Views on the Scarborough sixpence on eBay?

[jasonsewell]

Item no. 202162280662

[Ukstu]

Not my area but i do know these are rare and usually come with a good provenance. I personally wouldn't bid on it but thats me. Rob is clued up with siege pieces he will know whats what with this piece. 

Direct link to piece in question https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Unknown-Silver-Hammered-Coin-Siege-Sixpence/202162280662

Edited December 30, 2017 by Ukstu

[jasonsewell]

I agree, he’s mentioned siege though seems to have no idea? Was just wondering a reasonable price to spend on an electrotype, if anyone has a rough guess.

[Rob]

I would have thought up to a hundred quid is fairly typical. It really depends how badly you want one. 

[jasonsewell]

Thanks Rob, I’ll keep an eye on it just to fill that gap.

[Coinery]

It doesn’t look like an electrotype to me, it looks hammered? Does that make it a contemporary counterfeit (weight and metal would decide that I guess), or a more recent attempt at forgery (though I don’t think it will have succeeded in that at any point)?

[Rob]

With the reverse profile, it looks anything but hammered IMO unless it was using an offcut of metal to rest the blank on. The sharp obverse combined with the concentric rings doesn't look like any of the other Scarborough pieces. I think it is a case of call it what you want.

[Coinery]

49 minutes ago, Rob said:

With the reverse profile, it looks anything but hammered IMO unless it was using an offcut of metal to rest the blank on. The sharp obverse combined with the concentric rings doesn't look like any of the other Scarborough pieces. I think it is a case of call it what you want.

I thought that about the reverse, but it’s not consistent with the obverse, which made me doubt a full cast, though the sheet itself could’ve been poured and the reverse contact with a cold surface could potentially create the bubbles, before then being cut up and hammered from a clearly crude die?

Now here’s a question...would it ever have happened that cut-off cavaliers, or even parliamentary forces, would’ve chanced producing a product like the OP coin? It could also be a very easy target for forgers in the new commonwealth period couldn’t it??? ?

edit: some confusion...i was talking about the cast-like bubbles of the reverse, you were obviously referring to the irregularity of the bottom ‘die’

Edited December 30, 2017 by Coinery

[Rob]

This is an ongoing debate. Personally, I've never seen anything that suggests to me that they are genuine, in fact exactly the opposite. Leaving aside this one, In the case of the two towers pieces, I find it inconceivable that they would make a series in penny increments all the way from 6d to 1s4d plus the higher values. All that would be required would be to get approximately similar pieces of plate, weigh them, and stamp the value. It's not rocket science. You get an example or two of each denomination - which doesn't make sense. 

Although the denominations seen on the castle and gateway types are more sensible, I also struggle somewhat from a perspective view, and think the castle may be viewed looking at the inside wall. 

It is also important in my view that Cholmley is reported as producing coins to pay the troops, but no mention is made in connection with this of the quantity of CARA farthings found at the bottom of the castle well (cf. Peck p.56). Although there are pros and cons for them being contemporary with the siege, not least the fact that they constitute the early issues of copper farthings. When one considers the designs employed on some of the provincial civil war silver, they clearly hark back to the early part of Charles' reign, so it would be wrong to exclude the CARAs as possibly being made at Scarborough.

Although some of these pieces were in collections going back to the end of the 17th century, that still doesn't place them as being contemporary with the siege. I think it is significant that other siege pieces such as Newark and Carlisle were struck in towns, not just within a castle.

I had a discussion with kal about 3 and a half years ago on this topic. I laid my views out in a note, the contents of which are attached. I haven't changed my view on this since then. I'm sure kal will come back on this given his interest in the subject. 

140731-Kal on predecimal discussion.docx

[Coinery]

Goodness, that would turn in all on it’s head. I’m guessing there are too many people holding very expensive Scarborough coins to ever let that be a truth?

[Rob]

16 minutes ago, Coinery said:

Goodness, that would turn in all on it’s head. I’m guessing there are too many people holding very expensive Scarborough coins to ever let that be a truth?

Most are off the market, so not too many people will have one.

The reality is that my view is just one of several, none of which have been proved.

[Sleepy]

I know next to nothing about siege pieces so my opinion means very little, but I think Robs article makes a very relevant point, why bother minting them when your stuck in a castle with nowhere to spend your wages.

[Rob]

2 minutes ago, Sleepy said:

I know next to nothing about siege pieces so my opinion means very little, but I think Robs article makes a very relevant point, why bother minting them when your stuck in a castle with nowhere to spend your wages.

There is an argument for paying besieged troops as a means of stopping them mutinying. Buying loyalty is as old as history itself. However, the number of defenders dictates that you wouldn't need too many dies, let alone denominations. All you need is a supply of plate with a few die pairs.

There are 28 discrete varieties listed in Spink for Scarborough across 23 denominations (not including the 1s9d). The average civil war garrison was maybe 100-150 strong? The same goes for Bridgnorth. 120 defenders, yet 30 dies associated with 'B' mint currency and all of a month to cut and use them. 

[kal]

Hi Rob, 

I remember the discussion on the Scarborough issues and take this opportunity to thank you for forwarding the details and illustrations from the Hugh Howard and Lord Middleton sale catalogues.

With regards to the "siege sixpence" it is familiar stylistically, being similar to the product of a firm named Worthspoint who made a wide range of imitations of Scarborough siege pieces a few years ago.  The value punches are obviously wrong and the main device showing the castle entrance and the keep's stone work, lack accuracy when compared to the 'accepted pieces'.  

A paper I am writing on the plate money assigned to Scarborough siege coins is nearing completion and hopefully the discussion will continue.

[jasonsewell]

@Rob Another one for you Rob, I read in the "Coin Acquisition Of The Week Thread" that you had a named and priced Samuel Tyssen Cat. Do you have a name for Lot 2913? I have a price of 3s 10d?

[Rob]

Bought by Shaw. That isn't a dealer's name I recognise, but doesn't exclude the possibility..

M&R gives the chronologically closest person with this name as W S Shaw in 1858, but that sale was Books, Pictures, Engravings etc with one Napoleon medal noted and 56 years later. He is noted as the late keeper of the Sasines Register for Fifeshire, so being in public office there might be a possibility of confirming or condemning him as a possibility. The next Shaw listed wasn't until 1891.

[jasonsewell]

Thanks for the info Rob, certainly helps, In Ruding &  a BNJ there is mention of a Rev Stebbing Shaw who apparently bought heavily in the last couple of decades of the 18th century. May require a little more research 

[Rob]

8 minutes ago, jasonsewell said:

Thanks for the info Rob, certainly helps, In Ruding &  a BNJ there is mention of a Rev Stebbing Shaw who apparently bought heavily in the last couple of decades of the 18th century. May require a little more research 

That's more hopeful

[kal]

Just a heads up.  As "Unknown silver hammered coin - siege sixpence?" sold for 460 pounds, I've added  illustrations of siege coin replicas from WorthPoint that I downloaded a few years ago.  I've combined them and as seen from the "two two" shilling example, are not to scale.  Although similar to the Ashmore replicas produced in the 1970's, they don't appear to be copied from any genuine pieces and probably not intended to deceive.