Teg

Hi, The subject is huge. So I doubt that any one book would help much. I agree with Peter that a knowledgeable dealer would be a good way forward. The only ones I have personal experience with are Galata, Paul and Bente Withers. They have a website (www.galata.co.uk) and produce a catalogue (Sacra Moneta). They publish books, write them (including books about tokens), and sell them. Good firm, Teg

Hi, A few years ago I visited Colin Cooke and bought a 1730 Copper Proof farthing. Amazingly he had five to choose from, less than ten are known. I bought the one in the best condition / strike (all were UNC). Colin was surprised, he would have gone for the one with the 'best' pedigree. How much importance would you attach to a pedigree? Teg

Good points Rob. I do like a coin with a pedigree, but would prefer even a marginally better coin with none. The system has a lot of problems. Many dealers don't give a history - they are afraid you will find out how much they paid for the coin and hence their profit margin. I have bought a couple of farthings recently that I know are ex Colin Cooke - without it being stated. So none of his notes! Farthings are generally low value, and small. Until recently most were not photographed at auction. It is almost impossible to prove that the coin you have was the one from that sale. Coins do get swapped. Many coins have no tickets, you only have a dealers word that the coin is say 'ex Peck'. Peck is a good example, in his book he stated next to the BMC type where the coin was from. So it's possible to view the actual coin that he saw - when he decided what a particular variety was. The real traceability (for farthings) probably starts now - with a photographic audit trial. Rob your list of famous collections has set me thinking. I might well try and collect at least one farthing from each of the major farthing collections. Should be fun. Teg

Hi, I agree with Colin G. that this is a re-punched letter, and with re-punching being common up to late Victoria does not really carry a premium. Still a nice small obv. letters 1720 farthing. Die doubling is different again. For me it is produced at the stage of die manufacture - not production. To produce each working die more than one strike/impresion is made by each punch. If these do not line up - then an element in the design appears twice. An example:- OK it's a 1723 farthing - close enough. Look at the arm /spear / olive branch of BRITANNIA. There was one punch for all of BRITANNIA, One of the strikes when making the die was rotated - hence the doubled die. The legend and the date are not doubled - showing that this was not a double struck coin. If you find one of this type of coin - there should be others, because the die is at fault (and yes there are). On the obverse the E of REX is re-punched - this is either, as Colin says a repair to the die during its lifetime - or as I suspect in the case a retouched blunder during the making of the die. Finally! the crescent shape reaching up from George's nose is a die clash. This is where the dies have come together without a coin between them. The mark is from BRITANNIA's shield. Best Regards Teg

Hi, Looking at the Times archive (1887-1889), six weeks to 12 months prison - depending on previous. Seems like a big leap to hanging! Regards Teg

Hi Jason, Nice coin - worth a few pounds, £5 give or take a couple of quid. I am sure that Bob C. did not mean to imply that your coin is EF - or close. Fine I would guess - from seeing one side. Bob is also correct that £200 for EF would be very steep! All the best Teg

Hi, posting them makes sense - send me the address in a message. I included the Obv. pics to give a better overall feel for the grade. I have chosen 3 of the farthings, most of the worn Wrens don't have a good tone! Teg

Any of these help?

Hi, Welcome Dustyboy, you seem to be acting fairly - and caught in the middle of a 'dispute' between PCGS and some opinionated posters (like me) here. I won't be taking you up on your offer to buy the item, $3,500 for an $80 coin. In the hope that I would be able to recover the difference from PCGS. You seem to say that PCGS are experts in the attribution of British Farthings. I do have a lot of time for Ron Guth (still) but is he an expert here? Your coin is not the Peck or Freeman mule (which I think Ron acknowledges). PCGS are trying to add an extra type to the TB/BB mule. Your eBay listing quotes prices realised for accepted mules, yours is a different type. The true mule is possibly the rarest bronze farthing. If we add in toothed revs that have a few detached teeth - it is very common. I give a quote from Colin Cooke's list 48 - on this list he also sells M.J. Freeman's GVF Mule for £300. "A so-called 1860 Mule Farthing was sold on an eBay auction in January 2004, in around VF (with dark patches) for £313.03. Only trouble was that it was NOT a mule but an ordinary TB both sides! Moral, take care! If in doubt, check them out, before you buy." As I have said before, I sold Colin an 1860 mule - when I upgraded mine. I have discussed this at length with Colin - pity he is no longer here. As far as I know no one on this forum has any reason to 'hinder' the sale of this coin. Some collectors - like myself - are willing to give their EXPERT opinions, especially on such a rare coin. Good luck! Teg

