Colin G.

Why am I getting the urge to tip out a big pot of 1p coins and start hunting!!

I understood that it was believed that many Jettons were also used as counters/tallies when conducting trade

If I had known you were going for it as well...I wouldn't have even bothered!! That was earmarked early on All to no avail though. Things were getting desperate towards the end of the first five minutes. There were a couple that slipped under the radar, but not many. Once they started the Saxons, it was always going to be an expensive day. I wasn't surprised by 118 from the list above as Derby is always a popular mint, but the following lot going for £1900 was a surprise, as were the prices on 146, 164, 172 and 182. I even resorted to bidding on 514 at the end in the hope that it would be around estimate, but 3 or 4K hammer for a bent, double struck, and cracked William I had no appeal to me, however rare it might be. The Henry VIII farthing surprised me, I have seen better go for less...£1,400 + premium

If I had known you were going for it as well...I wouldn't have even bothered!!

I agree thought I may be able to fill a long standing gap...but not a chance still a couple more to come...but I don't hold out much hope!!

Neil, it is good to see you here...forgive me for sniggering but it was quite comical to see you get hung for something you had not done ......too honest for your own good...but not a bad trait to have in my opinion

You can store shortcuts to images in access and use code to get it to display the image

I would guess the raised area on the Obverse is a die flaw, whereas the extension of the serif to the A does look more "intentional" and is possibly where a die has been re-cut, but it in my opinion it would only go down as a "possible" at the moment, additional examples would need to be found before any certainty could be given...and even then it is still likely to be a best guess

Storage conditions can also have a major affect on lustre, in my opinion lustre can be removed by other factors..

Same for me, won one but two others are at my max bid so I may have won them.

That's why it needs to be left alone!!

A few for me but nothing too extravagant

Would you be willing to e-mail me a copy as well?

Dave, I just took a look at Martin Platt's 1860, that you guys referred too...in my opinion it really is a Mule...FYI! Ha,Ha Bob, Fair enough - from the pic, I didn't like the look of the bead like teeth. Maybe more obvious in hand. Either way, at £1250 and cleaned, I'm not interested. I agree with Bob it is a genuine 1860 Mule.

Try telling that to a prospective buyer of a BU 1874 "G's over sideways" I know of one in existence...just got to wait for it to come on the market

I must say I have always found Semra very pleasant to deal with, only yesterday she bought some bulk lots to the Midland coin fair for me to have a look at. They usually bring the single coins, but she went out of her way to accommodate my request. I know some will say it should be in their interests as the auction house to accommodate, but this can not said for all auction houses.

Welcome to the forum William, always good to see new collectors on here

I have an 1840 with a faint trace of the flaw along the arm, and being a flaw it is inevitably a progressive indicator, but it would be good to see images of them if you have the time? You can e-mail them direct if you prefer. Thanks for having a look through, I think we have checked against several hundred examples and the indicators have been consistent, but a wider specimen will inevitably throw up some interesting examples.

The threefarthings...definitely fits into my collecting range

Or as they say in binary - 01010111 01101000 01100001 01100001 01100001 01100001 01100001 01100001 01101000 00111111

I would take is as a compliment..but then again I am also a bit geeky!!

Peck every post you do now all I think is Big Bang Theory

I am not far off uploading the "new look" Victorian Copper series on my website, and thought I would get the forum users feedback on a recent discovery. It would appear that through collaboration with a fellow numismatist, a new Reverse type has been identified within this series. The change in design is very consistent across the dates, and has clear date spans (1838 - 1845 for Reverse type A and 1843 - 1859 for Reverse type B. This currently results in both Reverse types being available for farthings dating 1843 - 1845 and both types can be fairly easily obtained. From the information we have studied there is obviously the potential for 1841 & 1842 farthings with Reverse type B and also an 1846 Reverse type A, with the 1842 being the most likely possibility. The link below gives more detail and highlights the identifying features with each characteristic detailed under magnification via a hyperlink. It is only accessible via this link however links to the page on the website will be included in the near future. http://www.aboutfarthings.co.uk/Victorian%20Copper%20Reverse%20Types.html Following Rob's recent discussions about the 1839 proofs, it is interesting to note that all proofs have the "expected" combinations, with no 1839 proof Reverse type B farthings identified to date, which is a shame because it would have given some evidence that these were being struck later than 1843. The two noted anomolies are the 1860 proof and 1864 copper farthings which appear to have type A reverses which is quite strange. The "currency" example in the 1860 farthing in the Oxford collection appears to have Reverse type B. If the utilising of old proof dies were the explanation for the 1860 and 1864 proof strikes, it would have been more likely that the Reverse dies from the 1853 proofs should have been available. There is definitely additional study to be undertaken trawling through back catalogues etc, but I thought some early information may assist with the study. However I would be very interested in hearing from any collectors who have any examples of farthing types that do not conform to the above guidance.