Colin G.

Coin watch, there is an issue at the moment with uploading images to the forum, if you e-mail the photos, I will host them for you and provide a link.

And it's only the common variety of the two 1937 proofs I am going to have to start spray painting some farthings!!!

I guess I just had good timing!!! Looking forward to receiving my latest purchases!! Thanks Colin G.

All, Just a note to say I have listed an 1845 Large Date farthing, an extremely difficult variety to obtain. 1845 Large Date Thanks Colin G.

Chris, I think you may be working yourself too hard, you need a break !!!

Mine is my 1859 farthing that I bought for £40 from the USA !! One of my better purchases, it is also used quite a bit on my website!!

Yes, Welcome aboard Steve, glad you have rediscovered your old hobby!!!

Seriously the Royal mint are starting to churn out more and more modern comemerative "collectable" junk by the bucket load lately. In Junes issue of Coin News they even advertised a "striking carousel money box in hand-crafted silver pewter and gold, to a Diamond wedding celebration bell in silver plate and rose gold". They are starting to loose the art factor and replacing it with the tat factor. There must be lots of people out there with lots of cash to burn!!! Shame I am not one of them

Time to throw a few EII 3d's into the washing machine, cement mixer etc

Gary, Peck does state that "As first struck for trial purposes only they were relatively thin coins, but at the last moment reports came in that they were sometimes able to actuate certain shilling and sixpence slot machines. To obviate this their thickness was increased sufficiently..." This could be a possibility, but the coin does appear somewhat mistruck, and I have to admit, before I got to the lower posts I thought canadian 5c Peck does reference a thin flan example but states it as "pure nickel; thin flan" Rarity [Probably Unique]

Thanks Bob images received, I really appreciate you taking the time to submit them. I have one last favour for the forum viewers, does anyone have images of a lauer farthing they would be willing to contribute?

All, Following a few recent questions, I have received, I decided to add a few pages giving some limited information on counters/tokens that are commonly associated with farthings. One of these being the "To Hanover" counters, the bizarre thing is that I do not have one to hand (I am sure I had one somewhere ). Does anyone have a photo of one of these counters that they would be willing to contribute. If you do, can you e-mail it to me.

You're right, at that price I would get something a more useful, and practical like a Pitts biplane. I have flown one before, oh so so fun, nothing like looping, barrel rolling etc at 1800 metres up. I would have thought the fake producers would be falling all over themselves to reproduce these, I think even I could knowck one of those up with a bit of time and patience. As you say not exactly eye candy!!!

Yes a much under rated coin. I've managed to put the whole run together including the all types in BU except for the 1948 sharp corners. Gary, I have never understood the sharp corners rounded corners thing, although I have to admit I have never really closely looked, I seem to remember hearing it somewhere. Is it an obvious difference and on what dates does it occur?

Hussulo, It would appear that the peruvian port of PISAGUA was occupied by Chilean troops during the war of the pacific that ended in 1883/4, and resulted in PISAGUA becoming part of Chile. So it may be a die for a medal given following the war or celebrating the occupation?

Hussulo, All the images in the Kraus catalogues bear the "REPUBLICA DE CHILE", so whether it was used for some form of bullion coin, or as you say some form of medal may be a possibility. Sorry no more information at present, let me know if you find anything out about it.

Hussulo, That is a very nice example, of what I think is a very attractive coin design (but not many people tend to agree with me). I have a near complete lustrous set of these (awaiting the 1946 and 1949) which to me have great eye appeal, and it is a set that can be put together on a restrictive budget. You certainly have an eye for obtaining appealing error coins!!!

Do you have any scans? Thanks Colin G.

Gary, I have to say I agree with your comments, and would add that by definition a "mule" is an obverse and reverse that were not intended to be paired, however due to some reason (probably an error) during the period of transition, some coins have been produced with a mismatch of intended obverse and reverse die pairings. If PCGS are defining the beaded designation by some partial beadings on the border then this does not constitute a mule. Whilst the labelling on the slab, would be interpreted by many collectors as detailing an example of the established mule variety, the labelling on the slab does not indicate it as a mule whilst the accompanying letter certainly does. They can call it what they wish, but it should not be clearly described as something it is not.

