Rob

It also throws up a bit of a spanner in the works. Much is made of the Cary commission as a means of explaining the location of these uncertain mint coins. However, the commission covered the 4 English border counties from Hereford north to Cheshire - Flintshire or any Welsh county would be outside the remit, yet the same engravers are used. Chester was striking prior to the 22nd May 1644, and there is a good case to be made for the SA marked die also pre-dating this. In a nutshell, although it is possible to place some coins in the appropriate timeframe, I can't actually find any evidence that the Cary commission was ever acted on, the coining seemingly being a case of as you were, wherever and whenever depending on which engraver was travelling with which army group or attached to a particular garrison. The awarding of a commission does not necessarily mean that it was enacted, just that the legal right was given. Fundamental to this argument is the absence of any identifiable initial mark. Bushell, when he obtained the right to strike at Aberystwyth, took the open book as his mark. I believe that virtually all of the marks can be explained - the county signatures copled with the engraver marks of 3 pellets, 4 pellets, rose, lis, helmet, tower etc leaving only the uninspiring 2 pellets or scroll(?) together with what is off flan as potential identifiers. It's not very convincing as a mark. Answer one question and you generate 2 more.

Yes, but it's huge. It is bigger than a crown based on the size of a sixpence.

Penny or rather shilling has dropped. Letter from Prince Rupert to Sir William Neale, commander of the Hawarden garrison from 3rd December 1643 to the end of the war, saying £100 for the provision of armies and ammunition for Col. Marrow (died 21st August 1644) and the victualising and furnishing of Hawarden Castle gives an inadvertent bonus. Although it doesn't specifically state that coins were struck at Hawarden, it certainly makes it a centre for the receipt of funds, be they cash or plate, and where the plate goes, the dies will follow. Allen shilling obv. B has a bird as the obverse mark. If the bird shillings were struck in conjunction with the instructions outlined in the letter, it likely limits the dates to 3rd Dec. 1643 - 13th March 1643/4, end of March - 15th May 1644 or 25th July to 20th August 1644. The first period would be in line with refurbishing the castle following its recapture, the second covers a period when Rupert was in Oxford, and so is the least likely, whilst the last period saw Rupert camped on the Welsh side of the Dee at Chester (so 4 miles from Hawarden), and actively recruiting at this point to replace the troops lost at Marston Moor. Outside these dates either Neale or Rupert or both were otherwise occupied elsewhere. A happy coincidence is that the arms of Flintshire are a cross with a bird in each angle. Given the use of the leopard head (Shropshire & Shrewsbury), gerb (Cheshire & Chester), tower (Worcester) and pear/pears (if the HC is a Worcester(shire) location), then it is a logical fit that the bird should represent Flintshire. Options are likely Hawarden, Flint, Mold, Rhuddlan or one of the ports used for landing troops, but Hawarden is closest to Chester where we know there was a rocker press available. The shilling is paired with 3 marked reverses - rev. 6 Boar's Head, rev. 7 Scroll(?), this mark is uncertain and rev. 8 lis. Trouble is that there may be no more than half a dozen examples of obverse B across all marks, making hard work establishing a chronology for the pairs. It makes sense in terms of timing, as Rupert was trying to raise troops from the area in July/August 1644 after his return from York and the boar's head appears on a reverse paired with the early halfcrown obv.I and the second reverse on the sixpence which post-dates the tower both sides die pair, which I believe were struck before the end of the first week of July 1644. It also leaves open the possibility that the lion used as a reverse mark on a couple of shillings and a half-crown reverse is significant, as is the boar's head mark seen on a few reverses. Denbighshire(?) for the first, or maybe the mark of Edward, Lord Herbert, who was granted a commission on 29th July 1644 to strike denominations current in the realm at an unspecified location (though almost certainly given in conjunction with his commission to raise 10000 troops from the Irish Confederates. The family arms bear three rampant lions on a halved blue and red spade shield. Similarly, the arms of Radnor have a boar's head in each quarter, though the possibility of a North Wales coat of arms hasn't been excluded. All this does nothing to show the HC halfcrown was struck at Hawarden, but at least it moves the shilling question forwards. The real bonus would be the creation of another box to fill. I can feel a trip to both Ruthin and Llandrindod Wells record offices coming on.

