Sylvester
-
Posts
3,113 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Store
Gallery
Articles
Posts posted by Sylvester
-
-
Okay Sylvester, I toted this book in with me to work today. It weighs a stone, sigh! This is "A New History of the Royal Mint" edited by C.E. Challis (who is Reader in History at Leeds, btw). On p.340 there is a whole page table of silver coin output, 1660-1699 by pound, ounces, dwt, gr, and Pounds Sterling. So for 1663 it's
98,412 lbs / 1 oz / 18 dwt / 8 gr for L305,078
Compare 1665, the "Plague Year":
1,856 lbs / 2 oz / 5 dwt 0 gr for L5,754
There is a similar table for years 1700-1799 on p.434, and corresponding tables for gold coins.
Is this helpful? The book's ISBN is 0521 240 263 and imprint 1992.
Eliza
Excellent, looks like we are getting somewhere, i'll have a browse around for it...if i can find a copy, i'll keep my eye on it and nab it as soon as i am able to.
Sylvester.
Anyone interested in coins of AEthelred II? Because i have found what looks to be a really good book on it...
Actually i'm using it for an essay on the 'achievements' of AEthelred's reign, it just so happens that there is alot of coin info in there too...not relevant to my essay however...
Anyone interested just say so on here, and i'll put the details up for it...
-
From a numismatic point of view, the euro is a terrible thing. Kiss goodbye to all the variety, the end of interesting coins, as in coins that can actually change obverse and reverse, with the euro you can only change the reverse as if you changed the other then well it kinda defeats the purpose of trying to have all of them looking the same... Take the Irish euros...having seen pictures of them, if i remember rightly the obverse has the euro obverse, the reverse is a harp? Is it a harp on all of the denominations?
Now look at the pre-euro Irish coins, harp on one side, and a different reverse for each coin on the other. If the UK joins the Euro, the choice will be either keep the elements of the UK on all the reverses, or keep the Queen, you don't really have room to keep both. You keep the queen because that's what i should imagine what people expect to happen, then say good bye to any varience between the denominations. Say goodbye to the Queen and you destroying a British tradition...but you might have more interesting coins...alright maybe not.
Either way it's just replacing one set of junk uninspired coinage (which is what we've got now, except the designs change occasionally on both sides), with an inflexible even more uninspired set of junk...that changes less frequently.
And it's also a blow from a national point of view, and from an economics point of view. The UK's economy is stronger than some countries on the euro, join it and our economy will be effected.
There is also the concern of possible hyperinflation, if Germany goes down in a crisis for example, since France and places share the same currency they go down too...you can no longer just adjust the exchange rates between the two to help limit the impact. Also the euro is not flexible enough, if one country is doing really well and wants to revalue the currency they can't, likewise the opposite can happen.
But it does mean you can buy things from Chris easier...so it does have some good points.
Sylvester.
-
Chris, is that Wm & Mary half crown still available? Let's talk. I'll send you email.
Sylvester: yes, it was a "momentary lapse of reason" on my part to switch out the words in the title. I'm indebted to you for not teasing me about being a Colonial! I browse so many books during a given day that I do occasionally confuse titles. I hope you can find the Mackay -- I can't over-recommend it. And so long as Chris has a mailing address for you, if you *need* the photocopies, we can work it that way.
Eliza
Well Eliza i'll wait and see what you find on the mintage figures front, if you do find anything then i'll be glad of a photocopy of the relevant bits...
I've got my eye on one of those books, but my cash is tied up at the moment, Christmas shopping is pending and whether i'll have enough left over and all. Otherwise i'll have to wait till January. (i know they are not that expensive, but i'm on a tight budget until the new year)
Sylvester.
-
The first Steam presses were used by Boulton in 1797 for the Cartwheels. I do believe horse power was used previously.
Chris
Chris you're right, i forgot about the cartwheel stuff...steam presses indeed for these.
Not sure about what was used prior to this, horses are a very likely possibility.
Sylvester.
-
I don't know if you can compare the very fast minting process nowadays with the minting process of those early milled coins but I imagine it would be a possibility.
Chris
For one minting coins in such high relief nowdays at the speeds that are used in modern methods, i'd hate to see what'd happen to the die after a couple thousand...
Minting was done by hand presses from 1663-1815 was it not? Then from 1816 steam powered machines took over...
When i say hand operated presses, i do not mean hammered coins...
Sylvester.
-
That depends what you mean by 'milling' the edge, as it has a double and sometimes confusing meaning.
Milling a coin originally meant making it with a powered machine and not hammering it by hand, that certainly wasn't Isaac Newton's idea as it was being done long before he was born.
