Charles II farthing odd B!

[Coinery 1,157]

Just thought I'd share this! The B in Britannia has either been repaired on the die (top and bottom), or a blocked die has been dug out as a quick fix?

Either way, it would be easy to see how some of the worn examples of this die could start to look a little like a RRITANNIA coin?

Might be worth saving the image, if you're a variety collector, just as a rule-out coin?

381141242626

[Paulus 1,975]

link

Edited February 4, 2015 by Paulus

[Peter 615]

Ch11 to W111 are out of my depth with varieties as they were with Peck.

Quality control was non existent.....

G1 & 2 cause problems as well.

I upgrade a date but it is different to what I have...so I keep both....it goes on and on.

I think you need to set your own agenda with these and maybe one day we can all meet up to chew the fat.

[scott 144]

Variates of these? there is something... first O in CAROLO? the B's look like that, not seen many RRITANNIA, but given the R has a tail.

Edited February 5, 2015 by scott

[Peter 615]

A monkey with a chisel could of done the job better.

I think we must start with Nicholson for the 1/2d's and CC for the 1/4d's and improve from there.

The 1d boys had Peck/Freeman/Gouby/Satin.

I'm going to bed cos my head hurts.

[scott 144]

problem is, you do early milled copper, if you want to get a good range which includes Charles II and William III, you have the annoying part, which is the tin.

you could do them separate, but then you have such a short period for William III, then you have another problem... 1694 and a short date range

and peck is still useful for this

[Coinery 1,157]

I'm not sure if my post was either written correctly, or read correctly?

My point was this ISN'T a RR coin, it's nothing more impressive than a B with either broken top and bottom loops, or a filled die chiselled out.

The reason for flagging it was that someday someone's going to come on here with a worn farthing, claiming a new variety of RR! It was my thinking that a record of this very clear repair could be useful to someone as a die record for any future comparisons/negations, etc.?

[Peter 615]

Peter Lawrence claimed varieties at every possible occasion.

CC often commented a better specimen needs to come along.

A nice record of dies/repaired/blocked dies would be lovely.

As I said for the time being CC has probably got the best base.

We can use his collection and merge in the Oxford farthing collection and throw in anything else

we discover.

I like to be a completest, my mile stone I reached a few years ago was every cu currency

1672 to 1956 (except for a few impossibles...1676???,1693,1718 etc)

I now spend many hours sorting on dates and using Colin's fantastic resource to add a few varieties

on the cheap,

When a publication comes out they won't be so.

[Colin G. 147]

CC is definitely still the resource in this area, I have built up a bank of images of the series and continue to do so, however trying to sort them at the moment is a distant pipe dream. As Scott says the earlier series needs serious commitment for anything worthwhile to be generated in terms of a catalogue. Colin Cooke's lists are still the leading authority in this area as Peter says.