Coinery

Cor, you ARE da man, Mr Pearce!

Your's?

Wow, that's an amazing freak of a coin! Blimey, you don't get many of those to the pound! That'll shake Peter out of his bed!

It'll be the first bit to wear off!

I've had a persistent cough since Boxing Day! Went to the GP a fortnight ago, had blood tests and an X-ray the following morning...now here's the excellent bit, I had a text confirming my chest x-Ray was clear that same afternoon, less than 5 hours after I left the hospital! That's what I call an awesome service! We do have to remember though that the private work of a lot of the consultants does bring in revenue to the NHS hospitals as well!

I like it too. Got to pacify the Scots somehow, even it that means giving them a micron higher relief thistle!

That's the big problem though isn't it? Ultimately, you have to dip your toe in the water!No-one could ever describe the colours red or blue to someone who's blind!

Understood! Nothing's easy in coins! It would be no fun at all if it was too easy...he says, not quite sure about the truth of it?

Crickey, hope you're OK Peter? That all sounds very strange, surely not connected to your diabetes, not diet-managed type 2 at least? Your chemistry must've been all over the place if they were testing you that regularly? Any further tests, or are you sorted now? Stay safe, Stuart

I'm stumped then! Have you done a big Internet trawl for further images? I'll have a surf around later this week, it's interesting...AND hammered, so must be worth a couple hours of browsing!

Looks the same on the laptop! I'd feel reasonably confident (?photographs) in saying that the lustre has long since gone on this one, just some residual stuff around the devices? I can dig the Peck out tomorrow, but I'm sure you'll get a full attribution well ahead of then. They are lovely coins, I prefer them to the bronze issue.

I'm going to have to get the laptop on!

Gosh, you'll have to forgive me for this, Paul, but that looks like it couldn't possibly have a smidge of lustre left? Is that a really bad photo, or are the surfaces as abraided as they appear in the image? I hope you don't mind me being frank?

Another point, isn't that little drop-tail off the end of the proposed C part of the additional punched in shape? It certainly looks as though it could be, which would negate a C?

OK, so sharp/angled or flat, they tend not to be knobbly, if it's a punch intended to be a letter?Something is definitely, and consistently, going on with this punch, and the findings will be interesting, whatever they are? I guess there's little point in me trawling the net for new images, as I'm sure you've already covered that one off?

My main concern re it being an intended letter, is that it doesn't have a flat top, at least not before it wears flat? In the top row (no. 1), the beginnings of the shape is clearly knobbly in appearance, with the C only looking progressively C-like, as it wears flat in pictures 4 and 6. Definitely high-grade examples will be needed to be found! Is it a possibility that a second punch was cut to repair the broken pomegranate punch, and maybe refresh old dies?

I think we are seeing your images, 1, 4, and 6 (top line) as a clear progression of wear (or weak strike) of a knobbly structure, that ultimately ends up looking like an angular C. The story starts at picture 1 for me. Is this an on-die repair (on this limited evidence it doesn't look like an additional overstrike, on account of the prescision), or is it a reworked punch? If it's a reworked punch, was it meant to be significant (an identifier), or simply serving to make the pomegranate a more satisfactory looking fruit?

OK, I obviously have poor images to deal with here, as do you, but I'm initially seeing this (red-line) shape as a consistent thing (and as a starting point, because there's obviously an upper part, connected or separate). Below are a list of points your images raised for me. (edit to add this cropped image for ease) The key thing for me is the first image (top left) which has a 'knobbly' pomegranate-like surface, which I can easily see as flattening to a letter shape when not fully struck up or worn (the beginnings of which can be seen in the fourth image along [top])? The pomegranate punch is obviously knackered, as shown by your two larger images. Would there have been any attempts to 'doctor' it on the die? Can we rule that out? I'm surprised to see the shape (?overmark) so precisely placed on this many examples, given the size of the coin? Could there have been some recutting of the punch itself, only to make it more knobbly and palatable as a pomegranate? Given the fractures in the C-shape, is there any possibility that there were two 'bobbly-pomegranate-L-shapes' used to improve/enhance the broken mark on the die? The upper part struck first, perhaps, and the lower, second part (the bits I've drawn) laid in on top (though the amazing consistency of positioning probably rules this out)? Your investigation will be an easy thing to prove, one way or another, we just need some really high-grade examples/images, which span the disintegration of the pomegranate and appearance of this anomaly?

No, can't be a mint error, there wouldn't have been enough copper in a 1 penny flan to fill up that much of a crater in a die! Not without losing the reverse design, and leaving a substantial opposing crater in the middle of it!

I've never studied the dies of this type (I'm sure it's cosha?), but what a good way to make a couple of hundred quid on an alibaba coin? Mash it up a bit ,cut the edge off a bit, solder on a couple silver findings (jewellery bits to everyone else), wear it down a bit, give it a bit of .925 silver wash and, hey presto, £300...thank-you very much! Northumberland shilling next! Where's me chisel and that bit of silver solder gone?

Rob, will definitely take a look for images! Looking at those images gives me a slightly different idea, but hard to say at the moment? Can you email me the montage so I can draw on it to propose another angle, which you'll be able to refute (or not), if you have access to any of the coins.

Totally agree with you on this point!And totally on your wavelength re being hyper-critical, I'm exactly the same, and wouldn't be interested in either of the 2 coins you've recently flagged up! Keep talking that straight talk, Sir! It keeps a healthy debate going about these issues of hammered grading and quality! It's great to have a bit more hammered banter on here! Even Paulus is 'getting it'! We'll soon have him fully converted!

Don't tell him you're a Scot, that might send him over the edge! Again, it's that thing about grade and value! The face of the 3B is mostly soft in the sixth coinage, take a look at my old example here http://george-coins.co.uk/Elizabeth-I-ABell-Shilling-P3128309.aspx His isn't so bad, it's just a bitty, not very pretty, kind of coin. Was your's an A, I can't remember now? Edit: By bitty I mean clogged beads, unbalanced weaknesses, and scruffy at the edge.

Not ignored at all, couldn't have asked for more help. Learnt a couple of things about tracing IP addresses that I never knew before!It was great to have my missing limb stitched back on again! Cheers, Chris!

I'm going to have to get them to sell mine!