This milling process also led to the idea of putting the coin into a round collar with letters imprinted on it, so that these letters would end up around the edge after the coin was struck. This was an excellent anti forgery idea and was shrouded in secrecy at the time. This was also being done before Sir Isaac Newton' appointment as master of the mint in 1696 so I'm quite sure was not his idea.
As for milling as we understand it today... ie the edge with a ridged surface, well that may well have been Sir Isaacs idea but I have yet to find mention of it in any books I have been glancing through just now to try and find out!
Chris
www.predecimal.com
M. Pierre Blondeau was the guy that did all the milling in Charles II's reign. Before him of course there had been, Mestrelle (Bessie's reign) and Briot (Chopped Charlie's reign..sorry Charles I
). Mestrelle later got dismissed from the mint and some years later was hung for forgery. 
Sylvester.
-
These medals were designed by George Bower and struck in both silver and brass. The brass medal appears in Michael Mitchener's "Jetons, Medalets and Tokens of the Low Countries and France" reference 3032. Mitchener, writing in 1991, values the medal at £35 in Very Fine condition.
[ASIDE]...George Bower was also responsibly for the 1689 half guinea, and some of the William and Mary Halfpenny and farthings. The coins he designed often had rather comical portraits...
Sylvester.
-
Apparently some blanks in the 1670's (and possibly at other times?) were imported from Sweden. So perhaps they wanted to make sure it was proper copper and that the Swedes were not doing the dodgy.
This would perhaps also apply to any outsourced blanks. (nothing against the Swedes!)
Chris
It could indeed be that. It could also be a method for the mint to do random quality checks to make sure it's employees weren't making the coins substandard by nicking off with *surplus* metal...that should have been in the coins.
[ASIDE]...Kinda like the old hammered silver coins, officials would haul a few out of circulation and test them for weight and finess, to make sure that the moneyer wasn't making a sneaky profit by producing substandard coins...
[bACK TO FARTHINGS]...If you don't think that's plausible then, i'm sure i read somewhere about all the underhand things that went off later in W3's reign with the production of copper at the provincial mints.
Many coins were often cast rather than minted as it saved money!
And there were many foreigners employed that could not even spell the kings name, hence all those wonderful spelling mistakes of William, and of course the lack of design and detail on these coins and inferior workmanship.
Sylvester.
-
I'm sure the flan manufacturing process was not as uniform as it is today.
Not sure.
Sylvester, any ideas?
Chris
www.predecimal.com
Regarding the flan manufacturing in a word Chris, no. No it wasn't as uniform as it is today, if you look at the early stuff you'll notice that they are not totally round, or to put it another way the diameter around the coin is not consistent the whole way around.
Try stacking a few lower grade half crowns on top of each other, or better yet some of the maundy stuff as it's smaller, and i should imagine rounding the smaller coins would be harder. You'll notice that a pile of early milled coins never look as good stacked as a pile of late milled coins, which are exactly the same size all way around, and about as round as round gets, (unless it's a fifty pence of course!) They also look better stacked because of the higher rims and lower relief...
Therefore i suppose the might clip them for that reason...if they were overweight...
Only other reason i could think of was to check the consistency of tin/copper purity, but they could do this by using the leftovers after they cut the blanks out of a rolled sheet.
Sylvester.
-
Then you can have it FOC. Use the private messenger thing or whatever to let me know the address and i'll send it to you.
Now, your mum can hardly object to a free coin, can she!
Chris
Don't underestimate my mother! I did look where that got me...
And about the coin, thank you Chris! That is very generous of you, and i will take good care of it...it will join the slightly bent 1696 sixpence that i aquired in a bag of scrap silver, currently in my good collection awaiting replacement with a better one, but i've got my eye on one!.
I'll send you my snail mail address in a private email.
Thanks again!
Sylvester.
-
I stand corrected and ashamed
Chris
Sorry Chris...but i'm sure you'll pull me up on something so fair's fair!
Sylvester.
-
I'm mortified by switching "British" for "English" in the title. Before I go lash myself in contrition, let me say to Sylvester: this new history of the Tower Mint may be the "missing link" for silver mintage figures! If you can't find a copy yourself, I am willing to photocopy the pertinent pages and MAIL them to you.
Chris, I'm still considering that half-crown.
Eliza
Ah Eliza i presume you mean the use of the word English rather than British with regards to Mackay's book.
The reason is that if it's from Henry VII then it would be English coins, as Henry VII through to Elizabeth I were monarchs of England only, Scotland had their own kings (and Queen, singular intended) prior to 1603.
When Elizabeth died in 1603 her cousin James VI or Scotland inherited the throne of England and that's when it became Britain.
