1717 Halfpenny…..

[Michael-Roo 777]

I've had this for a few years.

Although it displays some wear I've always believed it to be a proof.

Its a bit thicker than the currency examples I have. The design is in higher relief, and the toothed border much more sharply defined. Also; the colour is a milk chocolate shade, lighter than would usually be expected for one of these.

What do you think?

As usual: apologies for the less than stupendous photography. I really must get a better phone….

[azda 973]

Instead of a phone camera, why not try a camera instead, and whilst your out, buy some gloves so you can Händle the coins better. Fingerprints are a big NOOOOOOOO. Apart from that, i actually like the coin

[copper123 1,352]

i would go with that - impaired proof almost certainly

[Michael-Roo 777]

Thanks Cop.

The legend letters are larger and better executed than the currency too, aren't they.

Did you take a look at my 1718 N over A in Britannia 1/2d? Apart from the DNW auction and Nicholson collection I've still not been able to find any reference to this variety.

Asda graded it a VF. After another look I think I'd go with that too. Still much better than the two I was able find mention of (Fine, and good fine).

[Garrett 76]

Yes, very nice coin indeed !

[Peckris 579]

I agree with its being a very nice coin. If it did turn out to be an impaired proof, how would that affect its value?

[Michael-Roo 777]

Who knows? I suppose, most likely the price of a currency piece in the same grade plus a bit of a premium. William & Mary proof halfpennies and farthings turn up in everything from FDC down to VG, and they all seem to sell ok.

It was sold to me simply as a 1717 halfpenny. It was me who noticed it could be a proof specimen. I've no intention of selling anyway. It was just something I thought fellow Forum members might like to see