Superb Looking 1698 William III Gold Guinea + Photographs

[LawrenceChard]

Superb Looking 1698 William III Gold Guinea + Photographs

I saw these photos recently, although I have yet to see the actual coin:

Note the fleck marks which are often a feature of gold and silver coins of that period.

For some reason, when I saw the photos, I thought it was a Five Guineas, which would have been even more exciting, but this is still a great coin.

Who else takes numismatic photographs that look so good?

😎

[SidS]

Pure coin porn!

A little haymarking in the fields, nothing to cry home about. A great looking coin. Totally my period of interest.

[jultorsk]

Awesome coin and photos. 🤩

I've seen those specks / 'haymarks' before, but have not found why they're called haymarks. One explanation I saw was that haymarking is "fine fissures on the surface caused by
tossing a hot coin on hay to cool." 

Another claimed: "entirely normal black streaky flecks in the metal, sometimes called "haymarks," caused by the alloyed silver containing tin, which came in part from Midlands and Welsh mines." - but that would not be applicable to a gold coin?

What is the definitive truth here, @LawrenceChard? 😀

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, jultorsk said:

Awesome coin and photos. 🤩

I've seen those specks / 'haymarks' before, but have not found why they're called haymarks. One explanation I saw was that haymarking is "fine fissures on the surface caused by
tossing a hot coin on hay to cool." 

Another claimed: "entirely normal black streaky flecks in the metal, sometimes called "haymarks," caused by the alloyed silver containing tin, which came in part from Midlands and Welsh mines." - but that would not be applicable to a gold coin?

What is the definitive truth here, @LawrenceChard? 😀

I've been hearing "haymarking" for about half a century, and was never quite certain what it was, so about a year or so, I thought I would try to find out.

I more or less drew a blank, finding a number of rather unconvincing and contradictory explanations. I postponed the research until I got a better opportunity to find out, so there you go, you know about as much as I do.

We could start our by asking @SidS, because he sounds like someone who knows!

 

[dicker]

Hi @LawrenceChard Brillaint photography.

My parochial interest is Victoria Sovereigns and to an extent Angels and Nobles.

When I have looked at older coins such as the one your have supplied the differences between coins seem to be significant.  I am used to seeing this on Angels and Nobles is this also the case for Guineas and if so how do you establish authenticity?

Another well photographed coin can be found in the link below.  Lots of differences between the two coins for example the Dot after GVLIELMVS.

Is it just years of experience, or is there a standard reference book?

https://aspreycoins.co.uk/product/william-iii-1698-gold-guinea-rare/

Best

Dicker

[LawrenceChard]

20 minutes ago, dicker said:

Hi @LawrenceChard Brillaint photography.

My parochial interest is Victoria Sovereigns and to an extent Angels and Nobles.

When I have looked at older coins such as the one your have supplied the differences between coins seem to be significant.  I am used to seeing this on Angels and Nobles is this also the case for Guineas and if so how do you establish authenticity?

Another well photographed coin can be found in the link below.  Lots of differences between the two coins for example the Dot after GVLIELMVS.

Is it just years of experience, or is there a standard reference book?

https://aspreycoins.co.uk/product/william-iii-1698-gold-guinea-rare/

Best

Dicker

Thanks.

Yes, the coin in your link also looks very nice, although different.

And, yes, "just years of experience", as I used to say when I was still only 16!

But no, there is no "standard reference book" as far as I have discovered so far.

It does help to look at as many different coins, and coin types, as possible.

There are many coin types I have still not had enough experience of.

😎

As guineas and machine made coins were introduced in the UK in about 1662, I would have thought their production would have become more uniform by 1798, but clearly not, and this seems to apply right up to late in the reign of George III, and the great recoinage. Some of the irrregularity may be explained by the edge milling process.

From 1816, things seem to have changed noticeably.

Edited July 24, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[jultorsk]

1 hour ago, dicker said:

Hi @LawrenceChard Brillaint photography.

My parochial interest is Victoria Sovereigns and to an extent Angels and Nobles.

When I have looked at older coins such as the one your have supplied the differences between coins seem to be significant.  I am used to seeing this on Angels and Nobles is this also the case for Guineas and if so how do you establish authenticity?

Another well photographed coin can be found in the link below.  Lots of differences between the two coins for example the Dot after GVLIELMVS.

Is it just years of experience, or is there a standard reference book?

https://aspreycoins.co.uk/product/william-iii-1698-gold-guinea-rare/

Best

Dicker

Any help from https://spinkbooks.com/products/a-guide-to-the-guinea-by-roderick-a-farey? 🤔

I'm woefully ignorant on guineas - keen to learn more.

[SidS]

3 hours ago, LawrenceChard said:

I've been hearing "haymarking" for about half a century, and was never quite certain what it was, so about a year or so, I thought I would try to find out.

I more or less drew a blank, finding a number of rather unconvincing and contradictory explanations. I postponed the research until I got a better opportunity to find out, so there you go, you know about as much as I do.

We could start our by asking @SidS, because he sounds like someone who knows!

 

I've heard both accounts that @jultorsk gave for haymarking. I guess the one with hay would sound to be more plausible, otherwise where would the hay in haymarking come from?

Surely if it was tin in the metal - and that is highly likely for silver coins marked with roses - being West Country silver (home of the tin mines) that still doesn't explain the gold - unless of course crown gold was alloyed with tin instead of copper back in the day, but there's a rock that doesn't need kicking over. 😁

I would assume the marks would be on the blanks rather than the finished coins to start with?

I too tried to unravel this mystery and drew a blank also.

You are of course also right about the coin sizes being less than standardised. One has to remember that with this series it was a full silver standard and the weight of the coin was its value (in theory) so coins were more important to be correct weight when struck rather than uniform in diameter. Something which is also evident from French ecus and Spanish Reales of this same period. Also present are adjustment marks where coins had excess metal removed to bring them down to the correct weight before leaving the mint - should they have been struck on the heavy side.

[LawrenceChard]

9 hours ago, SidS said:

I've heard both accounts that @jultorsk gave for haymarking. I guess the one with hay would sound to be more plausible, otherwise where would the hay in haymarking come from?

Surely if it was tin in the metal - and that is highly likely for silver coins marked with roses - being West Country silver (home of the tin mines) that still doesn't explain the gold - unless of course crown gold was alloyed with tin instead of copper back in the day, but there's a rock that doesn't need kicking over. 😁

I would assume the marks would be on the blanks rather than the finished coins to start with?

I too tried to unravel this mystery and drew a blank also.

You are of course also right about the coin sizes being less than standardised. One has to remember that with this series it was a full silver standard and the weight of the coin was its value (in theory) so coins were more important to be correct weight when struck rather than uniform in diameter. Something which is also evident from French ecus and Spanish Reales of this same period. Also present are adjustment marks where coins had excess metal removed to bring them down to the correct weight before leaving the mint - should they have been struck on the heavy side.

Yes, the belief that tin in silver coins caused haymarks does fall apart slightly when we realise there are haymarks on gold coins, which almost certaily would not have contained tin in sufficient proportions to cause any such effect.

For once, Google appears to be unable to help much "Haymark - Did you mean: haymarket"

I will stick to calling them "flecks"

😎