rooneydog Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 Be gentlePlease can someone explain why this obverse looks so "bulky" in comparison to other short cross pennies I can view on line (ie is it real ) ?Thanks Quote
TomGoodheart Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 (edited) Bulky? Not sure quite what you mean RD. Looks genuine to my inexperienced eyes, though both softly struck and a little worn (The reverse is softly struck, suggesting the flan is concave on that side. Conversely, assuming the obverse design stood proud of the flan it would have been more exposed to wear. As I see it of course ...) . Edited August 22, 2015 by TomGoodheart Quote
Rob Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 I concur. No reason to suggest that it is iffy. Quote
rooneydog Posted August 22, 2015 Author Posted August 22, 2015 Thanks both - by bulky I mean the eye looks huge, the sceptre looks large and there appears very little space in the background, hopefully I am making sense. Quote
TomGoodheart Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 (edited) Ah, OK. I'm not an expert on the series but it looks like the normal variation you get with hammered coins to me: http://www.coinarchives.com/w/results.php?search=cnut Plus, wear can 'blur' or 'enlarge' details. Particularly on smaller coins. Remember the dot of the eye, for example, was probably formed by a pointed punch that was more cone shaped than uniform in thickness. Consequently as the detail wears (from A to C) you see more silver as the design becomes less sharp... If you see what I mean? . Edited August 22, 2015 by TomGoodheart Quote
rooneydog Posted August 22, 2015 Author Posted August 22, 2015 Thank you for the opinion and explanation Tom. Quote
TomGoodheart Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 Thank you for the opinion and theory Tom.Corrected it for you. Quote
Nordle11 Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 Thank you for the opinion and theory Tom.Corrected it for you. Haha don't be coy TG that was a great explanation! Quote
Coinery Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 Does this mean you have that error in your phone's dictionary as an accepted or first option, Rooney? Quote
copper123 Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 Anyone know where this EOFE mint was ? Just interested . I can usually work out where the mint is on later coins but this one has me stumped (prob because I dont have any books on the subject ) Quote
TomGoodheart Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 (edited) EOFERWIC (York) Which, if you draw out the vowels and remembering J is a Yuu and W is more a Vee sound, is not too far off Jórvík ... (I sometimes find reading the legends as if I have a Scandinavian accent gives me a clue. Handy those Nordic Noir programmes on TV!) Edited August 22, 2015 by TomGoodheart Quote
copper123 Posted August 22, 2015 Posted August 22, 2015 Civitas Eboraci was the later mintI am forgeting the norman influance on our language after 1066 Quote
rooneydog Posted August 22, 2015 Author Posted August 22, 2015 Not a cnut spelling error, surely? I did mention to the young lad at the auction, when I was viewing, that he should be careful of his spelling - it took about 3 minutes for the penny to drop.Does this mean you have that error in your phone's dictionary as an accepted or first option, Rooney? My mobile sits in my glovebox just in case I break down, it makes phone calls cost £6 from Tesco and came with £10 credit about 6 years ago, it still has £3.59 left. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.