Anglo-Saxon newps from NYINC 2014 (partial)

[EVillageProwler]

We all know this expression: where one door closes, another one opens. Or, in my case, three doors open that turned out together to be roughly equivalent to the closed door...

 

Thursday morning I get to the show for Early Bird, and I hurried to CNG/Nomos to buy a Harold I penny (S-1163, good EF). The darn penny was sold (Internet) by the time I got there. Bad luck for me.

 

Here is my missed opportunity:

 

 

Lot 123

 

965158. SOLD $4950

 

ANGLO-SAXON, Kings of All England. Harold I Harefoot. 1035-1040. Penny (Silver, 17mm, 1.05 g 6), jewel cross type (BMC i, Hild. A), Serebyrig (Salisbury); moneyer Godwine, 1036-1038. + HΛRO••L•D REX Diademed bust to left. Rev. + GODPINE ON SER•E: Cross composed of four ovals united at thinner ends by two concentric circles enclosing a pellet. BMC –. Hild. 846 = SCBI 40 (Stockholm), 515 (same obverse die). North 802. SCBC 1163. Very rare mint for type. Toned. Good extremely fine.

 

I was in shock, followed by disbelief, followed by dejection.

 

What transpired next was truly very nice to the point of being funny. The folks at CNG/Nomos, instead of shrugging off my obvious extreme disappointment and moving onto other matters, tried very hard to make me feel better by chatting me up about stuff. Then one of their British specialists (from the London office) came over and took me in hand. Obviously he was trying to build a relationship with a customer -- never a bad thing. He also talked to me about the various nice pennies known to be available in the auctions and at the various dealers, and gave me his sincere and constructive feedback on all of them. I had wanted to take a good look at two nicer near EF non-portrait Wessex pennies in CNG's inventory for some time. I also wanted to look at the two sceattas in the 2014 Nomos FPL.

 

I explained to this guy what kind of set I was trying to build: essentially, centered around quality.

 

He advised against the two sceattas in the FPL. But, he really did like these two (which I bought):

 

 

ANGLO-SAXON, Kings of Wessex. Edward the Elder. 899-924. AR Penny (23mm, 1.60 g, 2h). Circumscription cross/Horizontal-Trefoil 1 (HT1) type (BMC ii). Uncertain mint; Maginhard, moneyer. + EADVVEARD RE · X, small cross pattée / MEGENARD MO in two lines, + + + between, trefoils above and below. CTCE –; SCBI –; BMC; North 649; SCBC 1087. Near EF, toned. Extremely rare – an unlisted moneyer for this issue.

 

The moneyer Maginhard is only known for one type (HQ 1) for Edward, struck circa 915-920, at an uncertain mint in Southeast Mercia (Bedford or Northhampton?) and at a Northeastern mint, spelled as MAGNARD. The letter forms on the present piece bear some resemblance to the Southeast Mercia issue, but with with different bars on the A’s and M’s.

 

[EVP's comments: I initially balked at buying this Edward penny because of the peck marks, but it turns out that the marks are strikethroughs (or whatever the proper term is) from the heavy strike on the other side. In hand, the coin is eventually toned. The toning pattern in the image is due to hot and cold spots from a flan that is not perfectly flat.]

 

 

ANGLO-SAXON, Kings of Wessex. Eadmund. 939-946. AR Penny (21mm, 1.18 g, 2h). Small cross/Horizontal-Pellet 1 (HP1) type (BMC i). Uncertain mint; Hunsige, moneyer. + EADMVND REX, small cross pattée / HVNSIGE MO in two lines, + + + between, pellet above and below. CTCE 121; SCBI 34 (BM), 354; North 688; SCBC 1105. Near EF, toned. Good metal.

 

[EVP's comment: the "spittle" mark on the obverse is MUCH LESS visible in hand than the image suggests.]

 

Both of these simply-designed pennies are gorgeous. GORGEOUS!!!

 

What about the 3rd "door"?

 

Remember the two sceattas that the CNG person advised me not to buy? Well, he ran into me at the show Thursday later in the afternoon to tell me that he has something for me to look at. It is another S-802A, but much better than the one in the Nomos FPL (Lot 121 from Nomos 2014 FPL).

 

I have no image from my coin because it was a fresh deal. But, mine is a much nicer coin (more expensive too): much nicer (rounder) planchet and much sharper and well-centered strike.

 

ANGLO-SAXON, Secondary Sceattas. Circa 710-725. Sceat (Silver, 1.29 g), series J, type 37, Northumbria. probably Eoforwic (York). Two confronted diademed heads; between, long cross with trident end; double border / Cross, at each end a bird right; double border. Abramson 18.30. Metcalf 298-9. North 135. SCBC 802A. Lightly toned with some underlying luster. Extremely fine, well centered and struck.

Ex James T. Joyner Collection

 

Here is the image for the FPL coin, which is the same design as mine (as far as I can tell) but yet has differences in the attribution:

(actually, I see one difference in the coin design: on mine, it has double diadems)

 

 

Hope you enjoy these bourse floor purchases. More to come, in other threads perhaps...

 

EVP

[World Colonial]

Don't know anything about the coins you bought but I like all of them. I think all of them are good quality and in making this comment, I think that minor differences in quality are over emphasized by too many collectors today. Considering the improbable circumstances that were required for these coins to survive in this state of preservation, I consider them exceptional.

[EVillageProwler]

Don't know anything about the coins you bought but I like all of them. I think all of them are good quality and in making this comment, I think that minor differences in quality are over emphasized by too many collectors today. Considering the improbable circumstances that were required for these coins to survive in this state of preservation, I consider them exceptional.

 

Thanks.

 

Regarding quality, there *seems* to be a difference between US and British collectors. In the US, we seem more focused on grade based in varying degree on the ANA grading standards: which is a "better" coin, or which has a "higher grade", or which is a "better coin for the grade". Across the pond, they seem more content on getting a nice piece with nice qualitative aspects: planchet preservation, or planchet roundness, or planchet brittleness, or strike centering, or strike sharpness.

 

In the US, we enjoy vibrant, colorful patina. Over there, they seem to like crustiness and old-time patina.

 

The above differences also have overlap...

 

As for survivability, many of the coins exists today in nice quality from hoards. Many of the hoards are from Viking raids or tribute payments: e.g., Cuerdale or Sutton Hoo or the sundry places in Scandinavia or Russia. Non-Viking hoards can be from exiled leaders, like the Vatican hoard with many high-quality pieces from some of the "middle-date" Anglo-Saxon monarchs.

 

Finally, they find small quantities and sizable "troves" from time to time there. The coins will show signs of oxidation (the bane of many US CC-minted dimes in the early 1870's) or brightness after curating the encrustations off, and that will reflect what they consider quality.

 

EVP

[World Colonial]

The oldest coin I own is a Spain 1618 NGC MS-62 BN 4M. But if I did collect coins like these or ancients, I would be more interested in the characteristics you described than the technical grade. In addition to the financial aspect, I attribute US preferences to the fact that practically all US coins are either so common or extremely common which enables collectors to prioritize these trivial differences.

 

The hoard explanation makes sense; same as ancients. Still, its nice to have coins like these still available in the quality you bought.