Type Collecting And A Representative Copper Coinage

[damian1986 142]

Another Collector's Anonymous post.

I'm trying to figure out what would make up a *representative* collection of bronze and copper without going gung-ho on every Freeman and Peck die combination or known variety. Type collecting or by monarch appeals more at the minute but I don't know how well this works with copper.

I took a bunch of farthings and ha'pnies out the other day to look at which ones I'd keep and which ones I don't like any more. Ended up with some coins I'd struggle to part with and then decided there'd be no point shipping the rest off as otherwise I'd be left with a bunch of coins that don't *mean anything* (i.e. don't complete anything) but look nice. So really I'm trying to work out where to go from here.

My interests are more diverse now and some of the early early coins are very expensive so have to be realistic in terms of budget too, can't have everything.

Not sure what I'll do yet, but opinions welcome!

[Rob 2,998]

The options are many, none of which are exclusively 'right'. I suggest that when you feel overcome by a bout of happiness, you pursue it.

Forming an accumulation of high grade pieces could be a lot worse. And you would be in good company in doing so, as there are a few well-heeled collectors who do similar.

Copper is not too difficult. Get a handful of Harington, Richmond, Maltravers farthings to cover the pre-milled. Starting with Chas II through to 1970, a copper or bronze 1d, 1/2d, 1/4d or fraction of each type is a collection of around 100 currency coins, even with the tin issues. The latter are the only really expensive ones in high grade, with just about all the others costing a three figure sum at the most. That would be quite respectable as a collection.

As with every collection, you could also get carried away and push the boat out on a Cromwell farthing, or some patterns. Then the sky is the limit.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Rob

[azda 973]

You could start a date run which would'nt include every Freeman number but instead just each date from say 1970 downwards to 1860 and then see of you can then go further back, it can be applied to pennies, halfpennies and farthings, so perhaps Choose which would more suit your pocket and go from there.

If you decide this route then try and obtain the best example you can afford of each

[azda 973]

The options are many, none of which are exclusively 'right'. I suggest that when you feel overcome by a bout of happiness, you pursue it.

Forming an accumulation of high grade pieces could be a lot worse. And you would be in good company in doing so, as there are a few well-heeled collectors who do similar.

Copper is not too difficult. Get a handful of Harington, Richmond, Maltravers farthings to cover the pre-milled. Starting with Chas II through to 1970, a copper or bronze 1d, 1/2d, 1/4d or fraction of each type is a collection of around 100 currency coins, even with the tin issues. The latter are the only really expensive ones in high grade, with just about all the others costing a three figure sum at the most. That would be quite respectable as a collection.

As with every collection, you could also get carried away and push the boat out on a Cromwell farthing, or some patterns. Then the sky is the limit.

The last Cromwell farthing sold for 10k last year did'nt it?

[Rob 2,998]

Ish

[damian1986 142]

Forming an accumulation of high grade pieces could be a lot worse. And you would be in good company in doing so, as there are a few well-heeled collectors who do similar.

This would be ideal, so lots of collectors do that do they? Any particular examples / approaches?

Copper is not too difficult. Get a handful of Harington, Richmond, Maltravers farthings to cover the pre-milled. Starting with Chas II through to 1970, a copper or bronze 1d, 1/2d, 1/4d or fraction of each type is a collection of around 100 currency coins, even with the tin issues. The latter are the only really expensive ones in high grade, with just about all the others costing a three figure sum at the most. That would be quite respectable as a collection.

As with every collection, you could also get carried away and push the boat out on a Cromwell farthing, or some patterns. Then the sky is the limit.

This would work, just wondering how I'd maintain the balance of the collection were I to have more than one coin per monarch / period or if I should be strict with myself. Yes the Cromwell farthing comes later..

You could start a date run which would'nt include every Freeman number but instead just each date from say 1970 downwards to 1860 and then see of you can then go further back, it can be applied to pennies, halfpennies and farthings, so perhaps Choose which would more suit your pocket and go from there.

If you decide this route then try and obtain the best example you can afford of each

Ah this is the problem though, a date run 1970 to 1860 in BU is very difficult, even omitting rarer Freeman types. Really I suppose I'm trying to find a way of justifying having one or a few coins per period whilst retaining some sense of purpose / goals as a collector.

[Rob 2,998]

It isn't a question of whether a lot of people take a similar approach, rather a case of what suits your temperament. Some people have to be completists, others can't live with low grade material, some only want an identifiable example of anything and everything, some operate a strict type example, others just buy a piece because they find it attractive. If you know which category you come into, you are halfway there.

A leisurely stroll to a type example of each design in a minimum grade would require doing some spadework to seek out the suitable coins but would provide variety and is far more sensible than trying to do a date run in the same grade. The collection wouldn't happen tomorrow if you are selective about grade, but would provide diversity.

