Paddy

Here is the dilemma - this is the Henry VII Groat I currently have, which I believe is S2198a. It is a more common issue but fills the bill in terms of a reasonably decent Henry VII coin - so how much should I invest in an upgrade? By the way, in reviewing this coin I notice that the devices around the mint lettering on the reverse appear as 3 sprogged circles a bit like the modern Nuclear symbol, whereas the pictures in Spink suggest a 5 petalled flower - cinquefoil. Is this another known variation?

This is my only one - not one of the scarcer ones but attractive enough. Pity about someone scratching WW into the obverse.

OK - I agree with the aim! Just the comment on the angle of the crown - compared to your picture it is higher at the back, but that seems right for the S2254, at least as presented in Spink. I think I can see nothing wrong with the coin. The more difficult question is should I be buying it, and if so, for how much? 🙂 I would like to have it, but I already have a reasonable Henry VII in my monarch run, so it is not an urgent need. But there again - it is a lovely example!

Is not the difference two different coins in Spink? The my OP ones is S2254, whereas the one @Coinery posted looks to be S2258? From the pics in Spink that seems to match the difference in the crown position, although they make more point about the number of bands on the crown...

I got to see this coin today. The "copper" streak was rust from the environment in which it had been found - a little light work with a finger nail removed it completely. The coin appeared genuine to me, the colour being darker and more evenly toned than the pictures suggested. Weight was 2.91g. Does that change anyone's opinion?

I am delighted that Peter Rabbit's latest "friends" would happily make a meal of him!

If anyone is still interested, I have added a whole load more pictures to the "Upgrade" folder at: https://1drv.ms/f/s!Alos83kNwyLnsi3O4FW1J24Chp4K Some of these are upgrades, some new (to me) varieties. A few queries, if anyone can help me: 1. I have the 1846 down as 1a & B - but the aboutfarthings website has no picture of the 1a - am I right? 2. I have the 1864 down as 3 & Bc - but the website does not offer this as a combination. Have I got it wrong? 3. I have the 1879 down as 5a & Ce - but again the website does not offer this as a combination. Have I got it wrong? Have I got anything else wrong? @Colin G. if any of the pics are any use to you for the website, feel free to use. Thanks,

Sadly the guy with this coin couldn't make it today - hopefully next Wednesday.

Thanks for that - very useful site! Also answers my question on the other farthing thread about 1699 with no dot before or after the date. There is one, number 527, and it is listed as Extremely rare - so that is a good one for my collection too!

Thanks for that Peter. Is there somewhere I can view that collection? I have tried his selling website and can't see a 1700 RRITANNIA there.

It seems to have been a week for farthings. This one came in a job lot from an auction - I got it hoping this would be an upgrade to my standard 1700, but when I looked closer I spotted the apparent RRITANNIA version. Is this what it is supposed to look like or is this just a damaged die? My other one has a very clearly completed B.

Thanks for that. As I read Spink there shouldn't be a dot after the date on 1699, only on 1698 - but I do find their wording confusing sometimes. I still suspect the dot before the date is missing - if nothing else the gap between the A and the 1 is much smaller than on my other example (viewable in the link in the original post). But I acknowledge that with a relatively low grade example, I can't prove it! Now, do I keep it as a possible variant, or flog it? (That is a rhetorical question - only I can decide that I know.)

Further to the above, in replacing my old ones I noticed this 1699 farthing, date in legend. It appears to have no dot before or after the date. In Spink, they refer to "No stop before or after" but I think that refers to GVLIELMVS not the date. All the examples I can find have the dot before the date - is missing this a known variety anywhere?

I am picking up a bunch more from the same collection later in the week, so you never know... 😁

Thank you all for the feedback. Both the 1721 dot and the 1863 3a+Bb will go into my collection as new variants. I still can't see the thin eight underneath, which reverse Bb is supposed to have, but I can live with it being there. (I certainly can't say with certainty that it is not there, so cannot argue for a new combination!) @Colin G. are there any plans to extend your excellent website back into George III and earlier? I notice 2 distinctly different reverses on 1679 farthings that are not mentioned in Spink and I would be interested to know if these have been identified before somewhere.

I picked up an old collection of Farthings the other day - mostly for upgrades to my own collection. I have loaded the 19 I will use as upgrades to my Onedrive folder at: https://1drv.ms/f/s!Alos83kNwyLnsi3O4FW1J24Chp4K as there are too many to post individually here. (There are 19 in this folder from 1675 to 1863 and another 21 I have not photographed as they are not going into my collection, and will go for sale.) I hope those of you who enjoy farthings can get some pleasure out of reviewing them! A few queries too: 1. The 1721 is the "dot after date" variety. In Spink this is listed as only a little scarcer than normal, but I can find no example sold on Ebay recently. Does anyone have information on how much scarcer this actually is? 2. The 1863 seems to be 3a and Bb using the codes on @Colin G. site - but I can't see any trace of the slender 8 under the 8. Is this a different reverse die or is it just my poor eyesight? 🙂 3. Have I missed any other variety in this lot? For those who can't be bothered to use the link, here is on of my favourites - the 1749 Farthing, which, despite the obverse scratches, seems pretty good to me!

Thanks both! I hope to get to see it finally on Wednesday, so I will have a better idea then. He says he has a bunch of other hammered coins he has found, so there may be others of interest. I will report back.

Thanks for that Rob. Does that mean you think it is a fake or a contemporary counterfeit? I think I can see part of the F before the RA - the foot and the lower bar. Could this just be wear or a filled die?

I read somewhere else on here that the 2017 and 2018 £2 coins will not be in circulation, and I am pretty certain the Gruffalo and Snowman will also stay in packets. I have always liked to get one of each coin each year to stash away, but with so many coming out now that are not circulation, I will stick to circulation only in the future. As far as I am concerned, if it is never in circulation, it is not a "coin" just a gewgaw.

Thanks for all that @Coinery - that helps a lot. I had not particularly noted the red areas where copper may be showing through, so I will take special note of these when I see it. As most of you know, I am not very good at IDing hammered but I like to be prepared when I know someone is going to bring me some. I suspect he will want to sell me some or all of what he has, so I need to be careful I am not taken for a ride!

One of the metal detectors I meet in the market has asked me about this coin. I believe it is S2254 "Tentative issue" Groat without mintmarks. Am I right? I have not seen it in hand yet - these pics from the enquirer. Can anyone see any indicators towards it being a forgery? Does anyone know of any forgeries of this coin turning up?

I strongly suspect this is one of the fakes knocking around. I have several other examples - one of Magna Carta and one of the HMS Belfast. In each case the appearance at first is proof-like with very shiny fields and a cameo effect to the bust. Further examination turns up edge errors and other "not quite right" features.

Either this one has been up for ages, or he has relisted it with the same daft photo! I remember seeing the same picture on a listing at least a year ago.

... and if that is the total for all letters, then stand by for another year of craziness. I begin to despair of the Royal Mint - they still haven't replaced the mintage figures page and they are bringing out more and more "direct sale only" issues. Profit is more important to them than fulfilling the task of a national mint.

When I was in the Engineers they had a rectangular piece of rock, which had been the high point of Rockall and had been cut out by the first landers to form a table piece for the officer's mess. It was nicknamed "The Square root of Rockall"... PS - further research - I believe this was the 1971 landing when the light beacon was fitted to the top of the rock. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall