Coinery

Many thanks for your extremely generous effort on this! The top coin is a known variety, and the second is the same variety as mine! I'll look at it on the PC tomorrow, but it looks to be most definitely a different die? Brilliant stuff, Mr Knipe! Are you going to share your contact with me?

Not quite so pretty I confess, but my first unrecorded farthing of Edward II, which I'm hoping Withers will add to an addenda and/or future publication update? Die-sinker error EDWADVS REX A Withers does catalogue an EDWADVS REX AN under Type 30k bis, but that's as close as we get - DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT bis MEANS PLEASE? Of some charm is the on-die repair to the broken-topped E in Edwadvs.

Could never be ghosting though, Clive, as the devices are all as per normal strike!

West Country Boy!

Die-cracks don't bother me at all, I see them as part of the numismatic journey of the dies, and are seldom detracting/disfiguring. A lot of varieties are spotted by, and identified from, die-flaws...where would we be without them?

No worries Stu, looking forward to hearing from you. I have newly discovered Nightmares In Wax photos to share too! Superb, will be back at ya shortly! You should share it all on here, by the way, everyone would love it!

Haven't forgot you MR, just a little preoccupied at the moment, but I'll get there!

Just a quick update...I've just heard back from Bente Withers, and they'd like photos to include this farthing in their next publication as a new variety! Whoo hoo, I'm loving these Plantagenets! Means I'll have to buy a new copy when it comes out!

Just to confirm, Colin (aboutfarthings) hasn't ever seen one either!

Thanks, Clive. I can totally see the logic for cataloguing this coin under 30b var. or similar, but Withers certainly doesn't follow that pattern in the book. For example, you'd expect the only other EDWADVS Type 30 coin he mentions, which is EDWADVS REX AN, to be catalogued as an error under 30h (the EDWARDVS REX AN coin), but he lists it instead as 30k bis???? Anyway, I've sent it to him with a polite email, so we'll see what he makes of it. Re your friends example of my coin from a different die, does it have the very characteristic repaired E in Edwardus? The cut-out letters on my above illustration demonstrate it really well. And many thanks for the offer re selling, but I'm going to do my damned best to hold onto my new Plantagenet series. One other point? Does your friend have, or know of, another example of Type 30l (the coin I mentioned in another hammered thread), it would be useful to resolve that thread? Colin hasn't ever seen one, so I'm on the look out, just to solve the mystery.

Oh, and I forgot to mention...flipping this halfpenny bought me the book! WHAT a hobby!

I've just bought this 191682428067 tonight to flip, does anyone have the Withers book and a couple of minutes spare to properly ID it for me? Only until I get my own copy, of course, which is imminent!

Very strange! I was looking over the 'completed items' section on eBay, to see if there were any 'identified' reverse Roman N halfpennies of Richard sold, just to give me a starting place for pricing on the 'bay, and guess what I found? The exact halfpenny I bought 191668757635 sold by the same seller, correctly identified as a R2 halfpenny. How odd that he should be selling it a little while later with an Ed2 farthing, describing it as 'Edward halfpenny and farthing I think'? Very odd! Perhaps a little reverse psychology experiment? Who knows? Anyway, it's been nicely recycled to a prominent halfpenny collector now. Think I undercut myself a little bit, as this was also a reversed Roman N reverse! Good thing is I reckon everyone's happy, and I enjoyed the process! Great coining, love it!

could be £2-£3 if you keep a sharp eye on the 'bay. Not quite as many people scanning over the fine grade material so you should/could get a steal! Please come and brag about it on here once you get it, won't you?

Ah, OK, that makes sense on referring back to the book, many thanks for that. So, a slightly different question... Does anyone know why a cataloger of varieties would use this term? Or, in the case of Withers listing their farthing varieties, have used the terms Variant AND bis in their Type 30 farthing varieties alone. For example, they have: Type 30d 'legend begins at 2 O'Clock' Type 30d var. 'legend begins at 4 O'Clock' Type 30k 'legend ends AX in error' Type 30k bis 'R missing from EDWADVS' Is this just a method of inserting updates into a revised addition?

Unless a second coin exists from the same die with the same reverse marks on it? Then we'd know for certain it was a badly ground piece of die-stock! I'll be keeping my eyes open. I'll email Colin and link him here. He may have found one of these, being as it's marked down as a variety. Would be a very clear example of your previously made point it there are others. Just out of interest, if this does turn out to be reground stock, do think it should still stand as a variety? Thinking of flawed one's and dots after, I guess it would be, really???? What about you Peter, have you got one of these hidden away somewhere? Scott??

I toyed with that idea, but thought the reverse details were so strong that it was inconceivable to think it ground down die-stock? For the central design to exist so strongly, I would've also expected to see some involvement in the legend, which looks very clean on the coin pictured? You don't think it could've been a ballsed up strike which the die-sinker restruck inverted?

Did you want to say pilot?

Given that that looks to be a boar mint mark and not a rose, I'd certainly go with Richard III York penny. T to the left and an upright key to the right!

Excellent music choice! Loved it! In follow mode, how is the height determined? I noticed with the demo clip it was following snowboarders and canoeists, how does it know what height?

I wear an Elizabeth 6d on a leather chain!

Crown?

Interesting spot, that! Halfcrown?

I personally think you'd knacker the fields of a proof with even the lightest of dips.

"but: is a restored coin still the original coin, or is it something else?" The fact that you have some doubts yourself as to whether restoration somehow taints the integrity of an item, is an answer in itself! Do YOU think it's still the original coin? It's still the original coin as it is, but with solder marks on it! If you think about it, you are essentially asking 'are you able to turn a blind eye to the fact that some of the legend, and a bit of the rim, and also the patina of the coin are artificial' following restoration? The analogy I made was to highlight the point about when an item/object loses its integrity/desirability through restoration?