1763 reference book on gold & silver coins 1066-1736

[Bernie 193]

I have placed a reference book of gold & silver coins 1066-1736, on Ebay, of which displays many pattern coins that I didn't know even existed.

The book was issued in 1763 and is in my opinion, quite good condition for its age. Item id 145759903017

[Paddy 1,617]

I actually have my own copy, which I am not ready to part with yet!

Looking at your pictures, mine has some variations - the end boards on mine are tooled leather covered, and the edges of the pages are tooled gold. I wonder if there were many variations in the published types?

 

[Coppers 58]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p4432023.m570.l1313&_nkw=145759903017&_sacat=0

[PWA 1967 2,035]

3 hours ago, Bernie said:

I have placed a reference book of gold & silver coins 1066-1736, on Ebay, of which displays many pattern coins that I didn't know even existed.

The book was issued in 1763 and is in my opinion, quite good condition for its age. Item id 145759903017

There are numerous reprints ,do you know what year the first edition is please ?

EDIT................................................................................

Can ignore this now as just found one 1744.

Edited May 5 by PWA 1967

[Bernie 193]

I believe the first print was 1736. Don't know whether it was as comprehensive.

[Master Jmd 63]

Not to take away from your sale - this would be a wonderful addition to a bookcase - but if anyone's interested in the book's contents it's available in full on Archive.org: https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_tables-of-english-silver_folkes-martin_1761/mode/2up

 

[Peckris 2 2,101]

On 5/5/2024 at 7:53 PM, Master Jmd said:

Not to take away from your sale - this would be a wonderful addition to a bookcase - but if anyone's interested in the book's contents it's available in full on Archive.org: https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_tables-of-english-silver_folkes-martin_1761/mode/2up

 

Interesting that the author annotates the top of each page with the monarch's name - yet for the whole of the Commonwealth (several pages) the pages are annotated as "Chas II". He also refers to the execution of Charles I as "the king's murder".

[copper123 1,433]

Obvious catholic - sympathiser or Jacobite.

Really cheap for such an old book cannot be many around now

[Paddy 1,617]

Not so much Catholic - more a Monarchist as opposed to a Parliamentarian.

[terrysoldpennies 733]

Funny thing , we fought for a Parliament and look what we've ended up with , a plutocracy !!

[Paddy 1,617]

I fear we are more of a bureaucracy at the moment, ruled by an ever expanding Civil Service and semi-autonomous organisations that seem determined to ignore the will of the people and even our elected representatives in a trenchant defence of their own jobs and beliefs.

There is no limit to the casual cruelty of the bureaucrat!

[copper123 1,433]

5 hours ago, Paddy said:

I fear we are more of a bureaucracy at the moment, ruled by an ever expanding Civil Service and semi-autonomous organisations that seem determined to ignore the will of the people and even our elected representatives in a trenchant defence of their own jobs and beliefs.

There is no limit to the casual cruelty of the bureaucrat!

well it must be the fault of the conservatives then seeing they have been in power 75% of the time

[copper123 1,433]

I have little time for people who claim Charles was murdered (Only my opinion by the way )

While he was beheaded he had many times been asked to plead guilty and say sorry and he would be well looked after , he refused to see common sense and carried on with his ridiculous inalienable right of kings defence .

He remains a total prima donna and while George IV was probably the worst king  we ever had, Charles runs into second place along with his father in third

[Paddy 1,617]

Interesting discussion on the worst king title possible here. I'm not sure I would agree with @copper123. I would suggest John as the worst - corrupt and greedy. After that it gets closer for second worst - Edward II, Richard II, Stephen and Edward VI are all good contenders with Charles I. George IV I let off as by then the monarch had virtually no power, and so could do little damage. Not sure what you have against James I - apart from his penchant for killing old women because he thought they were witches?

 

[Diaconis 706]

On 5/13/2024 at 11:46 PM, terrysoldpennies said:

Funny thing , we fought for a Parliament and look what we've ended up with , a plutocracy !!

Just a thought. Suppose we believe Hobbes that the state of nature is a horrible place where laws do not exist, property is non-existent, and everyone is out for themselves without a care for others. That then is the motivation to work and pay a portion of the proceeds from the fruits of our labours to maintain a government to protect us, and maintain natural law.

The irony is that the value we are getting for our buck these days is inversely proportional to the greed and self-centeredness of the government itself. 

Regressing into the state of nature and paying for the privilege 😃 Has a Pythonesque feel to it.

 

[copper123 1,433]

1 hour ago, Paddy said:

Interesting discussion on the worst king title possible here. I'm not sure I would agree with @copper123. I would suggest John as the worst - corrupt and greedy. After that it gets closer for second worst - Edward II, Richard II, Stephen and Edward VI are all good contenders with Charles I. George IV I let off as by then the monarch had virtually no power, and so could do little damage. Not sure what you have against James I - apart from his penchant for killing old women because he thought they were witches?