You are right, I didn't give it much thought. The largest thing with a garter reverse is a halfcrown, but the legend looks good for a 6d or 1/- with BRITT REX. Is it silver and what is the weight?

Too small to make out on screen, so inconclusive I'm afraid. The crossbars are often added to a V punch, though I'm sure that A punches also existed at the time because you see a mixture of strong crossbars of uniform relief compared to the V section and spidery ones at different angles which have clearly been added later.

Run over by a train probably.

Agreed. Is that a trace of a crossbar on the second V? i.e. an inverted A. Worth a check as it isn't recorded for the 3rd bust, but equally could be a random mark given the condition of the coin and the fact it isn't well struck up..

correct

Given there is a mark at the same point on both sides, the options are a thin flan at that point or slightly pinched. I would go for the latter given a few transverse marks to both sides.

or me?

Freeman 329A is the bright one, the one on the left is Norweb's F301 (1867 bronzed proof). In my opinion, the letter quality of the Heaton coin is inferior with shallower angles to the sides of the characters and the tops are slightly rounded. In hand the field is not as good as the RM coin for this or other years. I've got Nichoson's 1863 proof on the website, and the same criteria apply. https://www.rpcoins.co.uk/products/00003521

Not very seriously I won't. If I inadvertently come across something, then you could reasonably expect me to milk it, but o/w the only things I look for are the obvious things like wide/narrow date, die number, halfpenny numbers, open 3 or obvious legend errors etc. Anything not passing the audition gets weighed in. There are too many low grade things out there which may or may not be worth something, but by definition are unlikely to be, which are better off melted. And I'm not going to start checking every Elizabeth II penny I come across. It's bad enough dealing with worn bun heads.

It is the response you give when offered an extremely rare 1967 penny for no more than a few pounds.

Mostly not, but Hobson's Choice, you bet.

My F329A is ex-Freeman. He says proof, I say not. And so the discussion rumbles on.

I think we can safely say the description is a lie. I don't think Mr Brand would appreciate being linked to that one.

A hotel worker? You would need to top up your wages somehow in Central London. The address has been used for a while now, so can't see it being a paying resident.

From Schneider's article in the BNJ vol.29 p.101-127; Group D, bust 7a, crown type 9, shield type 4, reverse crown type 6, harp n and a note that crown is frequently struck over bell on either or both sides. I have a group D with the tun over anchor both sides. As yours but with a slightly different reverse crown and harp.

It's crown over bell both sides.

TBH, as long as the person concerned isn't causing financial grief to themselves or their family, it doesn't really matter how much is paid for something. Clearly, if a purchaser is pleased with the acquisition then that should be a box ticked. After all, this country is full of houses with a couple cars on the front pavement that have cost something approaching the market value of the house. Apparent frittering of hard earned wealth isn't the prerogative of buyers at coin auctions - some people waste their money when there is no requirement for an instantaneous decision. The logical alternative would be paying an exact amount for a coin that has been correctly assessed with regards to condition, i.e. graded, and then a fixed price applied and paid............... hang on a minute. We all find it easy to reference another person's in terms of ourselves, but we aren't the person spending the money. We've all bid a little bit more at some time or other.

There's 3 different 1569 dies for anyone doing a die study.

Looks ok to me. Third coin below uses the same punch. Inverted 6 is a 9 and vice-versa.

The O is far too big - it's partly off flan. On a more serious note, it isn't very convincing.

I suppose £5.50 is cheaper than the cost of getting some liquid nitrogen to pop the middle out. Not sure why I would want to though.

So, how much would you be willing to pay for it if bought from a dealer? Or perhaps the question ought to be how many dealers are likely to stock things like this, and correctly identified? If you ask a customer what they are looking for, they will inevitably say just browsing, so it is always going to be difficult to know how popular a niche is. I say with a large measure of confidence that individual areas are inhabited by a very small number of specialists, with the type collector far surpassing any specialist group. Just maybe, the tidal wave of 50p, £1 and £2 collectors are closing in on the type collector, but suspect that is transient and driven mainly by the tabloids.