Rob

We are talking about a war situation here, not peacetime, and it appears to be accompanied by an absence of regular mint controls such as a pyx trial, for which there is no evidence. The engraver will accompany the troops, who were only paid when a supply of coin or plate silver was available to coin. Levies were made on the local populations to pay the troops defending them, or wealthy individuals were encouraged to donate plate (which was how most wealth was held) for the King's cause. This was then either distributed or melted to produce coin. Royalist mint coin production appears to be a real roller coaster with periods of inactivity followed by frenetic activity when demand rose. Somehow, they had to find coin for the troops, who were always owed money, and this was satisfied on an occasional basis. Clearly, if coin was available there would be no reason to produce coins, but with the war effort effectively funded by the wealthy aristocracy, they held plate which was donated and melted down. e.g in Besly's 1992 article, Vyvyan's mint record books at Exeter list the quantity of donated plate and from whom in detail. The evidence of incompletely erased underlying detail tells us that dies were reworked. The main Royalist denomination was the halfcrown, because they always had a higher ratio of cavalry to foot soldiers than did Parliament. Half a crown was a day's pay (assuming they did actually get paid). However, the larger dies used on the pound, half pound and triple unite were redundant by 1644, probably following the closure of the Oxford Parliament in April 1644 and the dispersal of those Royalist forces to York and the south-west, though crowns continued to be struck at Exeter until the following year. This left dies with a diameter of approx. 2" with no application requiring the full surface area. I'm sure they did mark out a circle for the legend, just that I don't think they were concerned about complete accuracy of dimensions. Hammered coins are regularly struck off centre, so there isn't the compelling demand for the neat obverse and reverse you see on milled coins and a discrepancy of a few mms in diameters would not be as important as paying the men. Holding stock is a reasonable premise in the case of a fixed mint, but in the Civil War you have a mobile facility. There is plenty of evidence for die movement between locations over what can only be a period of months. Punches appear to move in groups, which is what you expect as they would be the property of the engraver, just as engineers today would have their own set of tools. Their punches didn't contain a complete set of letters and numbers as would be desirable in a fixed location, rather, many characters are composite made from smaller shaped punches. The number of engravers involved is small, probably only 6 or 8 based on the punch sets and marks employed, and they would all follow the troops. Only Shrewsbury then Oxford, York, Bristol and Truro then Exeter can lay a claim to be 'permanently open', and even that was only a little over a year in the case of York. Oxford as the capital had a significant full time garrison from December 1642 through to surrender in 1646. Vyvyan's mint at Truro in 1642-3 and then Exeter from Sept 1643 on can reasonably be said to be open throughout, but the surprise defeat of Essex at Lostwithiel and the elimination of Parliamentary forces from the south-west in August 1644 resulted in the demand for coined specie collapsing. That is why there are 1645/4 crown dies. The sudden reduction in demand meant the dies stayed on the shelf for a year until the war revisited the area. With the continual movement of troops around the country, there would inevitably be areas where it was impossible to source the metal bar required to produce dies, so reusing them was a necessity. Where they went was dictated by military activity and wasn't ordained in advance, so prior notice of an intent to purchase bar stock couldn't be given. Again, it works ok in a fixed location such as the Royal Mint, but not in deepest Shropshire when you happen to have overrun a Parliamentary supporter's mansion, and purloined his plate. Coin production in this instance is reactive and not proactive.

Dies were sometimes cut on a piece of diestock that was a larger diameter capable of accommodating the design for a bigger denomination. We know that die faces were ground down once deemed sufficiently degraded and a new die engraved on the end of the bar. That new die may or may not have been the same denomination as previous. In the case of the Oxford 1645 reverse 7 above, the two diagonal flaws on the bottom line below the declaration along with the cluster of dots in the centre are quite likely to be the remains of its previous incarnation where the detail wasn't fully ground away. As to why they got the diameter wrong, I think it is a case of die worn out/broken, so quickly recut a new one and get production going again. The quality of the detail on many of the known dies has all the hallmarks of hurried work. You do get the occasional one where more care has clearly been taken, but the overriding reason they were making Royalist issues was for the immediate payment of troops who would almost certainly be there for a limited time only, so speed was of the essence. You only have to look at a significant proportion of yesterday's coins to see the crude polishing lines on many dies that tell you they we made in hurried circumstances. So, in summary, I would think the reason the size was wrong is down to the fact that they would be more interested in getting production going than looking for precision in the design. It is particularly obvious on some Shrewsbury shillings, where the 3 line declaration clearly shows a shilling was the intended denomination, but the die is hopelessly oversized. See scan below where the obverse is full, but the reverse is significantly short. I wrote an article on the Chester halfcrowns to this effect and also the identification of a faulty rocker press in the final Circular of January 2014 where I could show that the CHST below obverse die was recut to make the Declaration issue obverse. The important observation was that the die was recut with the new detail significantly offset from the position of the previous to the extent that the only rational explanation was a die face suitable for a larger diameter. Coincidentally it also gave an immediate explanation for why the Declaration reverse die broke from the offset or very soon after.