Maintaining a balanced collection is a moot point. If a run of high grade coins are lined up, then a dog stands out like a sore thumb. One collector I know takes the view that when you buy, you are purchasing a single coin, not a collection, and arguably you should view every coin as a stand alone entity. After all, if you decided on a run of BU or thereabouts coins, firstly you will struggle with some of the tin issues simply on cost grounds. William III you will struggle on quality grounds. I would bite someone's hand off in good VF or better for these issues, maybe even accept a VF example of some.

The sense of purpose as a collector is simple. You are doing it for pleasure. If you don't enjoy it, arguably you shouldn't be doing it.

[azda 973]

As Rob said, you should collect for yourself and not for others. The main thing is that you like and enjoy your coin purchase and can explain the outlay to the boss whilst letting her admire it from afar and with gloves.

Coins are a future investment as well as your hobby, if you buy high grade coins they will in turn cost you money, so you have to be sure that what you purchase is worth the price and is nice enough where you won't want to sell it on in the short term. Your choices are endless, personally i'm liking hammered at the moment, that may change in 6 months and move onto something else, no harm in diversity either.

[Peter 615]

I've done the date run on 1/4d's from 1672 on copper,

I don't have 1676 or 1693 but varieties keep me keen.

[pies 33]

Buy what you like,buy quality. The collection whatever it is will sort itself out from there

[damian1986 142]

It isn't a question of whether a lot of people take a similar approach, rather a case of what suits your temperament. Some people have to be completists, others can't live with low grade material, some only want an identifiable example of anything and everything, some operate a strict type example, others just buy a piece because they find it attractive. If you know which category you come into, you are halfway there.

A leisurely stroll to a type example of each design in a minimum grade would require doing some spadework to seek out the suitable coins but would provide variety and is far more sensible than trying to do a date run in the same grade. The collection wouldn't happen tomorrow if you are selective about grade, but would provide diversity.

Maintaining a balanced collection is a moot point. If a run of high grade coins are lined up, then a dog stands out like a sore thumb. One collector I know takes the view that when you buy, you are purchasing a single coin, not a collection, and arguably you should view every coin as a stand alone entity. After all, if you decided on a run of BU or thereabouts coins, firstly you will struggle with some of the tin issues simply on cost grounds. William III you will struggle on quality grounds. I would bite someone's hand off in good VF or better for these issues, maybe even accept a VF example of some.

The sense of purpose as a collector is simple. You are doing it for pleasure. If you don't enjoy it, arguably you shouldn't be doing it.

As Rob said, you should collect for yourself and not for others. The main thing is that you like and enjoy your coin purchase and can explain the outlay to the boss whilst letting her admire it from afar and with gloves.

Coins are a future investment as well as your hobby, if you buy high grade coins they will in turn cost you money, so you have to be sure that what you purchase is worth the price and is nice enough where you won't want to sell it on in the short term. Your choices are endless, personally i'm liking hammered at the moment, that may change in 6 months and move onto something else, no harm in diversity either.

Rob it's difficult given the potential scope for collecting. I wouldn't have entertained the notion of purchasing something from the middle Anglo-Saxon period 12 months ago but I'm largely motivated by coins as historical entities and this is now a viable buy - going from collecting a few farthings and some decimal to being that bit more invested in numismatics brings with it these sorts of concerns I just need a little inspiration really. I know that unless I can make sense out of my collection as a whole I'll lose interest in individual pieces, although the rules by which I collect don't necessarily have to be that well-defined.

Your points are valid though appreciate the feedback, thanks.

[Peckris 579]

Here is a representative and inexpensive type collection of BU 20th Century bronze :

Pennies :

- any from the 1960s

- 1953

- 1949

- 1937, 1938, 1947, or 1948

- 1936

- 1927

- 1920 or 1921

- 1912H (EF with lustre)

- 1902 (you could also add a high grade Low Tide)

- 1901

Halfpennies :

- any after 1957

- 1953

- 1952

- 1937, 1942, 1944, 1945

- 1928 or 1936

- 1926

- 1924 or 1925

- 1902

- 1901

Farthings :

- 1954, 1955 or 1956

- 1953

- any from 1949 to 1952

- any from 1937 to 1948 (1938 is tricky in BU)

- any from 1928 to 1933, or 1936

- any from 1919 to 1924

- 1911 or 1917 (darkened)

- 1902

- 1901

That wraps up the 20th Century. It gets more complex the further back you go, but that little lot would cost you a few hundred only in BU.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Peckris

[damian1986 142]

Here is a representative and inexpensive type collection of BU 20th Century bronze

...

Thanks Peckris just trying to figure out your logic here.

Different legends for Liz II and George VI and one of every effigy of George V.

Suppose there'd have to be a darkened penny in there and possibly a KN (but not likely in BU!) for the mint.

How about the bunhead coinage what do you reckon? I only really got as far as older features, Heaton mint, younger features and beaded border.

Edited April 19, 2014 by damian1986

[Rob 2,998]

I'd be tempted to go for obvious design differences rather than worrying about whether there's a little H or KN somewhere to be seen. A bust is a fairly obvious feature that can be easily differentiated from the next without recourse to fine detail, so too is a significantly different legend. Even with the 17th century in EF and the rest in UNC you could easily spend £20-25K+ if you were to do a basic one of each type.

