Edward VI Shilling - Please help Confirm Attribution and Grade

Would greatly appreciate some help with this shilling of Edward VI.
I have it as Tower Mint, Seaby 2466. Is this correct?

Grading this coin is not easy due to the fact these seem to have been quite poorly struck to begin with. My tentative grade is Very Fine. Any opinions greatly welcome.

Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Not an area I delve into much, but it would seem to be S2466 as you said. Mint mark is the Arrow both sides, and the date on the reverse is MDXLIX, all of which corresponds.
I am even less keen on grading hammered coins - I usually work on "acceptable" or "not acceptable"! I suspect VF is a little too high - I would go closer to Fine, maybe Good Fine if splitting hairs.

 

I am not really an expert by any stretch of the imagination at grading hammered coinage, but I would think a gF to aVF, by the British system. Nice Shilling. I'd love to get one that nice.

 

What's not to like? Around the VF mark, but far more importantly, fully struck up with all legend intact, no scratches and only minimally double struck on the reverse. I'd buy coins like that that all day long.

 

I have one of these as well and the attribution sold with it says it's a 2466, but possibly a different portrait (I don't have Spink handy, but I think 2466 has possibly 6 different portraits) - I think mine was a VF, or at least sold as one (so it's probably an F). Grading hammered coins, as already mentioned, can create migraines, but I think they tend towards far more lenient grades than moderns. I like the portrait on mine better, but the OP's looks better overall.


Edward VI - Shilling Second Period, debased - Tower Mint
Spink 2466
1549 (MDXLIX on reverse)
Obverse: EDWARD VI : D • G • AGL • FRA • Z : HIB • REX
Reverse: Arrow Mintmark, TIMOR • DOMINI • FONS : VITÆ • M : D : XLIX; E - R across fields

 

Whatever the grade is (and it's not that important to my eyes), it's a very pleasant example I would gladly add to my trays

Q

 

Handsome coin, as expected from coins from you. Love the patina/crust.

 

For comparison, here is an Edward VI I used to own. It is a later type, but similar manufacture. NGC called this one VF-20 - so I would probably grade yours as Fine.

 

Technically not poorly struck. Crudely struck is more proper in my opinion.

Nice coin though.

 

I used to own one of the sterling EVI shillings and regret selling it - those were rather well hammer struck large sized coins.

 

I, too, was thinking good Fine because of the reverse. Here's my example that NGC called VF30.

 

I was thinking good Fine because of the reverse. Here's one that NGC graded VF30.

 

I think I finally have this one fully attributed. Comparing images in acsearch, this is the attribution I come up with:

Edward VI, second period, January 1549-April 1550, Shilling, Tower, mdxlix, m.m. arrow, crowned bust right, bust 3, rev. garnished shield dividing e r (N.1917/1; S.2466). 4,66 g.

MDXLIX = 1549.

The fact the legends are reasonably well detailed helped a lot.

 

Here's my Edward VI example. NGC certified it as VF30.

 

Here is half pound piece that appears to be from the same era in gold. NGC graded this EF-45.

I agree with the S-2466 attribution. I think that Choice Fine would be a fair grade for your piece. There is a big price jump between Fine and VF according to Spink.

Here is my shilling. It is the much more common S-2482. This is raw, but my grade would be EF.



Part of the reason that these coins are tough to grade is because of the die sinking in the fields. Note that the fields frequently seem to "puff out" for no other reason, it seems, besides die wear.