And while we are in the business of education, the obverse of the Oxford 1645 F-7 halfcrown is effectively full flan. Compare that with the reverse above and you can see that the reverse was engraved to a larger diameter than the obverse. The diameter of the obverse is 37.5mm at its widest point, confirming that the reverse must have been engraved on a piece of diestock of sufficient diameter to accommodate a physically larger denomination such as a triple unite, crown, half-pound or pound. Understanding that answers a whole lot of questions.

I suppose it could be rotated, but the 5 following appears to be a composite figure, so assumed the 4 was too given all the 42s and 43s are not from a single punch. The small 4 used on some dies from 44-46 looks to be a single punch. If you compare the A11 with the F7, you can see the 5 is completely different, despite, I believe, being by the same engraver.

Well done. That's a decent enough coin, and reasonably priced. Certainly compared to lot 68.

Many characters are composites of small straight and curved punches, so reversing a 4 is easy.

Couldn't afford to bid on anything before lot 100 in case I got carried away and won something for a few K leaving me bereft of funds. Charles I Boar's head mark is not the easiest to find. The largest BH population is the W/SA 6d reverse 1 with nine; two of which are in the BM, one in the ANS and another two which are highly undesirable leaving 4 to choose from, but I've already got a tower both sides sixpence. There is a B-6 shilling in the BM, but I've never seen another and in any case I need a B obverse shilling for the bird mark, leaving just the two halfcrowns above to choose from. Hobson's Choice really given I don't know where the Ryan coin is.

A few hundred pounds and you can cover most bases.

Henry VII coins use trefoils, saltires and rosettes for stops where these are applied. You need more literature.

It was experimental. The testoons also show a wide range of dies. A testoon reverse was also paired with a groat obv.

The other greyhound reverse die is the Motcomb coin (below) with the im at 9 o'clock. As far as I am aware, both these two are unique for the reverse die. At the time of the Montagu sale my coin was considered unique, but a handful have appeared since then, including those in SCBI 23. The above was considered rare enough to be illustrated in Montagu (wax on rev) and although subsequent coins have come to light, GH groats in either pure or muled form are still extremely rare.

Guaranteed to be a lot of dies. Potter & Winstanley note 16 obverse dies for no mark, lis and Greyhound's Head, but give up when it comes to Cross Crosslet. For what it is worth, they list 7 dies each for no mark and Lis, plus another 2 for Greyhound's Head. Crosslet is much more common. As far as the reverses go, you can reasonably expect a minimum of twice the number of obverse dies. Greyhound's Head being the rarest and hence the simplest case, the sylloge has an example of dies 15/16 (nearly identical) plus 3 GH reverses from 2 dies including muled marks. Add to that my GH rev. (below) plus another not in the Ashmolean gives a total of 4 GH rev. dies I know for certain. You are unlikely to be looking at more than another one or two reverses, if they do indeed exist. A back of the fag packet calculation assuming 1:2 obv:rev gives a total of 50 or so rare mark dies for both sides, plus a guesstimate of say 100 crosslets would give a total of 150ish tentative dies for all marks. If someone wants to do the survey, then we can plumb in the numbers and obtain a more precise estimate of the number of dies.

Not 115 individual dies, but coins. Some dies are shared, and no, I'm not going to work out the exact number. In any case I know the list is not exhaustive.

Not strictly mine, but an octagonal marked Potosi 4R that I sold a few years ago and recently bought back in. Rare coin.

Plenty of dies exist for the tentative issue, and a shedload more for the 3 band crown. The height of the bust varies. There are 27 tentatives in SCBI 23 (Henry VII coins in the Ashmolean), and a total of 115 profile groats of both types.

Looking for a Guatemala, Chile and the two Spanish mints.

and the reverse

Lima 8 Reales

I've got one of those too. Maybe not 45000, but probably 10000 in a 6' high pile of boxes.

I expect at least one die would have been made for each denomination for the coming year. After all, it is only the reverse that's new. After that, it is just a question of testing it.

Well done Sherlock.

What figures were used at the time to compile inflation? January sales clear the decks for the new year's stock - when restocking you would think it a good time to introduce the latest models/designs which are things that normally command a premium. i.e. is the upturn in inflation in March/April a function of business cycles based on the above with lower than average prices being replaced by higher than average prices? I can't see the inflation being related to the tax year for many items.

It is E/R in terms of relief. The R is much lower relief.

Of which probably the best example is the 1817 GEOE shilling. There isn't a person on the planet who would replace the correct R with an E.