Coinery

That could be shadow on Paul's first example? If not, and you're right, Rob, then surely that would rule out accidental damage, as the 1900 example would've required the missing part of the die to partially repair itself, for want of a better word? Just to really mix it up, could the different sloping mouths (if it's not a shadow) make for three intentional reverse dies? No tongue, down-sloping tongue, up-sloping tongue? Or should I say, matrix?

Which does look like a broken die then! Unless a die was subtly altered as some kind of mint study or experiment?

I can't see that as being two punches to be honest? Which horse is the norm on the early dates? Even if a broken die; with such a transforming and notable difference, I'd bet it would go into the books as a variety! Lesser differences are fought for in the auctions all the time. But, as is mentioned, replication and statistics would be an interesting starting point.

Not mentioned in Davies either, don't know why I left it out earlier as I had checked it! It's probably nothing, looking at images online some 'appear' to have an open mouth and others do not, milling and weight check out.Surely if some have an open mouth and some do not, that would surely make for a variety, especially as the old coinage of Victoria is moving into the precision age of milling? Less obvious details make for a variety. Even as a 'clog' it would make for a variety, if you've already spotted a number of other open-mouthed horses in a brief Internet search?

It's hard to prove based on the dies and other evidence we have, but 10cf is definitely one I take to be the start of Edward II's coinage if I were to be specific. Can anyone point me in the direction of the specific text/articles that discuss the 10cf edward I/II cross over?

Good spot, Paul! I can only presume 2 things, as it doesn't look suspect to me? What's the milling and weight like? I'd say it might be a clog in the die, OR, maybe you've found something new! I don't recall reading about an open-mouth horse before. Haven't you got the silver bible, Paul? I didn't see Davies in your list? I'm not home to check mine at the moment!

Thanks, TG, here's the plate coin.

I've been looking at this Type 28 farthing 221728810973 purely as an attribution exercise (it's got too many flan cracks for me), and was thinking the fleurs must be struck on the band individually? I've never got this impression from reading any of the literature? If you compare this coin's crown against the plate coin in withers' farthing book, it can be clearly seen that the gaps between the outer fleurs and the central fleur is much less on the plate coin!

How do you know all this stuff, Sherlock? Don't you ever sleep?

Yes, a major dunce moment, Paul!

I did notice the rise in value. I was looking around for a deal on Vol. I (until I had the doh moment), and was really surprised at the prices...you're right about the increase, what's going on out there? Fortunately, I won't be needing Vol. I for a bit...at least not until I expand the borders of Edward II to include the Plantagenets in their entirety, which is what I intend to do when the good times start rolling in again!

...a pint of ale? Very generous of you, old chap. The pleasure would be all mine!

Don't get Vol. 1, get vol. 2 if you want Edward I & II. 11d isn't represented in Spink, either. It seems to just be different perspectives - perhaps 11d is seen as a 'mule' by some? Time for Stuart to go back to school! I have been second-guessing North's input on the Edward coinage for the last week, not even registering that the information was in Vol.2, which I have sat in my cupboard, not 40ft from where I'm sitting right now! What a complete and utter imbecile! Oh, well, you've saved me a few quid there, maybe I could spend it on a... Maybe not, not just yet! Cheers, Clive!

Withers is suggesting 10cf for the start of Edward II...is that also your's and the general establishments understanding, or are there further studies contesting that? Cheers, Clive.

Thanks, Clive, that's great. I must get the first vol. of North. I'd noticed Wren used 11d (and you say North) but Withers doesn't, without any explanation that I can see?

I'm just reading Withers' book on pennies, and have noted they say 'there are several subdivision of this group [Class 11]' (just happens to be Class 11). They obviously have 11a, 11b, and 11c, which then have further 'uncatalogued' legend and bust variations, but I can't see any reference of use beyond saying: 'Canterbury Class 11b Penny with legend EDWAR R ANGL DNS hYB and Large Faced Bust with rounded chin,' which is a little unsatisfactory. However, and to cut a long story short, I've just seen a reference on the net which says 'Class 11b2.' Where are they getting the extra reference add-on from? Is there a reference that classifies at a deeper level than the Withers book? Cheers in advance, and as always, gents!

Is that a leather album with slip case, Colin?

Milou, your English is fantastic, I only wish I could speak Greek so well. I'm very much in love with your Greek culture and islands.

I just thought it was me! Anyway, I'm guessing a nice A5 album in leather isn't something that's known? Oh, well, no worries, I'll just have to expand Edward II in both directions and fill that A4+ bad-boy album with the entire Plantagenet dynasty! I can handle it!

Thanks, Rob, interesting and intriguing! I might come back to this thread in a bit!

OK, that would explain the one I've just seen punched with a cosher bust of Elizabeth! Thanks, chaps!

Just a quick question. Did the medieval mint manufacture its own 'official' coin weights?

Oh, whoops! Regarding your other post about an NGC grade for your coin. I think you'll find a lot of people on here still haven't fathomed their system? For my own part I have seen so many inconsistencies in their product, that I have also never troubled myself to understand it.

Welcome aboard, John! I know there's a prominent member here who set up a gold sovereign website. He might be a good contact along the way? Regarding your other post about a CGS grade for your coin, I think you'll find a lot of people on here still haven't fathomed their system? For my own part I have seen so many inconsistencies in their product, that I have also never troubled myself to understand it. The short answer to your question is CGS will give you the precise answer you are looking for. If they don't, then you might need to question why you are using them? Enjoy the forum, there are some very intelligent men of coins on here!

Goodness me, this looks like a new VERY intelligent move by the counterfeiters to 'blend in' with the mass market by making lesser grade coins? The kind that might entice a middle-market collector to step unwittingly out of their comfort zone? Somebody needs to face this full-on with a dedicated and properly functional website, that looks at all these 'problems' at the die and micro level.