Elizabeth I XII ?Tun over Hand?

[Coinery 1,153]

I'd very much like grading opinions on the below shilling, and also whether anyone thinks this could possibly be a Tun over Hand on the reverse?

I've recently bought a copy of Brown, Comber and Wilkinson, from Rob, allowing me to attribute this coin as follows (narrowing it down to two possibilities, depending on the outcome of the Tun over Hand question)...

This is obviously a 1592-4 6th coinage (bust 6B) shilling. But, using Elizabeth I by BCW to fine-tune a little, we have 3 Tun reverses (and two Tun obverses) to navigate around. I've reduced it down to two reverses, on account mine has the unrepaired lis (46) and lions (designated73), leaving the last remaining identifier the privy mark - namely, is this a Tun over Hand or not? Not surprisingly, the plain Tun is the most common pairing with the obverse here.

So, it's either:

BCW TN-2:a (tun over hand rev) or,

BCW TN-2:b1 (commoner variety)

Any help, or better images of tun over hand would be appreciated.

Thanks to all for the help in getting my images up here!

[Rob 3,152]

My initial response would be yes based on the small lumps seen on the left side of the tun, but this would require the underlying mark to be unusually small. My hand marked shilling has the mark fully half the width of the shield top bar in the second quadrant. Yours would be barely a third of the width, so unless it is a punch from a smaller denomination I would say no. I don't have a shilling of either mark from this reverse die.

[Coinery 1,153]

My initial response would be yes based on the small lumps seen on the left side of the tun, but this would require the underlying mark to be unusually small. My hand marked shilling has the mark fully half the width of the shield top bar in the second quadrant. Yours would be barely a third of the width, so unless it is a punch from a smaller denomination I would say no. I don't have a shilling of either mark from this reverse die.

Your points highlight the same issues troubling me about it. I also can't decide if that's a thumb or a tun double-strike? Do you think it likely that there would be just the one Tower Mint 'hand' puncheon for the shilling? I note from BCW that many of the punches were used unchanged for years (in service for 30 years in some cases), the reverse Lis and lions in the quarters being an example of many. It would seem possible therefore that a privy puncheon having a service period of only 2 years, may likely be the only one? Any thoughts?

To know this would then simply require a hand measurement from another Elizabeth shilling (anybody have one, and a micrometer?) and a straight forward comparison to mine.

[Coinery 1,153]

I think I've answered the over-mark question. In all of three reverse images I've just looked at, the hand spans the entire field. The wrist is right against the P, and the fingers as near as damn it touching the leaves of the longcross!

So I'm inclined to think NO for the Tun over Hand!

Still open to gradings, pictures of shilling hands, and thoughts on the privy mark!

[Rob 3,152]

I've added my hand shilling reverse for comparison. Hand tends to be quite a large mark relative to others.

[Coinery 1,153]

I've added my hand shilling reverse for comparison. Hand tends to be quite a large mark relative to others.

Thanks, Rob, conclusive I think! That spacing and size is typical of the images I looked at today!

[Coinery 1,153]

Anyone fancy a stab at the grade, I'd really appreciate the opinions? I always, always, overdo it with hammered!

If I have a little breeze through a couple of auction catalogues (London Coins a favourite), I always end up shocking myself...their grading mostly being under my guess by half a grade! My GVF is always their VF, and so on! It is a good way of adjusting your eyes however.

I'm thinking GOOD FINE myself...any ideas?

I promise I'll not ask for grading advice ever again! ;-)

[Peter 615]

Grading hammered is so difficult because each coin is unique.

What you have is an unclipped beauty WITH a portrait which is so often completely worn.

It is round and basically problem free.

I would expect to pay VF+ value from a dealer.

You have a cracking coin there and if you want to sell it for GF £ let me know.

[Coinery 1,153]

Grading hammered is so difficult because each coin is unique.

What you have is an unclipped beauty WITH a portrait which is so often completely worn.

It is round and basically problem free.

I would expect to pay VF+ value from a dealer.

You have a cracking coin there and if you want to sell it for GF £ let me know.

Thanks, Peter, I know it's always pressure-on being the first to post a grade on something like this! Much appreciated!