Farthings

[Jamesred 1]

Ok, So i now have had a look at some of my questionable farthings at 60x, 80x and 100x

Here is a wee list of some of the things i have found.

1840 A/A in gratia (Pic attached~)

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)

1850 5 over 7 in date (need to get a range of pics for this)

1883 Looks like a forked R in Victoria (Pic attached)

1860 .victoria also the V looks like a V/V (see pics)

They are all better looking looking into the microscope but i have an expensive camera and cant seem to get a good frame.

Think that should be enough to start with. I also have these at 1200dpi if anyone wants to see them.

Need to stick other pics on next post

James

1860 x 2 pics

1850 5/7

1883 forked R not very clear but could be a weird die crack or weak die

[josie 8]

Dont know about much in camera farthing is already small to take a picture others digital camera adjust the setting in Macro with flower syblol shown on the screen of camera then crop the picture which I dont know how.

Nice collection James.

[Colin G. 147]

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!!

[Jamesred 1]

Colin I will send the pic to you tomorrow night.

On the 1860 Did you see the dot before Victoria?? I have 14 1860 of ok grades and this is the only one with the dot. I will send that pic as well.

Once i get the camera stuff working my way i will show some more 1875h something under the G of Farthing 1822 small I in Gratia, On the 1860 when i send the scan have a look at the date area = lots of interest on that.

Im off tomorrow evening so will get soem pics to you.

Cheers as always

Heres another couple

1874H B/B R/R in Britt R in Britt Also forked as is R in Reg

Cant remember which coin this came off (back to the start again)

What amazes me is that i keep finding differences as you said in over strikes etc.

What constitutes an over strike and what a repunch??

The 1852 link on your site is off

[Jamesred 1]

Colin I will send the pic to you tomorrow night.

On the 1860 Did you see the dot before Victoria?? I have 14 1860 of ok grades and this is the only one with the dot. I will send that pic as well.

Once i get the camera stuff working my way i will show some more 1875h something under the G of Farthing 1822 small I in Gratia, On the 1860 when i send the scan have a look at the date area = lots of interest on that.

Im off tomorrow evening so will get soem pics to you.

Cheers as always

Heres another couple

1874H B/B R/R in Britt R in Britt Also forked as is R in Reg

This is off the 1855 it also has a D/D pics on way to you again

What amazes me is that i keep finding differences as you said in over strikes etc.

What constitutes an over strike and what a repunch??

The 1852 link on your site is off

[Colin G. 147]

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!!!

[Teg 0]

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

[Peter 615]

So this is why Colins promised encyclopedia never materialised....a daunting task.

Chris has the right idea in including standard varieties leaving the extremes to the specialists.

I must admit to parting with very few 1/4ds upon upgrading.

[Teg 0]

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

[Colin G. 147]

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

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?