joey

G'day Rob Just looking at your wish list here.Did you see the 1729 copper proof halfpenny Peck 835 on London coins preview of their December auction.Would be a nice mate for the 834.

G'day Declan.Couple of shots of my 1915 farthings,one of the close TT and the other one.They are only aVF or so but I only paid AUD$4 each a couple of years ago.

A decent range on offer there across the board for all periods, but I would question some of the grading though. Do they have a reputation for overgrading or not? G,day Rob. Sorry I did not get back to you earlier,I have not looked in for a few days.Regarding the reputation for overgrading, I have not heard one way or the other.I will ask around.I have bought a few things through them but as Tom said they seem to put their reserves & estimates a little high in my opinion.They usually have quite a bit left for sale after the auction.

I saw you wanted Chas 1st shillings.I noticed a few in an auction here in Australia in Sydney on Fri 21st Oct.Whether they are cheap or not you will have to decide.Lots 7948,9 & 7950 Elizabeth 1,lots 7955,6 & 7960 James 1,Lots 7967,8,9,70,71 Chas 1.You should find them at http://www.statusint.com

Thanks Peckris & Colin for your input.I did look at Colin Cookes collection,but only the 1699's.There are 13 of those,1st & 2nd issue.After reading your replies I revisited the site and looked at all W 111 dates(69 examples not counting the patterns/medalets).I found 1 example of the S stop of GVLIELMVS the same as mine,but it was a 1700,CC 514,and a lot of the other lettering was different.Oh well thats another project. To try and get as many different variations as I can. Thanks again.

G'day All I bought a 1699, Wiliam 111, 2nd issue farthing the other day.I was going to put it in latest acquisitions but I have not received it as yet.I thought I would get a bit of a head start with its Peck number(thats how I try to arrange my farthings,as per Peck numbers).Peck seems to assign these W 111 farthings mainly by the reverse,ie no stop after date-681,unbarred A's in BRITANNIA-684 & unbarred last A in BRITANNIA-685.On this coin there is no stop after the date and one or both A's may be unbarred,or if it is just some junk on the coin.This I will find out when I have the coin in hand. The obverse has me a bit baffled. The position of the S and stop in GVLIELMVS is different from any I could find on the internet or on Pecks plate 11.Also the position of the stop after TERTIVS in relation to he bust seems to differ from most.Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks Colin & Joey. Both the single coin on the database and the one pointed out by Joey have the halved rose and castle mark. The castle is very clear, being in higher relief to the rose sticking out of the left side and is of a consistent size when compared to others with the same degree of clarity. This must suggest a single punch was used for the mark. Compare that with my halved rose mark and you will see that my coin has a very blundered mark which is typical of filled and recut dies. The castle appears to have a rose shape superimposed on the coin, i.e. the castle was punched to a shallower depth compared to the rose. This would be expected if the die had been hardened previously. Surely on a forum where the number of penny collectors is on an industrial scale there must be someone with an example. The silence is deafening. G'day Rob found this one down here on an Australian site.This link should get you there. The P&M penny was on page two of the english coin section.Hope it helps. http://www.intnumis.com.au/index.php/cPath/123_228/page_id/1

G'day all Going through some farthings and found this 1845 with what looks like something under the right leg of the last A in GRATIA.There appears a higher base and an extension at the top left.When I first noticed it I thought it was just a doubling of the A,but looking closer it is only on the right side.Any ideas.

It's not doubling - but it does look like a recut A, the underlying A being a bit higher and rotated a few degrees anti-clockwise. The top of the original A seems to be protruding, and the right hand serif as you've noticed, and the bulge bottom left looks suspicious too. Recut letters are extremely common on the copper series, especially the farthings. Thanks for that.As you said, it does seem a common occurrence.Here is another 1845 I have which is similar but not quite as pronounced.

Rob,Andrew Howitt has a P&M penny.You should find it with this link.If you have not already seen it. www.bottles.freeserve.co.uk/fsp.htm

interesting, i may try that for myself on 1 or 2 cheapie coins. i do like the lovely blue tone some of my victorian silver has, but i hate the extreme rainbow toning that the americans seem to like. Artificially assisted very often. E.g. petrol. The petrol,is that only used for silver or is it used on copper coins to the same effect.I have a couple of farthings I bought from the USA,graded by NGC,that are quite colourful.You have me thinking now.I did wonder how they toned to the colours.

And the reverse.

g'day all I am looking at an 1806 Gilt Proof Farthing.It appears to be Peck 1387.It looks to be quite a nice coin but one aspect of it has me a bit confused.It appears to be an overdate.It looks as though the 6 is over a 7 in the date.I have included a couple of photos the dealer sent me.Do you get overdates in proof coins?I can't find anything in any of my books.If anyone out there has struck this before,or has any opinions it would be very welcome.

Hope that is more like you wanted azda

Here's the rev scan

Here is a shot of the obv.Photography is definitely not my thing.This is a scan.I dont think it is what you are after but is the best I can do.I will have to send the rev separately,the two together go over the 150K

G'day all.I have just received my 1806 farthing.I have included some close-ups of the points mentioned by Rob.Also azda and Colin were spot on with the 6 over 7,it must have been something on the lens or on the surface because there is no sign of a 7 in real life.As you will see on the photo the G of DG has e flaw at the base,but looking at Colin Cooks P1387 there appears a slight flaw there also.The edge is grained with no deep groove.The hair is waved.The olive branch leaves appear strong and attached.The stem below the hand is quite strong.The trident appears to touch the N but not impinge on it.Hope the photos come out ok.

When this coin arrives I will get some close-ups of the points mentioned and send in the photos.Just having a look at Colin Cooke's 1387, from what I can see of the G of DG the base has a slight flaw.

Thanks azda that could well be the case.It's pretty hard to say with these things until you get them in your hand.If I end up buying it (I most probably will)I will let you know for sure. Looks like some sort of scuff rather than an overdate, none recorded......yet!! I know its a bit cheeky but if you get chance, I wouldn't mind images of your proof farthings when they arrive if you are willing to let me have them, I will recognise the contribution on the website if used (unless you want to remain anonymous) Nice farthing Yes Colin I will do that no problems.I will send the dealers photos,they will be better than anything I can capture.

Thanks azda that could well be the case.It's pretty hard to say with these things until you get them in your hand.If I end up buying it (I most probably will)I will let you know for sure.

G'day All Today I acquired this 1806 farthing.It is slabbed by NGC PF64BN CAMEO.It appears to have all the attributes of Peck 1391.As I said I only bought it this morning from the USA,so I may not have it in my hot little hand for a couple of weeks.NGC said this is the only cameo piece of this date NGC has graded.There were two lots of images posted with the coin and have included them as attachments.Any thoughts or ideas anyone has on the "CAMEO" bit would be appreciated. Regards

G'day all Thanks everyone for their input.Peckris,the GV1 coins you mentioned,in Coincraft,it says that 1937,1950 & 1951 they had proof farthings from sandblasted dies.These were struck to facilitate photography of the coin.I am wondering if coins of an early date with a finish like mine may have been more accidental than planned.I will keep researching and if anyone out there finds out anything more I would love to hear about it.Sorry,I did mean to put this in the new acquisition thread but clicked on the wrong thing.

I suppose if there had been quality control then, it wouldn't be so interesting now.

G'day All I am wondering if anyone can enlighten me on what would cause the extra metal on the neck of Mary on these copper W&M farthing/medalets.I have seen 7 of these and 4 of the 7 have the extra metal on the neck of Mary.Of the photos attached 1a & 1ac are the same coin and seem to have the biggest piece of metal of the ones I have seen.The other 1dc not quite as much and the other two,one on COINSGB forum & one in Colin Cooke's collection, less still,but is definitely there.Hope someone has some ideas.

G'day All Thanks for your input.I could not work out how such a large piece of metal could be left.What you say makes sense.I am assuming that the coin with the largest flaw would have been getting close to the last coins from that die.Thanks again.