Coinery

Aye, 'tis true, Rob, you're right of course! It's an historic castle that I really need!

Absolutely love items like this! I've seriously got to sit on my hands at the auctions! look forward to seeing pictures of the 'sensitively' restored item. I personally think little is more when it comes to restoration of items that were never meant to look glamourous in the first place. It's a difficult balance to get right, where it is finished, yet still carries with it the weight of its age and history. i keep promising myself a Tudor coffer chest, they're remarkable affordable. Occasionally you can even find them with the original date and betroval chiselled into them. Love history!

Goodness, only just picked this up. So sorry for your loss, David. The words we all variously conjour up to connect with you is not the important detail; more important is the fact we, and so many others, have all wanted to reach out to you...that's what really counts in life, m'friend! Stay safe out there! Blessings ?

That's truly blood boiling! We're going to find this kind of abuse happening over and over again, to what will amount to, in most cases, decades of backed up data. As this kind of thing happens more and more, and they chuck in a few task-orientated 'updates' to keep us busy or befuddled, there will come a point when we haven't either the time or capacity to manage it, so we will then just have to choicelessly hand over the cash for a peaceful life! Seriously unethical. We get focused on ridding ourselves of one kind of piracy, energy provision, monopolies, etc., and new ones enter the back door at an ever increasing rate. my particular bugbear is mobile phone companies who can hold you to ransom on a contract, yet 'ethically' breach it endlessly themselves with poor service and endless price increases, which ultimately you cannot then say no to! Give me an island, a bag of seeds, and a bow and arrow!

One of the most distinctive Edward crowns on this one! ?

Hah! I can still barely afford one or the other at the moment, Peter! Getting there, though! ?

This is an awesome book! ? https://www.galata.co.uk/store.asp?storeAction=showDetail&stockID=6511&searchStr=Brown%20comber

Not sure about the overdate, but agree with the single obverse PM, which is correct for rose 18 anyhow. The lions and lis (62,41, respectively) don't rule out a '72 die, but I'm going for AC-2A:a which is actually the rarer of the known pairings for the acorn anyway! ?

They were of course all 6th issue, I just couldn't remember the sequence the PMs were in. The no-mark HP is the earliest in the lineup, occurring instead of the bell PM, so would be right for the complete portcullis punch. I'll get m' coat! ?

The point I was trying to make is your's may not be a no-mark coin? I can't recall without the book the period of the no-mark, but it would need to be early, as your portcullis is very much intact!

In bed and can't quite, off the top of my head, remember the chronology of the no-mark HP. The single portcullis punch has been a blessing in determining the the dates of these coins! The portcullis failed so distinctly and was equally repaired in distinctive stages.

Anyone ever handled one of those 1869's, they look amazing? Are they clearly 'novelty' in hand?

Straight off the die!

Was just responding when wife came in from a stressful late shift in ITU! Tomorrow it is then! :-) Such a lovely coin!

The examples are endless! However, more importantly, what about the Elizabeth shillings that are scribed with either an X or very often XII? They are the Shilling coins I would argue are the most often engraved this way and, interestingly, the first and most confusing of the new denomination/shillings that where introduced...and most likely the reason for the XII in the reign of JI and all the shillings going forward

Yes, but very few if any of these marks are drawn as crosses and, regardless, were they ever held as a spiritual statement, or used as a singularly specific denomination for passing on a spiritual message? Also, if you had a valuable comodity/coin in that period, would you seriously deface it with your spiritual or political statement/beliefs/values before passing it on? Wouldn't that make it a troublesome coin to spend if that were true?

Why don't we see 6ds significantly defaced with crosses from the same period, except on the rare occasion where perhaps it's used to defraud a 6d? Otherwise it's an exclusive phenomenon to the Shilling! X/XII scratched on shillings, which doesn't draw me to defacement...instead, at best, a ritual from J6 that had to deal with unmarked Elizabeth shillings, which then culturally continued thereafter, as best I've understood it to date! X or X|| scratched on an unmarked or worn Shilling (in the masses and consistencies with which it happens), with all the other variants (fraud, mistake) inbetween, is a no-brainer for me. I'm sticking with the sensible tudor, and subsequent Stuart community solution to big coins, which had to deal with clipped coins, and the introduction to the peasant communities of a new denomination...makes social and numismatic sense to me!

In which case I humbly, though unconvincingly, stand down! ? It's been a long-standing and numismatically debated subject on here, without any strong evidential conclusion to convince me otherwise..which sensibly leaves me remaining in the scratch for ease of identification in a candlelit environment camp! :-)

I'm still unresolved on this, thinking that a lot of shillings (unmarked) from Elizabeth onwards (and also where future xii coins were worn) were ritualistically scratched/scribed with crosses (and often XII to coroborate)to ID them in the new shilling culture, right up until W3 of course. It happens too frequently, and in the language of Shilling, and on just the one denomination, to mean very much else in my humble opinion! not succinctly put, but I have had a beery day off! :-)

What a messy Acorn, Rob...only just picked up, because of this thread, that the Ac/Er is only known (so far) on the straight date 73! Be interesting to get a close up look at the Rose for any Rose over, because your coin has to be a good candidate for Ac/Er both sides?

Elizabethan coinage for some strange reason never seems to command the same prestige as the other Tudors, despite being arguably a classic and clearly lengthy period of the dynasty. I personally love it, and your rarer acorn coin, Rob, must ride extremely close to being one of the best about...at least I haven't seen one (since you first presented it on here) that I've desired more! a beautiful, beautiful, coin! Now you've inspired me to take a cursory look for a die match! I'll switch the antiquated old dell on later and take a look! :-)

Nice find! ? This is bust 5A with rose 18 which, luckily for you, isn't a combination presently known with the ermine mark, leaving only Acorn or eglantine, which UNFORTUNATELY for you share the same devices for their reverses (lis 41, lion 62, etc., etc.), which makes them impossible to separate without finding a die match So, in view of that fact, and that I can't see this being anything other than a 73, you have a 4th coinage 6d with Acorn or Eglantine PM.

OK, just reread the title! So, a sixpence, meaning a BCW reverse die EG-e

Nice clear example of 5/4 looking at the top of the lions and breaks in the shield I'm guessing this is a sixpence? whether a sixpence or 3d, both are well documented with 5/4, and with the Eglantine being one of the most prolific marks of the reign it's not rare. However, it's great to have unambiguous examples of these overdates...great find, can we see the full coin?

Not for me, Sir!