Leaderboard

One of the subjects that has occupied my mind for a few years concerns a faulty rocker press that was most evident at Chester in 1643-4, but also appears at other locations. In all cases you have a consistent size of design on one side and a varying size on the other. This was the subject of an article I wrote in the Circular for January 2014. In the case of the CHST below halfcrowns you find that the reverse inner circle remains a consistent size, whereas the height only of the obverse inner circle is constant whilst the horizontal dimension varies considerably, the circle varying from nearly round to fairly eliptical as seen in the image below of the current Spink plate coin. By measuring the height and width ratios of the inner circle dimensions on both sides and with reference to each other, it can be shown that there is no variation in the vertical height at the widest point, so the horizontal displacement variation has to be due to a slippage in the rocker press mechanism. If both sides of the coin appear to stretch in unison then it is not indicative of a faulty press as it could be down to the dies. The stretching is clearly seen in the relative shapes of the letter R on the obverse. The R of BR at 6 o'clock is normally formed, yet the two Rs in HIR (sic) and REX are slanted, but the same punches would have been used for all three characters. Other halfcrown issues to show a displacement in one side of the coin relative to the other include the Chester declaration and prostrate gerb, HC and 'Welsh Marches'. This is quite useful as it is possibly the only faulty press meaning a chronology can be established. In the case of the two other Chester issues the location is not in question, however, the location of 'HC' and 'Welsh Marches' has not been positively identified. Firstly, the myth that HC is 'Hartlebury Castle' needs to be debunked as the place was no more than a large house, unable to be fortified and the 'siege' lasted for one day only in May 1646. This is fairly incompatible with the production of a siege coinage. It is also inconvenient that dies which use punches from York would be lying around for over two years. 'HC' therefore appears to be an earlier issue, and given there are coins showing the same slippage seen on the CHST below coins, suggests a timing not far removed and a location which may or may not be close by. In the case of the Welsh Marches coins, there appears to have been an attempt to eliminate the slippage because the two dies are set in a position such as to never be seen aligned, and the amount of slippage is reduced. Discuss.

Hi folks was looking at some pennies online as you do and I also know photographs can be so deceiving So air with a little caution. But some things really stood out to me and I wondered if my explanation could be a valid reason for what I am seeing. Both F10 Pennies but with some noticeable differences. The shape of the head at the top coin on left a gentle meander to the bun. In stark contrast to the very sharp curved style on coin on the right. Also the hair at the nape looks to be increase in depth more full overall. the rose in the middle of the shawl decoration is larger on the left coin as is the leaves to the left and the center rose at the bottom of the bust. Also notice a large section of the lower mantle is missing. Also there seems to be a flaw on the neck on the left coin which doesn't appear on the right hand coin. The bridge of the nose where the curve starts. On coin 2 it starts slightly lower to give the nose a more demure appearance. So after looking over both I came to an assumption that someone wasn't happy with the state of the die make up and reworked it or touched it up to make Victoria look less bulky and fill the mantle and remove the flaw on the neck. What do you think ? Thanks as always

So it does, well spotted! It also means that there's another three designs to look out for!

I also did a google search for tokens by Allen & Moore but nothing came up

I was going to bid on this one too but like you it went above my limit. it looks exquisite and I'm guessing it's a card token of some kind as the reverse shield has what looks like a spade in the centre of it

Hi Looking at the pictures you have shown, I note that the one on the left is not completely circular , and that the top right side of the coin is some what straighter than on the right side coin . In fact the one on the right seems wider across the middle of the coin than it is from top to bottom. this I think may account for the different shape at the back of Victorias head. Also the left coin seems to have a weaker image than the right coin, as there is a larger bare patch below the bust , possibly due to die ware , and the high part of the die, [ i e what shows as the field on the coin], has possible been re-polished serving to reduce the depth of that part of the die which gives the queens head. At the same time may be retooling took place to parts of the die , and may be to the rose. just my thoughts, possibly a load of tosh Terry