 

Yes there were some really bad plantagenet kings , I must admit I was concentrating on more recent kings  as it is easier as the older kings and their legacies fade into the past maybe a get out on my behalf 

[copper123 1,433]

1 hour ago, Paddy said:

Interesting discussion on the worst king title possible here. I'm not sure I would agree with @copper123. I would suggest John as the worst - corrupt and greedy. After that it gets closer for second worst - Edward II, Richard II, Stephen and Edward VI are all good contenders with Charles I. George IV I let off as by then the monarch had virtually no power, and so could do little damage. Not sure what you have against James I - apart from his penchant for killing old women because he thought they were witches?

 

yes he remains the only british king to have published a book and its a pile of rubbish .

from what I recall witches were only burned in scotland was it (?)  the pendle witches not sure how they died but they did and just because they were were old and without husbands .

James did like his art though and is responsible for quite a lot of the royal art collection which is owned by the crown which is you and me by the way through the goverment

[copper123 1,433]

8 minutes ago, Diaconis said:

Just a thought. Suppose we believe Hobbes that the state of nature is a horrible place where laws do not exist, property is non-existent, and everyone is out for themselves without a care for others. That then is the motivation to work and pay a portion of the proceeds from the fruits of our labours to maintain a government to protect us, and maintain natural law.

The irony is that the value we are getting for our buck these days is inversely proportional to the greed and self-centeredness of the government itself. 

Regressing into the state of nature and paying for the privilege 😃 Has a Pythonesque feel to it.

 

Like buying natwest with public money then the public being sold it back , just cause some narcissist trashed the whole company  

[Paddy 1,617]

1 hour ago, Diaconis said:

Just a thought. Suppose we believe Hobbes that the state of nature is a horrible place where laws do not exist, property is non-existent, and everyone is out for themselves without a care for others. That then is the motivation to work and pay a portion of the proceeds from the fruits of our labours to maintain a government to protect us, and maintain natural law.

The irony is that the value we are getting for our buck these days is inversely proportional to the greed and self-centeredness of the government itself. 

Regressing into the state of nature and paying for the privilege 😃 Has a Pythonesque feel to it.

 

Yes - it seems to me that we have an unfounded trust in the goodness of human nature, despite continuous evidence to the contrary. We elect people to govern us, or appoint civil servants to administer us, or employ law enforcement agents to maintain the rule of law and expect all these people to operate to a moral code and in the best interests of the general public and society - and they consistently let us down. Maybe the anarchists have a point.

 

[Peckris 2 2,101]

2 hours ago, copper123 said:

yes he remains the only british king to have published a book and its a pile of rubbish .

from what I recall witches were only burned in scotland was it (?)  the pendle witches not sure how they died but they did and just because they were were old and without husbands .

James did like his art though and is responsible for quite a lot of the royal art collection which is owned by the crown which is you and me by the way through the goverment

After some pretty awful torture to make them confess they were then hanged

[DaveG38 401]

My wife is a very distant relative of Alice Nutter's, one of the witches. When we were last in Pendle, some 20 years ago, we visited the churchyard where one of the Nutters is buried, and at this point, a large black cat appeared on the grave. Whoooooo!! Given this coincidence, I've been a bit wary of my wife ever since, just in case. You never know what she can do. If only she could magic up a 1726 half crown for me.

[Rob 3,106]

1 hour ago, DaveG38 said:

 If only she could magic up a 1726 half crown for me.

You just missed one in Zurich last week. Lot 1372.

[DaveG38 401]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

You just missed one in Zurich last week. Lot 1372.

The mind is willing, but the wallet isn't!!

[oldcopper 283]

21 hours ago, copper123 said:

I have little time for people who claim Charles was murdered (Only my opinion by the way )

While he was beheaded he had many times been asked to plead guilty and say sorry and he would be well looked after , he refused to see common sense and carried on with his ridiculous inalienable right of kings defence .

He remains a total prima donna and while George IV was probably the worst king  we ever had, Charles runs into second place along with his father in third

Historic people do get stereotyped of course. Charles I of course believed he was divine so why should he take orders from non-divine commoners? Not a likeable trait today of course (!) but thought processes several centuries ago would have been different. 

There was a drama about George IV and Wellington on BBC a few years ago. Wellington was portrayed as the wise elder statesman doling out paternalistic advice to the young buck George when he was Prince Regent. Only one problem with that - in real life George IV was 7 years older than the Duke of Wellington!

[Paddy 1,617]

Don't get me started on the film industry messing with historical fact! I gave up believing anything they portrayed after Braveheart.