Colin G.

James, I think of those listed, the top two interest me the most 1840 A/A in gratia (Pic attached~) - Not seen that one before, would you be willing to send a scan of obverse & reverse? 1852 E or F over E in Reg Doubled lettering on many letters in Brittania, also this has Briattaniar . no colon (Pic attached of E) - The one on my site is what appears to be an E over E which is slightly rotated. I can appreciate yours does look more like an F due to the step in the lower bar of the E. 1850 5 over 7 in date (need to get a range of pics for this) - Still waiting for a high grade example of each of these 1850 overdates to clarify the identifying features on each type. 1883 Looks like a forked R in Victoria (Pic attached) - I think you could be correct with cracked die theory on that one. 1860 .victoria also the V looks like a V/V (see pics) - Only partially visible repunches like this one are in abundance in the bronze and copper series, too many to list individually, unlike those above which are clearly visible and in both cases the presence of 2 individual letters can be confirmed. I also have these at 1200dpi if anyone wants to see them - Of course I do, send them through!!

I wondered if anyone has seen one of these before. The storey goes that there was an employee where my Grandad worked who made these for his workmates. To purchase one, you had to take 2 halfcrowns to him, he would make the ring out of one and keep the other as payment. The cupro-nickel does turn your finger green after a relatively short period , perhaps a silver one would have been better !! I must admit it is a fascinating item, I assume the coin was stretched into a thimble shape and then the top of the dome removed!! Ring Photo 1 Ring Photo 2 Ring Photo 3

Following a recent purchase, I have been sent a glossy auction catalogue for the CNG (USA) auction on the 23rd May 2007. It is chock full of colour images and details of ancient coins that don't really interest me. If it would be of use to anyone, I would be happy to post it them if they are willing to cover the postage costs, which would be £3 (cheque or paypal). Bear in mind it is 300 pages and A4 size. E-mail via my site or PM me if anyone is interested.

If it was an area that I thought may interest me at some point, or would possibly make a reference for coins which may end up passing through my hands, I would probably hold onto it, but I think it may be put to better use by someone who has an interest in this area of collecting.

Dean, Welcome to a forum occupied by some very pleasant and knowledgeable members, and a likeable host who has a soft spot for hedgehogs !! It is a very active forum (unlike many other coin forums), and you always seem to get numerous constructive and positive responses to your posts

I agree fascinating and informative site, and some stunning examples.

Oops responded to the gallery image not to the original post!! Yes it is the reverse 7 which has both H's fully visible.

I always found that this visual explanation was worth a look. Brockages Nice brockage examples by the way!!! very unusual to see a reverse brockage, I don't know whether there is a reason for this (i.e. whether the obverse die was always at the bottom of the press), perhaps someone else better informed can enlighten us.

It continues to amaze me how much is unrecorded on coin varieties, considering the time periods involved. I know there are people who question the definition of a variety, but these are all obviously from different dies or at different stages in the life of a die. This information obviously appeals to some collectors (myself included!!) and should therefore in my mind be investigated and recorded. I believe if Peck would have had the time he would have explored such variations, and comments in his publication confirm this, I know Colin Cooke always intended to do the same with farthings, but in all denominations it will be a massive undertaking. Thanks for sharing!!

Chris, the symptoms you describe do sound very "stroke" like, which could may have been caused by a bang to the head causing a bleed. Generally this affects one side, and the fact that his left eye does not open and he has no control over the left side of his mouth may indicate this. I must stop watching these medical documentaries, they convince us all we could be doctors

It always gives me a happy feeling to know there are still plenty of genuinely nice people left in the world, to offset all the nutters!! Good on ya Chris!! Lets hope Igor makes a speedy recovery!!

Teg, I can appreciate your comments regarding the owner, and maybe their appeal could have been worded a bit less aggressive, but I can also see their concerns. They are going to be selling a coin which they have had double checked by the "experts" and negative comments in relation to the coin could affect the sale price. It is not their fault that there are differing opinions on this coin, and at least they reacted to informed opinions the last time the item was put up for sale and sought confirmation before attempting to resell. At the end of the day the issue will be passed to the new owner, but so will the potential for recourse against the grading company. I thought I needed a better social life scanning every farthing that passes through my hands , but I have to admit, I have not yet started counting border beads That will give me something to do on Sunday afternoon

John As you say there are few references to these varieties, there appears to be no vast amount in difference between the 2 varieties in the Colin Cooke collection when you consider the prices/grades of the two examples. Realised prices Thick flan prooflike uncirculated - £800 Thin flan almost uncirculated - £650 Still a nice rare coin to own, I believe an example sold on ebay not too long ago for a similar price, but I am not 100% sure

Thanks for the update, and I would agree that the seller has now done all they can, and should be commended for their integrity!!