However Scotland continued minting it's own coins until about Anne's reign? So they still would be English Coins up until about 1707.
When the Act of Union took place, that's when the coins became British! (I think...) So English is more accurate than British in that sense.
Sylvester.
Eliza i would be very glad of photocopies, but l will check for the book first though...thanks!
-
Sylvester,
You interested in a 1745 LIMA, plain angles sixpence. I have one here that's had a small silver ring welded to the top (for the blind people in 1745
) but I imagine that could be removed and leave little trace.The grade isn't all that fab but I couldn't remember if you needed this one?
Chris
www.predecimal.com
Chris, thanks for making me the offer on the coin. The truth is i do need it...but, i am attempting to find as many of them in as higher grade as possible. The George II stuff should mostly be about EF- and upwards, (except for the rarer stuff like that 1746 Proof). I haven't come across any UNC ones yet though.
Coins in the following grades are really what i'm looking for (but it takes me a while to save up for them)...
*George II EF- or higher,
*George I VF+ or higher (where possible, i would settle for a good VF though),
*Anne VF+ or higher preferably AEF,
*William III AEF+,
*William and Mary i only need the 1693 (upside down 3) and 1694, AVF-VF+ is about the grade i could afford, roughly AVF on the '94 one.
*James II AVF-GVF,
*Charles II VF-VF+.
(I really appreciate the workmanship of these coins and the higher the grade the more detail to appreciate!)
But some coins may have to be ever so slightly lower depending on what's available, but no mounted coins, no holed coins, preferably no haymarked coins (but for some reason this is common on coins of this period, how does it happen exactly?), no counterstamped coins, and no creased or bent coins. As you can see i'm fussy about this particular denomination.
Now if it had been a William III half guinea i would have settled for bent, creased or haymarked, (wouldn't have an ex mount though, or a cleaned coin).
I bidded on one on Ebay, and i got thoroughly beaten, i gave up after £300, and that was a slightly bent example in about F, it went for about £400 in the end...and for a 1701 coin in that condition, some people have more money than brains, even i went too high and i probably would have broken the bank if i'd won it...so i'm glad i didn't, but i'm even gladder that i made someone else pay more for it.
I suppose that's the consolation prize when you lose something you really wanted, to know that someone has paid over the odds for it, perhaps two and a half times of what it's actually worth.
Still since i can't really afford to collect half guineas, i'll stick to sixpences.
My parents think i am wasting my money (despite the fact that my father was a semi-serious coin collector himself...he still gets on at me [i think he was more of a stamp man...which is an hobby i never really took to, and quit 2 weeks into it]).
My parents think £20 on a coin is scandalous, hence they don't know about most of my coin purchasing...if they'd found out i'd spent £225 on a James II half guinea they would have gone up the wall!
I remember telling them i'd paid £70 for a 1750 EF+ sixpence (actually it was £200), and my mother went mad...talk about a lecture, good job i didn't tell her what i really paid, only reason why she found out i'd got it in the first place is because she had to sign for the parcel!
Sylvester.
-
They were 1/10th of a pound, just like the florin which was issued until 1967 (but legal tender until 1992).
Florins were legal tender until 30th June 1993...
Sylvester.
-
You have a wild imagination there Sylvester, that's good.
Numismatics needs people like you!
Chris
Some people would say i'm mad (and some indeed have said this), i just say i'm imaginative...
Sylvester...
Bringing Numismatics alive...
-
As if Eliza will have a clue about your Fry fivers or tiddly 5p's! Don't forget she's a colonial
I imagine your cheque book having a date starting with 20-- would probably put any sellers off in 1985 too!
Chris
Well you never know she might have seen a picture of one!
Grrr i didn't think about the date on the cheque book. I could just tell em it was an error, or perhaps, perhaps i could just redated it '84...
Might work... might...
Sylvester.
-
That's no good. Hmmm. Okay: let me tell you that I've had good luck via abebooks.com for finding out-of-print stuff. I know for a fact (searched it this week) that there are copies of Mackay's "History of Modern British Coinage" availble *in the UK* through dealers linked to abebooks.com. I think our library copy was marked L8 95p, but that was in 1984. I found a copy for US$20, so you should find comparable prices there.
This is a GREAT reference and I'd strongly encourage you to either 1) get it yourself; or 2) hint broadly that Mr. S. Claus would be highly thought-of for delivering a copy on the appropriate day.
Eliza
I just ended up at ABE too searching for the book you mentionned no luck as you said...i got there entirely by accident, so don't think that i didn't believe you, cos i did.
There is one book on there entitled;
'A Start to Coin Collecting. English Coins Elizabeth II To Charles II'
...never heard of it so i couldn't say whether it's any good or not. But the reason why i picked it out is because it was written by one Margaret Amstell, and that name looked very familiar to me...
