1673 farthing no obverse stops.

[Michael-Roo 777]

Hi all.

A rare variety which is mentioned in the Colin Cooke collection as never having been seen by him in a grade better than good fine. His own coin, which is pictured in the collection, has been graded as fine.

Here's the better of two examples I own. Clearly much better than Mr. Cooke's but which I'd personally grade as fine too (or possibly a smidge better).

Spink haven't recorded one as being sold above fine for many years. I'd be interested to know if any other forum members have one superior to mine.

[Rob 3,002]

5 over 3 too.

[Michael-Roo 777]

Are you sure Rob?

Wouldn't that make this a mega rare unrecorded version of the no stops variety?

[Rob 3,002]

Look at the shape of the last digit, then compare with the Nicholson halfpennies or my 1675/3/2 in the unlisted varieties. They added to the existing digit usually rather than fill the old one in. For the halfpennies at least, 1675/3 is at least as common as the straight 1675. Somewhere there is a hand written drawing I appended to a thread regarding shapes of the 5/3. I haven't done the separation into 5/3 for the farthings, but surmise it is likely they reused dies for the farthing, just as they did the halfpennies.

The reverse die can be paired with any obverse as they will have replaced each die as it broke. There is no reason why this should not apply to all denominations.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Rob

[Michael-Roo 777]

Fascinating Rob. Thank you. I'll certainly chase up the information you mention.

In the meantime, here's my other example for comparison (which, I think, grades the same as the Colin Cooke coin).

[copper123 1,352]

in my opinion first coin is good fine and the second fine+ both very rare

[Michael-Roo 777]

Thanks Copper 123. Can I quote you on that?

Are you aware of any circulating in a grade superior to my best example?

[scott 129]

5 over 3? I don't see a 5

those look like both the same reverses to me.

[Rob 3,002]

5 over 3? I don't see a 5

those look like both the same reverses to me.

On the 5 over 3s the overcut is an s shaped punch which protrudes to the right of the 3 from the mid point or higher. When seen in relief, this is cut deeper than the original digit.

[scott 129]

either way, to me they are the same pairing.

and I know the 1675 no stops halfpenny was using the 1673 dies as well, so it isn't beyond the realms of possibility.

Edited October 9, 2014 by scott

[Rob 3,002]

There were no 1674 dated halfpennies,so the transition from 1673 to 1675 makes sense. This is not the case for the farthings as 1674s are quite common, so you would assume that any 1673 dies would be converted to 74s rather than having them left over into 75.

[Peckris 579]

Very interesting - I definitely see the 5 in the first example, so that's a new variety?

That first one I would definitely say was GF though the second barely makes Fine in my opinion.

[Michael-Roo 777]

Here are some (slightly) improved photos of my best 1673 'no stops' including a close up of the date.

I'd go back to my original enquiry; do any other forum members own an example of this variety and, if yes, how does it grade? It would be interesting to see if we can better Mr. Cooke's research which found good fine as being the best known.

[Peter 615]

I'm sitting here with a warm glow.

I'm working on my varieties (thanks Colin)

I can enjoy my hobby without Robs big busters,

I did send the Robster a 1963 1/2d.....only 49 left.I never charged the bugger.

[Colin G. 147]

I have to admit not an area I have yet focused on too much, so I can't be much help at the moment, I have loads of information but yet to even start collating it all.