Hi, First a warm welcome to this forum. As a contributer to the 'Darkside' PCGS forum I know you have a genuine interest in 'World Coins'. Your reasoned argument is also welcome. You have obviously spent time on a relatively small $ coin - to preserve your companies reputation. If I ever decide to slab my collection it would be with you. However (you knew there was going to be a BUT) I think you are wrong to designate this coin as a TB, BB mule. Peck, Freeman, Colin Cooke (not Goode) have all described this type - a particular rev. die as very rare < 100 known. You are introducing another rev. die - quite common - that they would have seen many times, and giving it the same description. Beaded border means full beads all round. My toothed border 1860 has most of the same characteristics as the PCGS mule. Including the 5 o'clock beads. If you stay with this stance you will be slabbing a LOT of 1860 TB/BB. So if it is all semantics, why not call this TB / 5 o'clock beaded look border. Without the lighthouse rock and bead count of a beaded border. Just wrong to make people think they have a high value coin, even if us Brits need to re-appraise how we designate border types. Again welcome to the forum - and thanks for posting. Teg

Hi Peter, I am sure there are many reasons why Colin's 'encyclopedia of farthings' never materialised. The obvious over-riding one being his untimely death. There were other reasons. 1) The difficulty of describing so many variations (same problem as Peck). Photographs of everything would make a book to expensive. I suggested a book with a CD, or a subscription to a web site with pictures. 2) He found it difficult to run a coin business all day, then work on coins in his spare time. 3) No sense of urgency, he was delegating more and more to Niel and Co - planned to retire soon and spend much more time on farthings. 4) No danger of being overtaken. We spoke of collaborating on a book at one stage, he told me that no one else had the coins or knowledge to produce such a book, he was being kind, he had the coins. He had let me see all his collection, and notes. 5) I have a lot more to say on this. Better shut up now! Teg

Hi, Thomas Graham Master of the Mint wrote to Gladstone in 1860 regarding the new bronze coinage - and the difficulties in striking it. "a die giving way on average after 30,000 impressions instead of 60,000 avg" and "the changes to be made have no sensible effect upon the design but refer to the border and other small technical points of which the effect upon the durability of the dies can be learnt by trial." So as an example. 1881H farthing mintage 1,792,000. By then 60,000 per die - so perhaps 30 working dies. Colin Cooke looked at a lot of 1881H - and came up with 7 different rev. types. I understand that the working dies were prepared in the Mint, and were handed over to the Heaton Mint, with the punching of the H as some sort of ceremony. So maybe 30ish varieties which by eye subdivide into 7 or 8 types. If these had been produced in the Royal Mint - no H, then we would have only the one type - as the working dies could not be differentiated. Or maybe the Mint would have refurbished the dies to give them a longer life, and we would have some doubled letter varieties. Hope this helps. Teg

Thanks for the invite - top quality site, well done. I like your George I farthing Obv. brockage, I wish most of my normal coins were that quality. The date (If it had one) is almost certainly 1719, the shape of the I in GEORGIVS only occurs for that year. I have a picture of a 1719 coin that seems to be from the same dies. You have a nice double struck George I farthing as well - 1720, but labelled as 1721. Thanks again Teg

Ah, different to my spiky chin. Yours is I believe a version of this - later die state perhaps:- Small world. (from Clem. Schettino's CD - his coin) teg

Hi Chris, Show us your brockage! Does it have a spiked chin? Teg

Hi Bob C. A rare coin in any grade. The bead counting is my 'insurance policy' it may prove ambiguous. This mule does seem to have both obverses - that I did not expect. (see Colin Cooke site) As our host is obviously a big bovine fan - I offer the following rural analogy. Before crossing a field of cows all of the big cows look like BULLS - is it isn't it etc. When you see a real two ton BULL there is never any doubt. The beaded border was changed because the die life was so short. Interestingly most of the BB farthings look better than the toothed borders. Better quality control? Teg

Back to the numismatics, all beaded border 1860s that I can see have 130 rev border beads. As do the Mules. The toothed borders seem to have slightly more - they are a pain to count, any observations? Teg

I see what you mean Colin - but can't agree. If he is threatening people (us) with legal proceedings for slander (I guess he means libel), then that is very out of order. I have a VF-ish mule, and traded a VG- F one to Colin Cooke. All the same die as his collection coin. So if the seller wants to describe his coin as "Mule TB/RB, from previously unknown dies - unlike any specimen authenticated from UK experts - however as the British Farthing experts at PCGS have slabbed it, it must be real" then I have no problem. Libel is only libel if untrue. Back to the numismatics, all beaded border 1860s that I can see have 130 rev border beads. As do the Mules. The toothed borders seem to have slightly more - they are a pain to count, any observations? Teg

Mustry harder be learning Chenglish auction eBay business This guy has a whole load of apparently very nice coins ending on ebay shortly. Coins include a 1714 farthing, 1716, 1709, 1707 crowns plus many more. However, his feedback is obviously dodgy, his english is terrible, he works a one day listing, and I doubt very much that he is in the USA at all, despite what it says on ebay. In short one to avoid like the plague. The only thing that isn't clear is exactly how the scam works. The coins might be fakes, but if so they are very good, so I suspect they are photos of genuine coins. Assuming this is so, then he isn't selling fakes, but is operating a payment scam. However, he does say paypal welcome, so any scam should leave buyers with some protection, and paypal out of pocket. It must be my inate sense of honesty, but I really can't see how this will make enough money to be worthwhile - am I missing something here, or just being naive? DaveG38 Quite, this seller has done this before under a different ID - he rips of Heritage auction pics. He is trying a bit harder this time - putting his own background on. Bstd. Teg

Hi, Grading GI copper is a nightmare. GF lustre as stuck examples occur. This type of coin really annoys me. It is a rareish type - stop after GEORGIVS to left of wreath. They don't know this - they have tried to sell it before at this price and failed. If they sold it at a high but fair price for the normal type I would buy it and we both would be happy! Bah Teg

Hi, It looks like a double struck farthing. The winner knows his farthings, so no need to warn them. Peck could have made his listing a bit clearer! Teg

Hi Rob, Thanks very much for the info. This is my coin - the same dies as yours? Teg

Hi, Regarding 1825 T over A. I have not been able to confirm this type. I have a coin with the T over something, and its angle makes you think of an A. As my coin only shows this to the right of the T, it could also be T over an angled T. The bottom right serif does not however appear angled. Rob is your coin similar?

Hi, Have a look at Colin G.'s site, aboutfathings.co.uk - he shows an example. He also mentions the different size of the trident prongs. Is yours from the same dies? Teg

Hi, In short 1865 / 2. Colin G. has some examples on his excellent website (aboutfarthings.co.uk). Peck and Freeman both acknowledge 1865 /2, but not 1865 /3 - perhaps Colin could make that more clear on his site. Colin Cooke also did not believe that 1865 / 3 exists. Why so many over-dates in the bronze series from this period? Gouby covers this in his book / pamphlet "The British Bronze Coinage 1860-1869" The Royal Mint from 1860 - 1863 contracted out a large amount of production of the bronze coinage to James Watt & Co, and Ralph Heaton. All 1862 farthings were struck by James Watt, all 1863 farthings were struck by the Royal Mint. At this time the Royal Mint continued to use their dies until they broke. (A debatable statement perhaps). Watt returned all the dies they had been using to the Mint - many with plenty of life left in them. These were over-cut - and in this case used in 1865. Hence 1865 /2 is what you would expect from that logic. Back to your coin, and others similar. Parts of the 2 can be seen - the base and the top right. That does not explain the curious spur in the 5. However I have seen that spur on 1865 with no other over-date. My best guess is that the spur is a flaw - possibly on the 5 punch, and is not connected to the over-date. I know that Colin Cooke has examined this exact type on a BU coin - and does not think it a 3. Yes I must get a life. TEG