Rob

You've seen it before, but here's a gVF type 2.

Nor did anyone else. That's why it was unsold. They were all overgraded.

Virtually all the York coins were struck in the period 28th January 1642/3 to 28th January 1643/4. The type 3 halfcrowns were later than the type 2s based on the wear to the horse punch which was the same for both types. The Briot style shilling dies were later still according to the wear seen on the punches. We know that the Pocklington Hoard contained a few dozen type 3s which were fresh as from the mint when found. The most likely reason for their concealment would have been the breaking of the Hull siege by Parliamentary troops on the 11th October 1643 and their subsequent advance to around Stamford Bridge, thus threatening York, at which point the Royalists retired to the city for the winter and left on the 28th January 1643/4 to head north and confront the Scots Covenenters who were advancing on Newcastle. Whilst it doesn't confirm these months as the time they were struck, it is likely that more silver would have been available during the summer when they were enjoying success on the battlefield than the following winter when contemporary diaries record that there was little coining taking place due to lack of silver. Once the Northern Army left in the January, troop numbers in York dropped from about 10,000 to 8 or 900 which also demanded less coin. The cavalry left for the north while the remaining troops were foot soldiers, suggesting the shilling was a more practical denomination at this point in time. A cavalryman earned 2/6d per day, the foot soldier a shilling - when the got paid which wasn't often.

Struck most likely between August 1643 and the 28th January 1643/4, with August or September the favourites.

The testoon was the anglicised version of the Italian testone. A quick wiki check suggests the testone ceased to be struck in the1550s. The nordic skilling wasn't introduced until 1625, so looks to have been adopted from the English terminology. The scilling was an ancient accounting term, just as the merk was, and is likely to be the origin of the value's useage. As for the changeover in terminology, mint records covering the commission to John Bowes at Durham House of 29th Jan 1548/9 refer to the shilling and half-shilling, and the conversion of testoons (i.e. the debased HenryVIII issues). It seems likely that the change was initially aimed at distinguishing between the old and new coins. Subsequently, there is reference to shillings of varying fineness, so the use of testoon was restricted to the issues they were trying to call in and melt down, and is referred to as such when the maximimum levy for exchanging the old money was set at 2d in every 20s.

Fashion, I suspect

More pennies. Received in change.

When you get to 100,you get sent to Broadlands courtesy of the Queen? Or should that be Broadmoor? NURSE!!

French 1793 2 sols, but I've no idea what mint as it is flat at that point.

Wow, what a revamp! 1368 in my 2013 copy is 25 65!That's because they split them out. The majority are 5b2 where the price hasn't moved. 5b1 is the rare one, but presumably this kept the 1368 designation as 5b1 comes before 5b2. Another case of it helps to know what you are looking for. anyone working with an old book and minimal knowledge would refrain from spending £100 on a 5b1 because the book only says Vb

1368 is 135, 450

1500p is closer. 25 fine, 65 VF

Almost. S1368A. The crown has pellet ends, not fleurs

I make it a 5b2, DAVI ON LVNDE. Interesting that the N diagonal has its own diagonal. I see the odd example on the last page of North, but not a huge number. X is normal

Any letter is only going to be as sharply cut as the quality of the punch. A worn letter punch would have former right angles rounded off, I would have thought, so maybe we are talking older and newer punches. The E looks more rounded than the C.

Brilliant. What's disconcerting is how any of the images could ever be confused with coins. A single image, ok, but to add 5 wrong images beggars belief.

I'm assuming the coin is quite worn? If it is worn, then unless it is the rare 1* obverse you will not devalue it by cleaning. Just because it is a dark colour doesn't mean it is a good idea to clean it. Coins are valued on the degree of wear, the less there is, the higher the value for that variety. Little or no wear and a dark colour just means you have a toned coin which is quite acceptable. What you cannot do is restore lustre to a toned coin. The best you will get is a cleaned and/or polished surface which will devalue it as collectors would not in general be interested.

This is the page that shows the Ed.II letters and crowns. Fig. 5 is described as angular. The base is round on this one too.

Based on what is written in North, I would say an angular back. Fig.5 on p.35 is referred to on the following page as angular back and it matches the C profile.

I think it's ok. Mark is halved rose and castle at 7pm after SPI

As you will be aware, the penny was struck in 3oz 2dwt silver during the reign of Edward VI through to the end of Philip & Mary. Edward VI is stright forward with the London coins bearing the scallop mark and York the pierced mullet, the legends being [CIVITAS] LONDON and EBORACI respectively. The coins of P&M are slightly more complicated. Mint marks are halved rose and castle or castle for the London coins. Pennies (at 3oz fine) were also issued for use in Ireland and bear the rose mark, though were struck in York and read CIVITAS EBORACI. They were struck from called in base coinage of Henry VIII and Edward VI after being further debased. An example of the York penny struck during Ed.VI is below. The London penny of P&M with halved rose and castle looks like this

Thanks Colin & Joey.Both the single coin on the database and the one pointed out by Joey have the halved rose and castle mark. The castle is very clear, being in higher relief to the rose sticking out of the left side and is of a consistent size when compared to others with the same degree of clarity. This must suggest a single punch was used for the mark. Compare that with my halved rose mark and you will see that my coin has a very blundered mark which is typical of filled and recut dies. The castle appears to have a rose shape superimposed on the coin, i.e. the castle was punched to a shallower depth compared to the rose. This would be expected if the die had been hardened previously. Surely on a forum where the number of penny collectors is on an industrial scale there must be someone with an example. The silence is deafening.I'll add this Here also Rob Thanks Dave

Welcome. You have joined the inmates at the asylum.

If it is mark free don't dismiss it. Any gold (apart from modern RM output) without blemishes is always going to be worth a premium, and rightly so.

Try a gold quarter stater