1720 G2 Farthing

[Coin_Hunter 0]

My first coin with die-doubling

Is this good? Coin Yearbook 2007 says £25 in Fine is the die doubling variety worth much more, or just an interesting feature?

Thanks for looking at my coin

[Colin G. 147]

What you have on that George I farthing does not appear to be die doubling, but a repunched letter. Because the letter has started to wear on the die, it has been repunched. Because the punch was not accurately aligned it has resulted in the underlying letter still being visible.

"Die doubling" is the result of parts within a press being loose, which creating a chattering effect as the planchet is struck which results in doubling of the coin image.

You can also get coins which are "doublestruck" which is where a coin fails to get ejected for some reason and ends up being struck more than once. The following are images to a Charles II farthing which has been triple struck.

Triple Struck Farthing

Nevertheless still a fascinating coin , the repunch may add a slight premium to the coin for variety collectors. But because it is not a repunching error or a recorded variety, I would have thought it will be minimal. I am only back to George IV on the website at present, but I am working on George III and have no doubt I will get back to George I one day (I hope!!! ). If and when I do, can I use your images to show this particular variety. In recognition I will add the comments "images courtesy of coin hunter".

Edited October 9, 2007 by Colin G.

[Hussulo 6]

Interesting coin Coin-Hunter. I would agree with Colin's verdict. It is a repunched letter. I would also like to use it on my site if possible I could list it in the error section. I am planning on listing more error types soon ie. repunched letters, die cracks, wrong spellings etc.

[Teg 0]

Hi,

I agree with Colin G. that this is a re-punched letter, and with re-punching being common up to

late Victoria does not really carry a premium. Still a nice small obv. letters 1720 farthing.

Die doubling is different again. For me it is produced at the stage of die manufacture - not production.

To produce each working die more than one strike/impresion is made by each punch. If these do not

line up - then an element in the design appears twice.

An example:-

OK it's a 1723 farthing - close enough.

Look at the arm /spear / olive branch of BRITANNIA. There was one punch for all of BRITANNIA,

One of the strikes when making the die was rotated - hence the doubled die. The legend and the

date are not doubled - showing that this was not a double struck coin. If you find one of this type

of coin - there should be others, because the die is at fault (and yes there are).

On the obverse the E of REX is re-punched - this is either, as Colin says a repair to the die during

its lifetime - or as I suspect in the case a retouched blunder during the making of the die.

Finally! the crescent shape reaching up from George's nose is a die clash. This is where the dies have come together without a coin between them. The mark is from BRITANNIA's shield.

Best Regards

Teg

[Hussulo 6]

Great coin Teg displaying a multitude of errors.

[Coin_Hunter 0]

What you have on that George I farthing does not appear to be die doubling, but a repunched letter. Because the letter has started to wear on the die, it has been repunched. Because the punch was not accurately aligned it has resulted in the underlying letter still being visible.

"Die doubling" is the result of parts within a press being loose, which creating a chattering effect as the planchet is struck which results in doubling of the coin image.

You can also get coins which are "doublestruck" which is where a coin fails to get ejected for some reason and ends up being struck more than once. The following are images to a Charles II farthing which has been triple struck.

Triple Struck Farthing

Nevertheless still a fascinating coin , the repunch may add a slight premium to the coin for variety collectors. But because it is not a repunching error or a recorded variety, I would have thought it will be minimal. I am only back to George IV on the website at present, but I am working on George III and have no doubt I will get back to George I one day (I hope!!! ). If and when I do, can I use your images to show this particular variety. In recognition I will add the comments "images courtesy of coin hunter".

You certainly have my permission to reproduce the image. And thanks for the useful information, I now understand a little more about these fascinating errors

Interesting coin Coin-Hunter. I would agree with Colin's verdict. It is a repunched letter. I would also like to use it on my site if possible I could list it in the error section. I am planning on listing more error types soon ie. repunched letters, die cracks, wrong spellings etc.

You may also list the coin image - wow am I getting some attention for my little fascinating coin hehe...

Teg -the 1 and 7 are interesting....