Here is a 1695 halfpence depicting William III who (along with his wife Mary) usurped the throne from Mary's father, James II. This coin is only NCG VF 20. Now the question: Despite its relatively low grade and its common nature, why is this coin somewhat unique (and probably worth more than the usual $40 for a coin is such a low-average grade)? It's a test of one's skills of observation. I missed the answer at first when I focused only on the grade: As students of Ancients already know, even low grade coins can be interesting and evoke history. guy
I think the word would normally be Tertius. I finally decided that what looked like a C was a mis-shapen U. Couldn't be sure one way or the other. But the correct spelling would not have a C, in any case.
The answer is that even in that low grade they are pretty scarce as most of the coins circulated a very long time. England and then the United Kingdom after 1707 was very chintzy about minting low value coins until the beginning of the 19th century. Even silver coins got rather scarce in the 17th and 18th century - so much so that coins were imported and tokens made especially for farthing and halfpenny denominations. So 17th century coins would have likely circulated until they were nearly 100 years old and most of the examples you see are very very heavily worn. So VF-20 may seem like a low grade, but for a halfpenny, particularly from that reign - it is actually a pretty high grade coin. Your coin is much nicer than my English halfpennies and comparable to some of the very rare in the grade Scottish bawbees from that reign that I have.
Scottish Coins are rare - they always have been a just a small NUMISMATIC secret. Copper is mega difficult the Scotts used the coinage until it was worn out
Errror in TERTIVS and error in BRITANNIA inverted V`s for A`s Not unique as that would imply it is the only one
Which is why they are in such miserable shape. In contrast it is possible to even find silver patterns of the bronze coinages from the 17th century as they were made for wealthy collectors. Silver was recoined in 1707-1709 in Edinburgh. But bronze was not recoined and bodles circulated as a rough farthing and the bawbee as a halfpenny - even though the bodle was worth 1/3 of a bawbee it didn't correspond into the new English sterling standard and bronze Scots coins continued on circulating given that new British bronze coins were scarce even in England and rarely made it north.
Geez. Fair enough. In strict numismatic terms, the word “unique” means "one of a kind." In that case, it is an uncomparable adjective. Phrases like “quite unique,” or “very unique” would be illogical. But alas, I wrote the phrase “somewhat unique.” Well, what could that mean? Another accepted meaning in common speech for “unique” would be “interesting, curious, or unusual.” In this case, the word "unique" with the qualifying modifier “somewhat” would connote the latter and not the strict numismatic meaning of "one of a kind." But I'll let the grammar police explain: The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage is quite plain in its disagreement with the critics: Those who insist that unique cannot be modified by such adverbs as more, most, and very are clearly wrong: our evidence shows that it can be and frequently is modified by such adverbs. I’m sure you knew that already, however. I do apologize for my sloppy speech. That said, the above halfpenny is certainly not expensive nor rare, and may not be “somewhat unique.” But it is interesting, nevertheless. In the 2010 Spink's “Coins of England and the United Kingdom” the 1695 BRITΛNNIΛ coin is only listed in fine condition. NGC has only one of this type graded (the one shown above in VF 20). Here’s another halfpenny of mine for comparison: Next week, in honor of Davey, I’ll post my favorite Jacobite medals. guy
Hi Guy My BIRTHDAY today 5 Oct. Present 4 everyone to see. Here is my 1697 Half-Penny sorry not in 'captivity' so do not have it graded by an independent company.
William and Mary did not 'usurp' the throne, they were invited by Parliament because they (quite rightly) had had enough of the House of Stuart. Think of it as a boardroom coup. As it turned out it was a remarkably successful reshuffle.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage is quite plain in its disagreement with the critics: Merriam-Webster uses a bastardized version of the English language. To corrupt or debase (something such as a language or art form), typically by adding new elements. It is either -Unique, meaning being the only one of its kind; unlike anything else. Existing as the only one or as the sole example; single; solitary in type or characteristics: -Or it is not unique. Coin Year Book does not even give the error a mention Fine £35, Very Fine £125, EF £600 British Coins Market Values Publication lists as "Unbarred A`s Fair £10 Fine, £35, VF £175, EF £1250.
Thanks everyone for reading my post. And thanks SwK for sharing. I'm always surprised that any early milled copper coinage survived given the damp weather conditions and the less refined minting technology. It is not surprising that there was no official copper coinage during Queen Anne's reign. Previously, I have mostly confined myself to the Ancients at his site because there has been little interest in early modern English / British coinage here. I am impressed, however, that there are signs that there may be some passion for early milled coinage after all. As an English literature minor in college, I've learned it's futile to enter into grammar and common usage debates. So I won't at this site, either. In one of the above responses, however, the statement was made that William and Mary didn't "usurp" the crown from Mary's psychopathic father, James II. (I would have been a strong supporter of the Glorious Revolution, by the way.) The pleasant euphemism of the day (1688) was that James abdicated or even abandoned the crown. (This is similar in many ways to the propaganda campaign Gaius Octavius used against Mark Antony.) That said, I have always been a supporter of the Stuart sisters. The older Queen Mary was beautiful and elegant. The younger Queen Anne was feisty and resilient. These courageous two sisters helped usher in the constitutional parliamentary monarchy that helped shape the modern world. https://www.cointalk.com/threads/british-the-queen-has-died.249659/ https://www.cointalk.com/threads/mourning-a-great-monarch-english-medal-of-mary-ii.240407/ Good stuff. guy
Nice coins! The earliest I have found is the 1730's, as here in the colonies they really didn't have any earlier than that, except for parts of Massachusetts where there was some settlement that early. I know I can find anything on the internet, but I like to find my coins in the foreign coin bins at most coin shops and shows, and they only cost about 10-25 cents. Most of the coin shops have no idea what they are, so they get pitched in there.
Hi Guy I have been collecting a long time, of course there are more nice quality in collections but William III is illusive in great condition. These days we collect Roman Bronzes mainly Hammered British coinage but like all collectors I sold a lot of our early MILLED coinage. I was like a 'magpie' I kept the finest we had of copper coinage, this was not so many of William III. These days it is so difficult to find new pieces - those from the earth like Roman have from damp and human chemicals become even difficult to recognize. FRIENDS of the FORUM bring more of your coins to be seen - for one I am interested