Then i realised that she was the one that was mentionned in my 1985 coin price guide as setting a new all time record for a British Coin, when she bought one of the few surviving Henry III Gold Pennies for £65, 000.
In 1985 money that was a phenominal amount, (still is from where i'm sitting) bearing in mind that you could buy 1694 sixpences for £110 in VF. Now they go for £250 in VF.
If only i could go back to 1985 for a day with the money i have now...well i'd write out a cheque so that they wouldn't look at me gone out when i hand them a few Fry fivers rather than Wellington fivers, or conversly ridiculously small 5ps, rather than ones that are considerably bigger and harder to lose.
Oh if only...
Sylvester.
-
Sylvester, I was not able to haul in this new book I referred to. The brief bib is this: "A New History of the Royal Mint." Cambridge UK & New York : Cambridge U. Press, 1992.
Same data for early milled by weight, but I suspect it may be organized more efficiently. I hope to get time to take a better look tonight.
Eliza's week at work has been a month too long ...
Eliza
Eliza keep me posted on what you find! (if anything!). I went to my library today as i promised i would but i found nothing much except general books that just showed you the odd picture, but no real info for advanced collectors.
Sylvester.
-
Actually someone's voted MS66! WHAT!!! CAPITAL LETTERS CAN'T DESCRIBE WHAT I'M THINKING NOW...
Sylvester.
-
Very pretty coin, that Double Eagle.
I also had a look around that almost entirely US forum and was shocked at some of the grades given to the 1917 US Cent! Did someone really give it an MS63!!!!
Even anything AU is pushing the boat out!
Hope this link works:
http://www.coinpeople.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1452
Chris
Yes i'm afraid they did, MS63 and i shook my head when i saw that!
I think i gave it VF35 tops, might have been lower though. It's definately not EF in my opinion, but then again it's not my field of speciality and i hate grading cents so i avoid them wherever possible.
Sylvester.
Sadly it is US dominated, but it's helped me gain some info on the US stuff so i'm indebted to it on that front, and i get on well with all the regulars on there.
Sadly most things on the internet are US biased, that's why i try and brighten up their little lives with a few shillings and such...
-
Here's a link to some photos of my Early Milled (EM) and some of my LM sixpences... arranged from newest to oldest. (They are scans and thus some of the scans don't do the coins justice...and in some cases [like the Edward VII one] this could be considered a good thing as it hides some of the ghastly toning).
I would have posted them on here but the sheer amount would have Chris thinking i'm spamming the place, + it would take quite a while!
http://www.numisaddict.com/showthread.php?...=&threadid=2310
Also Chris it'd be good advertising for you, if you were to post a message on the group in the link, as some of the collectors on there are interested in British coins. Perhaps we can win some more people over to the 'Darkside'...or so the US only collectors refer to it...
Sylvester
-
Mine is a 1894 GEF specimen, i still reckon it would fetch about £275 on a good day...
Here's a link to a picture of that Double Eagle...amongst some other coins in my gallery on another group i regularly frequent.
http://www.coinpeople.com/forums/album_per....php?user_id=36
Sylvester.
-
Churchill Crowns are the epitome of evil.
Christians would probably say Godless Florins are
True but not being a Christian...
i must admit i like em alot, now there is a coin i would love to specialise in, i make that 4 varieties, 1848 proof, 1849 w.w., 1849 w.w. partially obliterated, 1849 w.w. totally obliterated. But i'll not continue this conver further since it belongs on the late milled section. I know i'm bad...
-
Could you post some on the boards? I know i'd like a look at them!
Any sixpences dated between 1675 and 1751 in there?
Grade dependant of course.
Sylvester.
Early Milled Coinage
in British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries
Posted
The essay is not that good i'm afraid...and his achievements, well from what i've read he didn't have any...i feel he was misunderstood, and therefore despite all his faults i find i'd like to stick up for him (i like misunderstood monarchs, AEthelred II 978-1016, Harold II 1066, Stephen 1035-1054, John 1199-1216, Richard II 1377-1399, Henry VI 1422?-1460 & 1470-1471, Richard III 1483-1485, Henry VII 1485-1509, Mary Tudor 1553-1558, James II 1685-1688, George IV 1820-1830, William IV 1830-1837...and i think that's about it) but all the evidence is clearly against AEthelred...sadly
Sylvester.
All the monarchs above are seen in a bad light for so many different reasons...notice how Charles I is missing from that list, but he was an idiot, who asked for what he got, if you still refuse to compromise with Parliament when it's clear you've lost what do you expect to happen?