[damian1986 142]

I'd be tempted to go for obvious design differences rather than worrying about whether there's a little H or KN somewhere to be seen. A bust is a fairly obvious feature that can be easily differentiated from the next without recourse to fine detail, so too is a significantly different legend. Even with the 17th century in EF and the rest in UNC you could easily spend £20-25K+ if you were to do a basic one of each type.

Thanks Rob that's a very good point!

[Peckris 579]

Here is a representative and inexpensive type collection of BU 20th Century bronze

...

Thanks Peckris just trying to figure out your logic here.

Different legends for Liz II and George VI and one of every effigy of George V.

Suppose there'd have to be a darkened penny in there and possibly a KN (but not likely in BU!) for the mint.

How about the bunhead coinage what do you reckon? I only really got as far as older features, Heaton mint, younger features and beaded border.

Yes, you got my idea. (1945 for a darkened penny, and a 1918KN in VF).

For bun pennies, the differences in obverses and reverses are subtle. I'd say a common type of 1860 beaded border, then 1862 or 1863 in EF minimum. 1874 is the first 'aged' obverse (subtle!), and any date between 1889 and 1893 for the last main subtle obverse type. That would also sweep up most of the main reverse types, provided you ignore the 1860/1861 'signature below foot' '..below rocks' '..below bust' 'no signature' variations. For wide / narrow date varieties, both exist for 1875 and neither are especially expensive. For Heaton (H) 1882 is the cheapest option.

If you want one bun in genuine BU, 1890-92 are the cheapest, with 1889 not far behind.

For halfpennies and farthings there are far fewer variations and also they're more affordable.

[damian1986 142]

Here is a representative and inexpensive type collection of BU 20th Century bronze

...

Thanks Peckris just trying to figure out your logic here.

Different legends for Liz II and George VI and one of every effigy of George V.

Suppose there'd have to be a darkened penny in there and possibly a KN (but not likely in BU!) for the mint.

How about the bunhead coinage what do you reckon? I only really got as far as older features, Heaton mint, younger features and beaded border.

Yes, you got my idea. (1945 for a darkened penny, and a 1918KN in VF).

For bun pennies, the differences in obverses and reverses are subtle. I'd say a common type of 1860 beaded border, then 1862 or 1863 in EF minimum. 1874 is the first 'aged' obverse (subtle!), and any date between 1889 and 1893 for the last main subtle obverse type. That would also sweep up most of the main reverse types, provided you ignore the 1860/1861 'signature below foot' '..below rocks' '..below bust' 'no signature' variations. For wide / narrow date varieties, both exist for 1875 and neither are especially expensive. For Heaton (H) 1882 is the cheapest option.

If you want one bun in genuine BU, 1890-92 are the cheapest, with 1889 not far behind.

For halfpennies and farthings there are far fewer variations and also they're more affordable.

Thanks Peckris with the halfpennies I've gone 1887, 1875H and 1862, partly because I already have them and partly because I do notice the obverse differences between 1875H and 1887. My thinking is to add a beaded border type and thereafter let funds, availability and desirability of individual pieces dictate whether or not any other varieties are added which probably works better for me.

Appreciate the advice, cheers

[Peckris 579]

Here is a representative and inexpensive type collection of BU 20th Century bronze

...

Thanks Peckris just trying to figure out your logic here.

Different legends for Liz II and George VI and one of every effigy of George V.

Suppose there'd have to be a darkened penny in there and possibly a KN (but not likely in BU!) for the mint.

How about the bunhead coinage what do you reckon? I only really got as far as older features, Heaton mint, younger features and beaded border.

Yes, you got my idea. (1945 for a darkened penny, and a 1918KN in VF).

For bun pennies, the differences in obverses and reverses are subtle. I'd say a common type of 1860 beaded border, then 1862 or 1863 in EF minimum. 1874 is the first 'aged' obverse (subtle!), and any date between 1889 and 1893 for the last main subtle obverse type. That would also sweep up most of the main reverse types, provided you ignore the 1860/1861 'signature below foot' '..below rocks' '..below bust' 'no signature' variations. For wide / narrow date varieties, both exist for 1875 and neither are especially expensive. For Heaton (H) 1882 is the cheapest option.

If you want one bun in genuine BU, 1890-92 are the cheapest, with 1889 not far behind.

For halfpennies and farthings there are far fewer variations and also they're more affordable.

Thanks Peckris with the halfpennies I've gone 1887, 1875H and 1862, partly because I already have them and partly because I do notice the obverse differences between 1875H and 1887. My thinking is to add a beaded border type and thereafter let funds, availability and desirability of individual pieces dictate whether or not any other varieties are added which probably works better for me.

Appreciate the advice, cheers

You're lucky with halfpennies - the 1860 beaded border in BU is much cheaper and more available than the toothed variety.