Farthing upgrades and queries

[Paddy]

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!

[mrbadexample]

1. Bramah 12c - he says: "All the listed varieties are rare". 

2. Agree with your die pairing.

Nice pick up, Paddy.

[Unwilling Numismatist]

A very nice purchase there @Paddy, some nice vickies too!

[copper123]

The 1721 farthing with a dot is not as rare as the 1721/0 but I would hazard a guess at 10 out of 100 random coins of this date would be about right

the 1721/0 is probably about 4 in a 100

[Colin G.]

Although they are exaggerated in the image attached, there are two distinct types of 8 encountered in the farthings from 1862 - 1865. Your 1863 has the fat 8 style, but you often find the underlying thin 8 is also visible, by the thicker diagonal mid bar being partly visible in one of the loops.

[Paddy]

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.

 

[copper123]

I would really like to own that 1721. farthing its a lot better than the one in my collection

[copper123]

Try finding a 1862 fat eight farthing for your collection paddy - thats a hard one to find

[Paddy]

6 minutes ago, copper123 said:

Try finding a 1862 fat eight farthing for your collection paddy - thats a hard one to find

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

😁

[Peckris 2]

1 hour ago, copper123 said:

Try finding a 1862 fat eight farthing for your collection paddy - thats a hard one to find

A dealer I know paid £200 for a large mixed lot at Warwick in the 90s - just to get that farthing. He then took it out, and sold me the rest of the lot ... for £200! Nice work if you can get it, or meet a mug like me.. 

[Paddy]

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?

 

[Rob]

I think there could be a trace of a stop both before and after the date. No stops either side is P683. You need a decent example to confirm no stops as they filled easily.

[copper123]

26 minutes ago, Rob said:

I think there could be a trace of a stop both before and after the date. No stops either side is P683. You need a decent example to confirm no stops as they filled easily.

Difficult when most are on dreadful cast blanks

[copper123]

Like the 1739 , 1746 and 1749 as well first two are fairly common the 1749 is a bit scarcer - nice chocolate tones as well on those three.

[Paddy]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

I think there could be a trace of a stop both before and after the date. No stops either side is P683. You need a decent example to confirm no stops as they filled easily.

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.)

[Paddy]

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,