Coinery

Now there's the rub, actually finding a CR-a sixpence reverse! BCW state there's just one single die known, meaning there probably aren't many surviving, legible, examples from it! With the reverse on my coin having the Cross over Eglantine privy mark, it must be one of the two reverses mentioned (unknown varieties aside), both of which are 8 over 7's...but one.........but one also has a 6 As you say, get an example of the CR-a single-die reverse and it's child's play! Anyone?

Sorry I'm all out of those. I've got the lads in China working on a new batch round the clock but I don't think they'll be ready in time. I guess it won't be so long before we see some you-tube footage of a factory floor somewhere, with a team of lads sat around with hammers? Thank God, for the most part, hammered's are unique enough that more than a few releases of the same kind would soon be picked-up Does this count as two entries

Thanks for the comments! If you were looking for an example of a particular reverse, bearing in mind there is only the one die, where would you start? This is where I struggle with all this, not understanding due process. Until I hit this forum I never even realised there was life outside a Spink's catalogue...10+ years of blundering around in the dark! Not that it's any lighter now, just more engaging! It's quite crazy how it all catches hold of you, I got quite excited to see Rose 18, on your top image, right alongside my avatar and thought, WOW, it's even orientated the same way on that particular obverse!

Couldn't make that an Elizabeth I shilling I suppose?

As a detectorist, just about anything can be considered "silver", granted, I use a cheap Garrett Ace 250 but aluminum cans will go off like a silver coin, copper-nickel will ring in as "silver" and gold rings will ring up as pulltabs. Anyone who uses a metal detector for metallic analysis is doing it wrong. I would believe Pewter would ring up like silver also. I have to say, this is my thinking too, but he didn't seem to want to budge on the situation. Another buyer bites the dust, I guess?

You've got a sharp eye for spotting the eBay irregularities! Presumeably he outbid the genuine top bidder, and then cancelled the transaction with himself, all ready to live another day in paradise!

Not me, no. I spotted it but I'm saving my pennies! And I'm never sure what ebay thinks of listings ending if there are bids on a item. Not that they can do anything, but a bid is supposed to be a contract ... It's happened to me dozens of times! I put an opening bid on something, just to keep an eye on it sometimes, and I can forget about it for weeks, until one day I spot it in my ended listings!

I think it's good! Yes, watching it, but it'll probably be bought OFF the 'bay platform, can't imagine he'd be able to resist the offers! Are you going to have a go if it survives the 9-days?

Rubbish, that's an Eeeeeeeeeeeee, everyone can see it clearly for themselves! What balderdash...pah! I don't suppose you could paste me up your source-link for that old text, or PM it to me, i think it's great and more than a tad beautiful? I have a plan!

was that a lavender blue coin by any chance?

About 4-5 months' ago! He said he's going to let me know where he got it from, a dealer apparently????? Isn't it a shame you can't follow these things up with the buyers anymore!

What's the likelihood of the eBay groat being the original the replicas were made from? I'm having a good long thread of emails going with its seller, who remains convinced it's genuine! It went for £50ish! It weighs 2.05g (so a tad heavy), but tests positive for silver according to his metal detector! Now I know these modern detectors are quite advanced, but can they mistake what I think is pewter for silver? My fake was too thick, filed at the edge, was soapy, etc, he said his is none of these things. I think he's genuinely interested in what's going on!

Me neither....hmmmmmmm I am just SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO glad I asked the question!

Excellent, I came very close to expanding upon that joke!

They only did these in Gold/Silver and Bronze. 200 Gold, 1500 Silver and 2000 Bronze, then the dies were apparently destroyed under supervision according to the little booklet that came with it Proof, if ever it were needed, that there is a God! Incidently, how did you manage to acquire the status 'not a God, just a man'? Are you in?

I'm still excited about the day that I can begin to actively seek out those magical and 'perfect' pieces, and start work on a collection. Finances have never, and still don't, permit me to tie-up thousands in a collection (not yet, at least, though I am beginning to see daylight). I am never sure where my loyalties lie in coins, but I do have a weakness for Elizabeth I (all metals), copper [any], and William III. Also, more recently I've taken an interest in Edward VII, Edward I and, shockingly for me, George V. So I guess I will evntually (when our narrowboat is finally organised) be flitting back and forth between the early hammered of Edward (the sheer variety intrigues me), the early-milled copper of Charles II, Elizabeth anything (gold, once I've satisfied myself I know enough about it), silver and copper of William III, some Edward VII and, when I'm skint [considering the above list, this will be always] but feeling itchy, there'll always be dear old G5! THAT'S THE PLAN! Though I will likely (very likely) drop off one or two areas that I'm struggling in (probably William would be the first to go) and focus on the others! My speculated collection will have my fingers stretched across a lot of numismatic pies, so I'll probably knacker myself up and get nowhere! Oh, and for some reason, I have a couple of one-off desires in EF...a Mary Groat (just bought the cracked one from Castlecoins [rockinghorsepoo], purely for the bust), and a Charles I siege piece please! THAT'S ALL!

I think definitely C or E, something with a curving left edge, at least! Let us know Debbie when an expert in calligraphy nails it for you!

Isn't it E R?

And the crosses on these two images (currently for sale on ebay, so some free advertising...my justification), which Debbie brought to our attention a while back, are very different again, namely, punched rather than the usual scratches. Interestingly, this coin is marked on the reverse too, I don't recall seeing that before? I also think Seuk's pictures would add weight to the proposal that the crosses are not connected with testing for authenticity. Any connection with the plague?

170865769243 Nice beautiful script!

When I first asked this question, I thought there would be a single, well-documented, and conclusive answer to this phenomenon! Apparently not, making me desire the historical rationale even more so! It's got to have been recorded in some old tome somewhere!

Most of the time, but there are exceptions, and if a cross must be assumed to be deliberate which would help the accounting theory. My only difficulty with the accounting theory is I can't see what accounting purpose it would serve, unlike the marking of a pile of BoE notes that are bound together! I suppose that if done for accounting purposes you would expect to see multiple crosses too. The earliest I have seen a cross is on Edward VI fine coinage, which immediately post-dates the debased period and could be a hangover from this period. Could it be that crossed coins were those that failed the recoinage test in 1696? I've just made a quick check on those coins with a cross that I have weights for and the closest any came to full weight was a James I 3rd bust shilling at 5.87g with the next at 5.75g. The lightest was 5.39g. I also have an Elizabeth I shilling with a star mark at 5.92g. We also have to bear in mind that some marks could be graffiti and completely unrelated to the underlying reason for the majority of marks. At the recoinage, those coins of full weight were punched through the centre to signify they were of full weight (and therefore value) and could be used for transactions for a limited time. In the event of discovering a pierced coin was underweight, the person who tendered the coin was liable to make up the difference in value. Do we have any other weights for crossed coins which would back up this theory? i.e. does anyone have crossed coins that are full weight and if so how many? Marking the field makes the cross obvious, so one would assume that it was done as a means of identification. Yes, I speculated (above) that it may have been something to do with the Recoinage. I think it is the most convincing explanation. If the marks were recoinage-related, wouldn't we have clear evidence in historical documents, particularly as one would presume the marked coins continued to circulate, if only for a short period? It would have to have been broadly publicised (declaration?) to the general public, who would be using the coins, wouldn't it?

It is Hus and his fat thumbs Single Malt and working in the small hours, that's my guess!

Most of the time, but there are exceptions, and if a cross must be assumed to be deliberate which would help the accounting theory. My only difficulty with the accounting theory is I can't see what accounting purpose it would serve, unlike the marking of a pile of BoE notes that are bound together!