Teg

Very good book, highly recommended - it took me a fair while to find mine. Teg

Hi, Chris I am surprised you have had issues with CC grading in the past. I have always thought he was spot on, or a little harsh. One good benchmark has been with pedigreed coins. His grade has almost always been the same or usually lower than previous sellers / auction houses. Farthings in particular bring problems to high end grading. I have coins that I have bought as B.U., catalogued into my collection as B.U. (and I think I am strict!), then taken a high res. photo in a certain light, and they almost go into the 'cull' pile. Many, if not most, of Colin's own collection looked far better in hand than in the sale photos. The general high standard of this collection makes me think that they will look good in hand. Perhaps we need a new grade, looks BU at x30. None of which would excuse a missed fingerprint, let Niel know which coin and I am sure he will look again. Looking at the collection, I wish I was in a rich time! Oh well. Teg

Hi, not a proof. The proofs do not have the deep groove - they are plain or grained. Teg

Hi, All the proofs have a grained or plain edge. Currency has the deep grained groove. I cant see any features that would make me think proof, so perhaps an odd coloured currency piece? Teg

Hi Ron, the weights don't help on these - yours is in the normal range. A picture would help, some of the proofs have obvious characteristics - a blocked letter or similar. The edge is also important - does it have a security groove, is it plain, etc? I have six different 1799 proofs, and I know others here have some as well. Teg

Hi, it's a 1/2 penny. I can't tell if it is 1730 or 1739. Someone will know! Teg

Hi Matt, Welcome to the site. 1893 is not a proof year for farthings. Peck's book (British Museum) does not list one and neither does Michael Freeman (Bronze Coinage). The Victorian Proofs can be hard to verify - and even the experts disagree on some dates / coins. Very often the first coins struck from new dies look 'prooflike'. The late Colin Cooke had the best farthing collection ever assembled. One of his 1893s is described as 'prooflike', (not proof). There are still pictures of his coins on the Colin Cooke site. 1893 farthing If you have a picture of your coin we always like to see nice farthings! Teg

Peter, Great achievement, 1676 is rubbish. Mr Freeman would have had it slabbed if it were genuine. We should be glad that our collecting was defined by C.C. 1693 copper, for me not currency. Anne - again not currency. What is your favourite farthing? If you could only save one from your collection - which would it be? Good call to pass on the tin issues! Teg

Try collecting them 2 at a time. Colin Cooke was doing 2 1689's for the price of 1 when the farthing collection was sold. 2 farthings = one halfpenny and so can be collected as such- see lot 662. I was going to attach an image, but it doesn't seem possible any more? I thought about it! In the end I decided I needed a currency example more - so I bought lot 664. So you got 662! Much cooler than my coin - you have your own Peck footnote. Lucky for both of us - we bought at the lower end of the estimate. Did Colin list who he bought the coin from? A good job you wanted a currency example because I was only interested in it as a halfpenny. Colin bought it from Peter Viola in 2004. The history I have on it so far is Spink 16 lot 824 sold for £410 and SNC 2/92 no.269 listed at £1500 - which I suspect it didn't sell for given it is nearly x4 the price a decade earlier. Nothing after that until PV. I don't know when the 'Bn' reference in Peck was noted. It came with a Spink ticket written by Mark Rasmussen and PV's ticket. Without question it's the most I have paid or am ever likely to pay for a Chas II halfpenny in poor! Thanks Rob, Peter Viola - I could not remember the name. As I recall he had a collection of William and Mary that Colin bought, including this. That pushed him into detailing what W&M farthing varieties existed - which he included in one of his lists. I visited him in Jan. 2005 to go through all the varieties - which is when he showed me your coin. We both thought it was fascinating and were not sure why Peck did not give it a proper entry. Great buy! Teg

Try collecting them 2 at a time. Colin Cooke was doing 2 1689's for the price of 1 when the farthing collection was sold. 2 farthings = one halfpenny and so can be collected as such- see lot 662. I was going to attach an image, but it doesn't seem possible any more? I thought about it! In the end I decided I needed a currency example more - so I bought lot 664. So you got 662! Much cooler than my coin - you have your own Peck footnote. Lucky for both of us - we bought at the lower end of the estimate. Did Colin list who he bought the coin from?

Hi Peter, A great achievement - especially with tin. Do you remember farthing specialist selling complete date runs? What did you decide on problem dates eg 1689, 1693? I don't even have a complete type set of currency farthings yet! P.M. sent on swaps. Colin - you may have made a smart move with the G/G. You know you will have to upgrade. I have G/G and 1860 mule in VF ish. Not as good as I would like - but good enough to stop me upgrading! Teg

Hi Colin, I would leave it as it is. You are going to want a better example in the future. Until then this one is an interesting space-filler. Leaving it like it is you will be able to recoup your £40 odd quid when you upgrade! Teg

1822 farthing, with Lion side feet ? Click He must have seen Wossip's coin Wossip "Wossip" - Michael Freeman, should know a lot better. I am very disappointed in the farthings he has recently listed. If you are reading this Michael - WHY? Teg

Hi Jon, The diameter could be the key. 6d is 19mm, farthing is 20mm. Held together the difference is obvious. I would expect the rim to look slightly thinner than it does - if it was on a 6d blank. Tricky. Teg

Hi, Interesting! The Norweb sale had a 1951 cupro-nickel farthing 'probably from a sixpence blank'. So although I don't have a record of a 1949, it is possible. If (very big IF) genuine then worth a few hundred pounds. Teg