I know we have had a lot of talk recently about grading companies and their abilities, and this is an example which I feel demonstrates that the companies in the US are great with US coins but not with UK coins. There is currently an auction on ebay for a slabbed 1860 mule, which caught my attention. The price looked reasonable for a slabbed 1860 mule which was showing signs of lustre, but it was difficult to confirm the variety from the existing images. I enquired about better images of the coin and in the sellers defense he provided them very quickly and courteously. The issue is that it is my opinion that this is a toothed/toothed border farthing which it would appear has been incorrectly slabbed by PCGS (a verification check on the cert number does show this to be in the PCGS database as a mule). It does not bear the signs of a beaded border reverse and the single rock to the left of the lighthouse confirms this fact. I write this post to try and inform potential buyers of my opinion, and I have written to the seller in the hopes that by showing comparisons he will agree with the error and pursue this with PCGS.

Ron, It is always encouraging to see personal representation especially from a large company like yourselves, and it really is a move to be commended. I can appreciate your comments about the "toothed/beaded" border designation, and the fact that it is not immediately clear, but the two different reverses that the major references class as toothed or beaded do have differences. When looking at a number of these farthings, it does become clearly apparent that a coin is either the toothed or beaded variety, even down to grades as low as fine. Historically in literature this has always been defined by the 3 rocks to the left of the lighthouse instead of the large single rock that appears, although as we all know only too well, coins do come to light that differ from the "norm" and hence become a new variety. The fact that new varieties are identified regularly further compounds the fact that the "3 rocks" factor is not a 100% guarantee that a coin can be classed as a Beaded Border. I have no doubt that there could well be a beaded border reverse out there with a single rock waiting to be discovered. I have provided an image comparing the beaded and toothed borders on several coins at various grades, and I think the difference is readily apparent, not only in the shape of the denticles/beads, which are consistent around the perimeter, but also when considering a section through the coin. Comparison Section The problem is that if I was purchasing a BB/TB mule, I would want to see this feature to determine that my investment was not at risk, unless I was 100% certain that it was a new variety. I also expect that many people would feel the same. However many other investors may not be aware of such distinguishing features and would want to choose the slabbed option, safe in the knowledge that an expert has authenticated the variety. As you say if there is a portion of the toothed border that has deteriorated to show beads then your description may well be accurate, but I would also suggest that it could be misleading to the buyer who may not be getting what they expect. I am not stating that the coin in question does not show a mix of beads and teeth, because without the coin in hand it would be difficult to be certain, and the fact remains it may well be a new variety. However my personal opinion was that it did not match what "historically" has been defined as a BB/TB Mule, and should ideally therefore not be labelled as such to avoid confusion similar to that which has already occurred. If the coin in question has mix of beaded and toothed on the reverse and toothed on the obverse, would it not be better labelled as a beaded & toothed obv/toothed rev mule, I can appreciate its a bit of a mouthful and could probably be better worded, but at least it is an accurate reflection of the coin in the holder. Fixed Link!! Comparison

Teg, I believe as you say there are very few people who posess the coins or knowledge to pull off such a complete catalogue, and that a collaberative effort would be the more likely solution. The trouble is trying to find people who can: Work collectively Commit the time required Cover the collection range involved Do you think Neil or others at Colin Cooke's will ever pick up his work and attempt to complete it, or do you think his work will remain an unfinished reference?

James, I had noticed that the link for the 1852 was playing up when I went to look at the 1852 E/E, I will have to look into it. In the meantime the page can be accessed by going to 1853 and pressing the < button. The problem with these minor varieties is the time it will take to accurately describe and catalogue them, figuring out how to present them, and finally deciding what the benefit is. Believe me when I say it is hard enough keeping track of the varieties I add to my site. My initial aim was to list the "clear" varieties, that can be accurately described, and I am getting the feeling that this in itself should keep me occupied for a considerable time!!!! Several dates are now already into double figures regarding obverse/reverse combinations, and maintaining the visual presentation is difficult when the varieties start to stack up (to ensure ease of comparison). Deciding the cut off point for inclusion into the site was difficult, I try to only include confirmed varieties, however even now I find myself adding/removing varieties, or redefining them on a regular basis due to more information becoming available. I have a mass of unconfirmed varieties awaiting confirmation or clarification, and hopefully in time I can clear some of them up thanks to submissions, images and questions from people like yourself. I don't think there is anything wrong in identifying these minor varieties, and it will be a mammoth task that I have no doubt someone will undertake one day. But you have to consider to what will these coins be collected due to this minor variation. I think it is more likely that this will occur on "clearer" varieties. As I gather and compare coins it continues to amaze me just how few coins can be confidently defined as a perfect die match. I would like to know how many farthings copper and bronze it is anticipated could be produced from a single die, to give some indication of the numbers of dies involved per year, but when you factor in die repairs, I have no doubt that figure would multiply dramatically!!!