English Hammered Coins

Still not bad at all. The reverse is in excellent condition with a very strike. The bust on most of these hammered coins the first to wear down.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have only one but after reading a little more about the series I believe that both PCGS and NGC (I had it crossed) have it listed incorrectly. Both have it listed as a S-1364 however PCGS on the label listed it as a "1D" yet the classification of these coins does not even include a 1D as there are only a 1A and 1B in class 1.

It was hammered in Oxford (temporary mint similar to how the U.S. had branch mints) but I believe it to be a class 3D which would have been the last issued prior to the inclusion of a sceptre on the King's right (coin face left).

I only include the above for affirmation since at least one person in this thread had made reference to this being their area of expertise. If I am wrong I would love to find out why.

AU55

 

While I don't actively collect this era of coins, I find them fascinating and may transition into collecting a few. I will have to do some study first, however. Very nice coins all and kudos to the OP coin.

 

I will verify the classification on this one for you JH. This is a beautiful coin! Love the toning! Once I have a few minutes today I will get you a definitive class.

 

They are a lot of fun to collect and research. Let me know if you want me to help you with some direction as to literature and where to look to buy. I would be more than happy to help.

 

One tip with hammered coins would be not to get them graded by any coin grading service. Most serious collectors do not put much value in having them graded and would almost rather have the coin unslabbed.

 

I suspect "1D" is the denomination, not variety. 1D = 1 denarius = 1 penny in the old nomenclature.

 

Nap beat me to it! 1d is definitely the denomination - I think PGCS uses 'd' for British fractional coins (as they should), but NGC uses 'p' (which would be correct for decimal...)

 

I feel like I have neglected my new CT friends for the last few days. Since I have not found enough time in the day to take some new photos, here is the seller's photo of my recent pickup. I am working on a Kings and Queens of England set and will mix a few Scotland coins as I come across them. This is my third hammered for my England set.

Silver Hammered Groat of King Henry 6th dates c 1422 and is of the Annulet issue and minted in Calais

 

Actually the "1d" is referring to the class of penny. The hammered coins of the Plantagenet Kings are divided into numerous classes, sub classes and sub classes of sub classes. Because the names and styles of the pennies of these Kings did not change for hundreds of years, it takes quite a bit of study to identify the class and thus identify the rough year(s) when the coin was minted.

 

Congrats on the new addition! I have bot numerous coins from that dealer on Ebay and he generally has some very fine examples of hammered coins. There is an upcoming auction in September @ Dix Noonan Webb which is another fantastic source of hammered coins which many of the Ebay dealers source their individual coins from. www.dnw.co.uk

Welcome to collecting these coins Shernan! If you have any questions, let me know. I have several of the same Henry VI groats. And for those in the forum new to the english hammered coin lingo, a groat is 4 pence...4 pennies.

 

I believe the coin is a class 3d1, by moneyer Willem of Canterbury.

 

I appreciate the info. The 1d listing on the label being denomination would explain that for sure.

@Nap - I am fairly certain that the mint is not Cantebury and the two 'O's would be consistent with Oxford which from what I have read:

"The mint signature on the coins is usually OXON, OXONE or OXONFO."

Whereas with Canterbury:

"The mint signature on the coins is variously C, CA, CAN, CANT, CANTE, CANTER, KAN, KANI or KANT."

 

I have only one but after reading a little more about the series I believe that both PCGS and NGC (I had it crossed) have it listed incorrectly. Both have it listed as a S-1364 however PCGS on the label listed it as a "1D" yet the classification of these coins does not even include a 1D as there are only a 1A and 1B in class 1.

It was hammered in Oxford (temporary mint similar to how the U.S. had branch mints) but I believe it to be a class 3D which would have been the last issued prior to the inclusion of a sceptre on the King's right (coin face left).

I only include the above for affirmation since at least one person in this thread had made reference to this being their area of expertise. If I am wrong I would love to find out why.

AU55

[/QUOTE]
I agree with Nap on the fact that this is not minted in Oxford, but that of moneyer Willem of Canterbury. That's a very hard one to catch, but to be of Willem of Oxford, the letter following the cross on the reverse must have an "X" and clearly the form more looks like an "A"....also the following the ligated "ON", that letter, while looking like an "O" is actually a "C"...the letter "O" would be formed by two punches that looks like "()".

Now as far as class goes, it is a very close call, but I will also side with my fellow collector, Nap, that this is that of class 3d. This is the transitional class from 3c to 4a. Class 4a is the first class in which the sceptre appears. I can also see how this could be classified as class 3c because of the formation of the "R" on the obverse, not having an out-turned tail seen on the 3d class.

So your coin would be minded between 1249 and 1250. Spink #1364 would be the correct reference.

 

It certainly looks like an "O", however, the letter "O" on these coins are formed by two punches that look like parenthesis "()". Also, if that was the letter "O", the next letter would have to be an "X", and to me how straight the lines are formed, I can not see how that is an "X".

All that being said, ask my wife and you will find that I am most often wrong in my opinions!

 

I can't see it but I will take both of your words on it. Actually PCGS and NGC could not see that either so your suggestion of it being "a hard one to catch" must ring very true.

I was only keeping it because I thought it was hammered in Oxford. Up on the chopping block it shall go.

Thanks again.

 

JH--its a VERY good example of a Henry III long cross. While not a perfectly centered strike, the boldness of the strike and fantastic toning will have many serious collectors considering it. Keep em coming!

 

Here is a nice reference site for the long cross pennies of Henry III:

http://www.henry3.com

Much easier than trying to look at the tiny pictures in Spink/Seaby

 

For beginners, this is quite useful as well:

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/Long-Cross-Pennies/Long Cross Pennies P1.htm

 

That site I found to be more informative and to my liking. After reading on that site for a while I can see exactly why it is a Canterbury and not an Oxford.

This site was the one I was reading to get that initial information. There is a lot of information there but not laid out in a relaxing manner as the previous mentioned site above, in my opinion.

Both helpful though and appreciated.