihood of a 'best price' if asked. After all, profit on a £50 coin is probably £25 at most. A £500 coin it could be hundreds, so dropping the price by £10 or £20 to get a sale is a bit more palatable. Of course if it's a known rarity and an eventual sale can be guaranteed then it's probably not worth asking!

He's that guy in the adverts of course: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYw4os8nK9I