Coinery

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!

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?

I was taking a closer look at the Withers' farthing varieties for Edward II and noticed that Type 30l, described in the book as 'shoulder lines to bust depicted' or possibly 'scribe lines' that are as 'prominent as the letters...and look as if they are intentional,' was in fact nothing other than the devices of a reverse die, so presumably just a re-hammered farthing? Anyone? Pictures taken from the book 'Farthings and Halfpennies Edward I and II' by Paul and Bente R Withers.

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.

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?

Brilliant, and many thanks again! Better get the book I think!

Many thanks, Rob! How does that work with Spink, as now I'm TOTALLY confused? I've got it down as a North 1331b Type II on account of the ANGL legend and lomardic N with '(rarely) Roman Ns on the reverse,' which for me makes it S1699 BUT with a Roman N reverse?Sorry to take up your time, but what do you think?

Having a bit of a night of it all round!

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!

Thanks. DaveG38 kindly gave the link in post #5. The before/after pics are remarkable, but: is a restored coin still the original coin, or is it something else? If you know what I mean...I personally think it's something else, much like a classic car! You can have an immaculate 1960's E-Type, which is 50% new panels and half an engine from a different car (albeit it old stock/re manufactured etc), or a WWII Spitfire, which has been built around 5% of its surviving structure and the ID Plate but, bottom line is, neither are quite the real deal, but an awful lot better than not having one! Terrible grammar I know! Edit: and sentence structure!

Scone you illiterate b****r. How you pronounce it is another matter.Edit: "scon"

I'm happy with just 10%, Dave...so much greed around here!

Tee hee! Scone or scon?

Declan was handing them out for 20thC varieties the last I checked, and Rob for everything else across the board! I've got one from both of them! Anoraks that is!

The right, obviously, as you get a better sense of the depth of field/grade.