Kilkenny money 1642

[kal]

Kilkenny Money 1642

 

I bought this half-penny from Spink’s early in 1993.  Having noted it was an unusually well struck piece on a large broad flan and showing traces of original colour.  The accompanying coin tickets showed neither grade or any pedigree and when I showed interest it was offered at a reasonable discount.

 

Just recently I obtained a Hans Schulman auction catalogue off the Howard Gibbs sale of November 1960, which included a significant collection of the siege coins of the British Isles.  I believe that lot 216 may be my coin.  Unfortunately, even though it is illustrated, the plates are generally abysmal, which is a shame given the importance of many of the rarities on offer.  They include a Scarborough half-crown, a Carlisle shilling and an extremely rare run of Inchiquin money which includes the nine-pence, six-pence, three-pence, etc.  

[azda]

It certainly does look similar Kal

[mhcoins]

yours looks better, i'd say they aren't the same 

[copper123]

[kal]

It's difficult to establish that the Kilkenny images depict the same piece so it's provenance, if any, remain open.  It's unlikely either Brushfield or Bower have it illustrated.  It's a pity Gibbs didn't sell his collection through London - it would have made more sense as the coin plates would have been much better and there would have been greater demand.  

The coin illustrated in this post is from the Spink Lavirviere Irish Collection of Ormonde's crown of 1649 (coin on left) and Gibbs lot 222 (coin on right), only recognizable by the flan shape and off-centre strike.  

[kal]

Correction to previous post - should be Bauer and not Bower.  Adding to the problem of identification, I noted that the Gibbs' image of the obverse legend appears to read "CAROLVS   D G   MAG   HIB" but should read "MAG    BRI or BRIT".  So unless there is a problem with the exposure of the image on his photograph, the coins can't be the same, as mine has the correct legend.  

[Matteo95]

I think they aren't the same coin ... You can understand it quite clearly looking at the legend where there is MAG ... 

[scott]

and the fact the crown is more central on the picture rather then the coin

[mhcoins]

8 hours ago, kal said:

Correction to previous post - should be Bauer and not Bower.  Adding to the problem of identification, I noted that the Gibbs' image of the obverse legend appears to read "CAROLVS   D G   MAG   HIB" but should read "MAG    BRI or BRIT".  So unless there is a problem with the exposure of the image on his photograph, the coins can't be the same, as mine has the correct legend.  

 Also look at the space on the obverse (left of the picture) between the outer beading on yours. The above example from the old plate has no excess flan.

[OldCurrencyExchange]

With the amount of "switching sides" by the leading protagonists in this complicated series of wars, there is plenty of scope for deliberate and accidental blundering of legends.

The small quantities of finds does generate substantial debate.

Hopefully, future finds will yield ore info + potential for "changes of numismatic opinion" for the future.

Getting back to your coin ... its a beauty !

Edited December 30, 2016 by OldCurrencyExchange
better explanation