His introduction says the ENRB upholds standards of integrity and honesty in numismatics. No mention of artificial toning in the description though. That's a bit dishonest given that no coin could naturally tone to this degree in less than 10 years. Why do Americans like this sort of thing? How can so many people be so stupid? If prices get any higher for chemically treated lumps of metal, it will soon be cheaper to buy a Jackson Pollock. Presumably the above statement should read holds up standards as any standard would be higher. What amazes me is how can the grading company not make reference to the fact that this is artificial toning.

That coin creates a fantastic illusion of 3 strikes although on closer inspection is does appear to be only doublestruck!! Nice coin Hus

Peter, I agree that it is a farthing, not a halfpenny, but I would question whether it is struck on a halfpenny flan. I would have thought there would have been more of a surround to the coin, if it had been centrally struck. There should still be a surround beyond the graining if you position a farthing centrally onto a halfpenny flan. I think the seller has mis-attributed the denomination, but it is still a fascinating coin.

Teg, I have ploughed through my images of 1825 farthings, and many seem to have a larger gap between the I and the T, in fact I only 1 example of the smaller gap between the I and T and that is a very poor example, so the overdate on that coin cannot be seen. I have overlaid one of these coins onto yours and it looks to be a pretty good match!! Image 1 The A and I and the leaves match perfectly, and the T is now positioned over your underlying numeral, the rotation even aligns. All we need now is Rob's example to see whether there is another variety!! I think the overdate is visible enough to constitute its own variety on the site, so I will get it added.

This series is littered with double cut lettering, missing bars and serifs etc. Just another overcut letter I think. The rare ones seem to be those with cleanly cut and intact legend. Having said that, I just checked my 2 examples and one is 5/5 in the date and the other is T/A in BRITANNIA. That's one that Colin doesn't have on his site. The R over R is one of the more difficult examples to obtain, I have only seen one example to date, and that is the one in my collection . As you say there are a multitude of repunched numerals/letters in this series, but I have tried to restrict it to the major "obvious" differences at present. I am due to update the George IV section shortly with a few more varieties, and I have now got 3 different obvious 5 over 5 examples, 1 lower, 1 higher and one to the left. I am unaware of the T/A variety, have you got an image (1200dpi would be nice, and your approval to use your images would be even nicer!!)

As TEG says it is the 5 over 2 of which there are a few versions, in my opinion they are mispriced in coin books and are commoner than many people believe, although they are difficult to obtain in higher grades. I have to also say that my opinion is similar to Tegs in that it is a flaw on the 5 punch, because it does appear on coins with or without the overdate and also where different date spacings occur. Which implies it is not a die flaw, if it is a 5 over a 3 they produced the same effect on different dies by accurately positioning the 5 over the 3 in the same position every time. Is there a possibility that the punch was originally a 3 that was altered, I have to honestly say I do not know enough about the repunching process to know. The line appears too accurate to be just a flaw in my opinion, but I may stand to be corrected. I have left the varieties on the site at present because they do appear as differences that are clearly apparent to the eye, but I am hoping in time, I can obtain some clearer examples, although it may be a case of we will never know for certain.

Ah thats what it will be, it takes me so long to think what I am going to say it must have timed out I will have to plan ahead!!

Chris, I seem to have lost the ability to edit my posts, is this due to the recent changes on the forum, or did I press something in my options that I shouldn't have!!!

The brooch does only seem to have 6 jewels, but I could also persuade myself there could be a very weak 7th. The shoulder drapery where the K is normally positioned is also different from my other 1806 farthings. The area is generally a smooth recessed area between 2 raised ridges like a plan view of a canoe shape (if that makes sense ) this one has only the raised ridge to the top, with the area then grading into the field of the coin, perhaps there was some form of fill in the die in this area. The ship is similar to the others with three main sails and a separate small sail to the front. But it does appear in finer detail than my others, the 3 ropes to each sail are very clear and then one rope from the rear of the ship to rear sail (Forgive my poor sailing terminology - sails and ropes ) Into the possible variety pile for this one, with the others!!

Opinions wanted on one of my 1806 farthings, it has no "K" on the shoulder as is found on the currency farthings. The area is completely smooth, even under magnification no trace. I have seen them weak, but I have never seen an example without the incuse K other than the known ones (incuse dot, 3 raised dots etc.) Anyone have any opinions? 1806 Farthing