Bell Brothers, North Shields

[malj1]

Bell Brothers, North Shields

Penny - copper 30.7mm
Penny - scyphate - copper 30.8mm (with centre hole, unsure if this is correct or added later)

both uniface

[Figleaf]

Hole is added later (not strictly in the centre of the token) with a professional tool (no ragged edges).

Peter

[malj1]

Bell Brothers, North Shields

Halfpenny uniface brass 25.4mm - scyphate - with centre hole.

It came with another penny which is brass this time.

[brandm24]

Hole is added later (not strictly in the centre of the token) with a professional tool (no ragged edges).

Peter

I agree, Peter. Not only off center but it partially obscures the denomination.

Bruce

[bhx7]

Hi Guys,

I have been looking quite closely at my tokens which have previously been classed as scyphate, like the Byzantine cup coins. I think I disagree with this term for the Bell Brothers tokens and similar. The Byzantine Cup coins are stamped creating the cup shape due to the minting process that was used, the main or most obvious design, being within the cup concaved side. I have quite a number of examples. The Bell Brothers tokens and other similar types have their design only on the convexed side. So surely Convex would be the correct term. I know this may be controversial but I think it is definitely the more correct terminology. Thoughts welcomed

Brian

[FosseWay]

If I've understood Mal's description and pictures above right, the unholed pieces are flat and the holed ones convex. Correlation doesn't mean causation, of course, but a reasonable starting point given the evidence above is that the convex shape is caused by the holing process. In other words, the tokens are either flat with no hole or convex with a hole, but not in any other combination. 

If that is the case, I would suggest that the hole is the most obvious characteristic to use to define a different type. You could mention in passing that all holed tokens appear to be convex, but personally I wouldn't go any further than that.

If, on the other hand, there are clearly convex tokens without holes, and the convexity is the result of deliberate decisions by whoever made them (to differentiate them from non-convex ones, or because of a change in manufacturing process), then yes, I'd say it is worth defining the differences, and then the question of terminology comes up. I'm agnostic on which term to use, but would probably choose "convex" simply because its meaning is more obvious to anyone who hasn't studied Greek 

[Figleaf]

Agreed. Different techniques and purposes. The Byzantines were struck in a cup maybe for better "aiming" of the upper die, maybe to serve as a sort of proto-collar, but in any case during the strike.

The tokens were struck flat and took a cup shape maybe because they didn't want the hole making to ruin the design, so they used a relatively soft support while the hole was made. (I wonder why they didn't just turn the token around and made the hole on the obverse going down, though.) The hole could be made during the production process or much later (less likely, as you'd have to pay someone to ensure the right face was up).

Peter