Composition of English Hammered Silver coins

I believe that the English silver coins from the end of Edward VI's reign were made of sterling 0.925 Silver. Edward VI had 33% Silver coins minted from about 1548-1551 and from 1552 onwards the coins were made out of 'fine silver". I was wondering if it was possible to update the catalogue to say that each of the silver coins after roughly 1550s were made out of 0.925 silver?

Hello Nick and welcome to the site. You mention that you believe this to be the case and you might well be right. I know that Spink is generally fairly unclear when it comes to silver fineness, do you know of any documentation or reference source that might clear up the issue with any more certainty? The referees would be happy to support any catalogue modification requests but we are supposed to verify the accuracy of the information supplied.

I though the composition varied based on the fluctuations in the price of silver.

I have just been reading through Spink and J.J. North as I would say are the two most respected British catalogues.

North states that Queen Elizabeth restored the silver coins to their original fineness of silver though doesn't explicitly mention the fineness. Spink writs that initially the silver was struck in 0.916 Silver, but between 1560-1577 and after 1582, the coins were struck in 0.925 silver. In 1559-1560 they were 0.916 and in 1578-81 they were 0.921 silver.

It is entirely up to you if you decide to include the 1578-1581 as 0.921 silver or just for simplicity sake make all silver coins after 1560 0.925 silver.

North also writes that the silver content was not changed till 1920, when they were debased to 50%. So all silver coins from 1582-1919 were 0.925 silver, and essentially from 1560 as well.

Also just for completeness I will put down the weights for the coins. It is based off a shilling, therefore the weight of a penny is 1/12 of the weight of a shilling

From 1559-1577 they were 96grains per shilling = 6.22g,
1578-1582 95.6grains = 6.195g
1582-1600 96grains = 6.22g,
1601-1602 92.9grains = 6.02g

I cant find much about James I reign but considering that Charles I had coins of 92.75 grains 6.01g I would assume that James had the same as Charles but, 6.01 and 6.02 are so similar it is not worth worrying about.

It is entirely up to you but I would probably put the coins from 1559-1600 at 6.2g and 1601-1662 at 6.01 or 6g. Especially considering that many coins are not at their full weight due to being clipped the extra 0.02g is probably not required.

After 1662 the coins were no longer hammered and were milled so the weights change again. I cant find too much about the specific weights but I will look if I have time

I can't make as much sense of the Gold coinage.
From Spink, the "Fine' Gold was 0.994 or 0.995, depending on the date and the "Crown" Gold was 0.916. Though I don't know exactly which denominations were considered Fine Gold.

I know that the sovereign was considered Fine gold because it says so but it doesn't explicitly list the other denominations. I would expect that the Sovereign and Half Sovereign were 0.995. Also that the Pound, Half Pound (also known as Double Crown), Crown and Half Crown were 0.916. I am not sure where the Angels and Half Angels fit in but I would guess that it is 0.995.

This PDF here suggests that the "Fine" Gold is also known as "Angel" Gold, leading to the assumption that angels were 0.995.

http://traynedbandes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Elizabethan-money.pdf

Through the reigns of James I and Charles I, the Pound through half crown were all 0.916. Again there was "Fine" Gold, this time of of 0.979. I would guess this refers to the sovereigns and Ryals and Angels of James I and the Angels of Charles I.

The Unites, Laurels replaced the pound, therefore the Unites, Laurels and crowns were all 0.916, for James I and Charles I.

The weights are more difficult. I can try to elaborate but I am not too sure myself.

With all of these changes, I am happy to help if needed. Especially with the more difficult denominations and periods of uncertainty of weight and denomination.

Let me know if you need more information of if you need assistance in altering the catalogue.

One more thing on a some what relevant issue, I was wondering if we could alter the "actual silver weight" and "actual gold weight" to be more accurate. Currently when set to grams, when the collection weighs above 1kg, it says for example 1.6kg. Which can in reality weigh anywhere from 1.55kg to 1.65kg. Where as when set to ounces, it sets it at 51.7 oz. This could weigh 51.65oz to 51.75oz. This is accurate to about 1.5g compared to 50g for the grams setting. Is it possible to make the grams setting, above 1kg accurate to a 0.01kg or even 0.001kg. After all when referring to gold plus or minus 50g is plus or minus $2650 $AUD

To confirm is the ounce in regular 28.3495231g ounce or 31.1034768g troy ounce?

Thanks for your research and contribution Nick, I will get on this at the weekend and update the catalogue.

Hammered took a real dive from the reign of Henry I, it was well known moneyers were savagely treated with warnings to remove their hands and testicles if they added base metal to the silver coins. Quite a lot fell to this punishment for minting underweight coins. Those who still had their hands and manhood were forced to work with very worn dies and low grade equipment, but still some produced underweight coins to make a living for themselves.

It stayed like this until the Tudors took to the throne, there is no real accurate silver content up until the end of Henry VIII reign. Henry in some cases mixed "silver" with up to 2/3 copper. Hence how he got his "copper nose" nickname.

Towards the end of the short reign of Edward VI attempts were made to restore public faith in the country's coinage. Introducing 4 new denominations, and return to high grade silver .925. but not before standards sank so low that base pennies passed as half pence, and base half pence were accepted only as farthings. The fine silver crown came very late in Edward VI reign (1551-1553) as part of a move back to sterling silver. The silver half crown was introduced as an alternative to gold half crowns which often became lost due to being so small.

During the reign of Mary, base pennies and fine silver were both produced with the base penny circulating as half pence. The same situation carried on 20 years into QE I reign with silver prices inflating in the early 1580's.

This is as far as I can go regarding minting and purity of silver hammered coinage. I have not seen anything yet to indicate silver content changed from the reign of James I. but of course that does not mean it has not, it just means I have not gone higher than James as far as research is concerned.

radrick007, Thank you for taking this on. If you need any help just ask.

Fluke, you are entirely correct with your summary of silver coins prior to Elizabeth. I think for now if the catalogue can be updated to reflect some of these changes it will be good for everyone. If I have time over the next few weeks I will try to continue helping with updating and re cataloguing the English section. This includes adding more obverse/reverse combinations and mint marks.

My primary focus is on English shillings from Edward VI to the present and have noticed some coins missing from the catalogue. I endeavour to help in any way I can to make this a very complete catalogue, without going over the top with detail as I know the shillings of Charles I can have hundreds of very minor differences.

Hi Nick, I've been through and modified the Elizabethan Shillings that we have listed (although there are a few missing, as you say) and I am moving on to later issues. Does your North have a info on Elizabeth I milled shillings since Spink is a bit vague?

No, sorry. I have just looked through Spink, North and Coincraft. None of them give much information. From what I have read, the Millled for the most, were made out of sterling silver. Except for possibly the first two months when some were made out of .916. Though most were trial runs at this stage. So I would put them down as .925. I have looked at detailed write-ups in the British Numismatic Journals but none mention specific weights. By looking at previous auction records we can attain a rough idea of weights but they are very varied. For example, I have seen the milled 6p recorded as 2.8g-3.2g. I am really not sure what should be recorded, unless we use a weight range. If you want a weight range, let me know and I will look through auction records for weights.

Also, when it says 96 grains per shilling, I believe that means the sixpence is 48 grains and the penny is 8 grains. I think they were weighted proportionally.

Thanks for that. What about dates? The inference seems to be that they followed on after the hammered issues but there is also some indication of strikes in the 1560's - could these just be trials?

There is some uncertainty as to whether some of the coins struck in 1560 and 1561 were pattern strikes or not but I will include them in brackets. Though if they are confirmed pattern strikes I have omitted them. From what I understand the dates are not exact but this what I have gathered. By the "156(1)4-7" I mean that from 1561 there are some recorded but they may be pattern strikes, not including them it was from 1564-1567.
Half Pound, 156(1)2-4 star mm | 1567-8 lis mm
Crown, 156(1)4-7 star mm | 1567-8 lis mm
Half Crown, 1464 star mm | 1567-8 lis mm
Shilling, 1660-1 32mm star mm | 1660-1 30mm star mm | 1660-1 29mm star mm
Sixpence were minted from 1660-71. It is best to go off Spink and use your digression as to how many varieties to include. All had the Star mm.
Groat, 1560-1 star mm
Threepence were minted from 1661-4. It is best to go off Spink and use your digression as to how many varieties to include. All had the Star mm.
Half Groat, 1560-1 star mm
Threefarthings Only three are known and are assumed to be patterns. Though they were 1663 with either the Star mm or Mullet mm.

For all of these coins this is the simplified version. There are dozens of different die pairs, the sixpence lists more than 60.