Choose fontsize:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
News
jamiepearce
January 17, 2024, 07:59:51 PM
 Evening.been out the picture for a few years.is there any weekenders coming up this year?
rookypair
January 04, 2024, 09:57:08 AM
 I think everyone has dispersed in all directions. Good to see some of the original peeps posting to 
rjm
January 03, 2024, 11:26:38 PM
 This site is pretty dead now! 
TOMTOM
January 03, 2024, 05:38:50 PM
 HI IM HERE ANY RALLYS
dances with badgers
December 28, 2023, 09:40:42 AM
 the dreaded social media lol
DEADLOCK
December 27, 2023, 08:26:38 AM
 Still going social media plays a big part 
dances with badgers
December 26, 2023, 10:41:07 PM
 This site used to be amazing, where has everybody gone? 

View All

 

Currently there is 1 User in the Chatroom!





Click here if you
need van signs


Or here if you
need magnetic signs


Or here if you
need a
Corporate Video Production Company in Milton Keynes

See our
privacy policy here


Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Hammerd for ID please...  (Read 1203 times)
jtalbot0001
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« on: September 08, 2014, 08:11:26 PM »

Hi Everyone, I found this many years ago but never really bothered with it as it was badly clipped and worn, but the more I look at this coin the more I want to know what it is. From what I can gather this is either Richard II, Henry IV or V or Edward IV and was minted in York. It appears that other examples I try and lookup (50% or more) tend to be either worn, clipped or just really poor strikes. Even Spinks examples are poor, so did they come from the mint looking like that? I am also not sure if it is a penny or higher since if you look at the bust side it is almost totally clipped around in the inner circle yet somehow on the reverse side has managed to retain some writing? IE am I right in saying the inner circle of the obverse should be more or less the same size as the inner cirlce reverse? Also this coin I am covinced has another mark which I can't quite see mentioned in Spink but can see something similar mentioned under Richard II in North - vol 2 page 63 no 1329e which mentions a mark after [CIVI]TAS which this coin I am sure has but is not a Sun or an Excallop as mentioned at the bottom of the page. I am convinced there is just enough to ID this coin even without an obverse legend. Thanks in advance, Jon.


* coin reverse.jpg (110.15 KB, 392x408 - viewed 267 times.)

* coin obverse.jpg (129.84 KB, 459x440 - viewed 269 times.)

* coin reverse 1.jpg (110.75 KB, 392x408 - viewed 252 times.)
Logged

THE TALBOT MOTTO: "To sniff out all things old and beautiful." ....... Just because I'm extinct doesn't mean I can't sniff out the hammereds!
The Doc
Superhero Member
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 3773



« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2014, 08:25:43 PM »

You could be right with your ID as Richard II Jon.

This is the coin illustrated in the BNJ as referred to in the footnote in North. (c) The British Numismatic Society 1980

Hard to be certain if the mark on your coin is  identical.


* Richard II.JPG (25.87 KB, 267x271 - viewed 239 times.)
Logged
Dale
Superhero Member
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 2293


Bristol hammies wanted


« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2014, 09:24:54 PM »

Looking at the obverse I don't think the flan was very well prepared before striking, the coin seems to have blobs of silver.......... As the Doc said its hard to be certain what the mark is ( a flaw??) Nice find tho, and well spotted Smiley
Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Home
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal