Toned Coins

[brg5658]

Nothing iridescent or wild, but some lovely toned surfaces on this red/brown copper token. This is my favorite 18th Century Provincial (Conder) token in my collection. The surfaces are immaculate, booming with luster, and nary a tic to be found. While the Druid design isn't the most exciting theme for these tokens, no collection should be without at least one example of the type -- afterall, it was the "first" design of many hundreds to appear during the period. I always love when pieces like this come with their old auction tickets...

Absolutely beautiful - no wonder you supplied the picture of it to illustrate the Wikipedia article on Conder tokens: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conder_token

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

[brg5658]

This token is nice, but not colorful at all when imaged straight on...

BUT, tilt it into the light a bit, and the bronzed proof surfaces exhibit quite the array of iridescent blue tones. Very few of these DH342 tokens circulated, and most if not all of them were reported to have been struck as "bronzed proofs" in December 1794 or January 1795 by Boulton. Listed as "scarce" in D&H, this token was originally thought to have been struck in as many as 150 pieces; more recently, it has been estimated that as many as 250 to 300 may have been produced. The small boar versions (D&H 339 to 341) are must less common.

[Sword]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY Paulus!!!

Hope you have a fantastic day.

[Peckris]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

[Accumulator]

I've never really looked at tokens, but can't fail to be impressed with these examples. Welcome to the site!

[Coinery]

This token is nice, but not colorful at all when imaged straight on...

BUT, tilt it into the light a bit, and the bronzed proof surfaces exhibit quite the array of iridescent blue tones. Very few of these DH342 tokens circulated, and most if not all of them were reported to have been struck as "bronzed proofs" in December 1794 or January 1795 by Boulton. Listed as "scarce" in D&H, this token was originally thought to have been struck in as many as 150 pieces; more recently, it has been estimated that as many as 250 to 300 may have been produced. The small boar versions (D&H 339 to 341) are must less common.

Again, the top image...great creativity and presentation (side on image below)! Brilliant!

[brg5658]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

Yessir, that's James Conder, one and the same. He wrote one of the first books indexing the provincial tokens (Pye and Birchall wrote earlier works, but they were less exhaustive and Conder's 1798 work surpassed their works in popularity).

[Peckris]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

Yessir, that's James Conder, one and the same. He wrote one of the first books indexing the provincial tokens (Pye and Birchall wrote earlier works, but they were less exhaustive and Conder's 1798 work surpassed their works in popularity).

Fascinating - he wrote 'the book' while copper tokens were still at the height of popularity. I wonder how he reacted to the first regal issue of halfpennies for over 20 years appearing only the following year?

[brg5658]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

Yessir, that's James Conder, one and the same. He wrote one of the first books indexing the provincial tokens (Pye and Birchall wrote earlier works, but they were less exhaustive and Conder's 1798 work surpassed their works in popularity).

Fascinating - he wrote 'the book' while copper tokens were still at the height of popularity. I wonder how he reacted to the first regal issue of halfpennies for over 20 years appearing only the following year?

Once the twopence and penny were issued in 1797, the writing was on the wall I believe. Interestingly, the provincial tokens circulated heavily and new designs were struck even through 1801 or so. The introduction of "for collectors only" tokens increased from about 1793 onward -- and Conder himself joined in on that. Some proprietors would issue very limited runs of tokens and then sell them for premiums to other collectors. That's why there are so many immaculately preserved examples of many of these coppers today. They sat in coin cabinets for years!

[Peckris]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

Yessir, that's James Conder, one and the same. He wrote one of the first books indexing the provincial tokens (Pye and Birchall wrote earlier works, but they were less exhaustive and Conder's 1798 work surpassed their works in popularity).

Fascinating - he wrote 'the book' while copper tokens were still at the height of popularity. I wonder how he reacted to the first regal issue of halfpennies for over 20 years appearing only the following year?

Once the twopence and penny were issued in 1797, the writing was on the wall I believe. Interestingly, the provincial tokens circulated heavily and new designs were struck even through 1801 or so. The introduction of "for collectors only" tokens increased from about 1793 onward -- and Conder himself joined in on that. Some proprietors would issue very limited runs of tokens and then sell them for premiums to other collectors. That's why there are so many immaculately preserved examples of many of these coppers today. They sat in coin cabinets for years!

Don't forget the renewed token 'splurge' in the early 19thC, when the Great Recoinage of 1816 failed to deal with copper coins (possibly assuming that 1797-1806 was enough, or because they were just too busy with gold and silver issues). I'm thinking - for example - of the very common Cornish penny of around 1815.

[brg5658]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

Yessir, that's James Conder, one and the same. He wrote one of the first books indexing the provincial tokens (Pye and Birchall wrote earlier works, but they were less exhaustive and Conder's 1798 work surpassed their works in popularity).

Fascinating - he wrote 'the book' while copper tokens were still at the height of popularity. I wonder how he reacted to the first regal issue of halfpennies for over 20 years appearing only the following year?

Once the twopence and penny were issued in 1797, the writing was on the wall I believe. Interestingly, the provincial tokens circulated heavily and new designs were struck even through 1801 or so. The introduction of "for collectors only" tokens increased from about 1793 onward -- and Conder himself joined in on that. Some proprietors would issue very limited runs of tokens and then sell them for premiums to other collectors. That's why there are so many immaculately preserved examples of many of these coppers today. They sat in coin cabinets for years!

Don't forget the renewed token 'splurge' in the early 19thC, when the Great Recoinage of 1816 failed to deal with copper coins (possibly assuming that 1797-1806 was enough, or because they were just too busy with gold and silver issues). I'm thinking - for example - of the very common Cornish penny of around 1815.

Indeed, you are correct. My area of interest and where I know the most is limited to the 1787 to around 1801 era, which encompasses almost all of the tokens indexed by Dalton & Hamer in their reference. Those from the early 19th Century are indexed elsewhere...and their production was stopped almost overnight in 1817 when they were made illegal to produce by act of parliament.

[Peckris]

Almost all of the Conder Token article in Wikipedia was written by me. It was really small and quite bad, so I undertook a complete re-write and reorganization of the article in mid-June 2013. It is almost ready to be submitted for "Good Article" status; I hope that will happen sometime this winter. All of the tokens pictured in that article are from my collection, except the Ipswich.

Interestingly, the Ipswich token is one I do have, though it is just a shade less good than the one illustrated. That was my first exposure to the name Conder, so for quite a while when I read about Conder tokens, I used to think they were talking about "Ipswich tokens payable at Conder's"! So he is the same Conder who wrote the book, then? That I didn't know.

Yessir, that's James Conder, one and the same. He wrote one of the first books indexing the provincial tokens (Pye and Birchall wrote earlier works, but they were less exhaustive and Conder's 1798 work surpassed their works in popularity).

Fascinating - he wrote 'the book' while copper tokens were still at the height of popularity. I wonder how he reacted to the first regal issue of halfpennies for over 20 years appearing only the following year?

Once the twopence and penny were issued in 1797, the writing was on the wall I believe. Interestingly, the provincial tokens circulated heavily and new designs were struck even through 1801 or so. The introduction of "for collectors only" tokens increased from about 1793 onward -- and Conder himself joined in on that. Some proprietors would issue very limited runs of tokens and then sell them for premiums to other collectors. That's why there are so many immaculately preserved examples of many of these coppers today. They sat in coin cabinets for years!

Don't forget the renewed token 'splurge' in the early 19thC, when the Great Recoinage of 1816 failed to deal with copper coins (possibly assuming that 1797-1806 was enough, or because they were just too busy with gold and silver issues). I'm thinking - for example - of the very common Cornish penny of around 1815.

Indeed, you are correct. My area of interest and where I know the most is limited to the 1787 to around 1801 era, which encompasses almost all of the tokens indexed by Dalton & Hamer in their reference. Those from the early 19th Century are indexed elsewhere...and their production was stopped almost overnight in 1817 when they were made illegal to produce by act of parliament.

Odd though, isn't it, that it was to be nearly 10 years before halfpennies and pennies began to be minted again? And let's face it, the copper issues of 1797, 1799, and 1806-7, were a bit of a hodge podge taken as a whole.

[brg5658]

I'm sure this one will get a rise out of a few haters. LOL

[RLC35]

I'm sure this one will get a rise out of a few haters. LOL

I usually don't like toning, but that is a beautiful coin. With that said, the coin would probably bring a better price with a quick dip to remove the color, and restore the coin's natural silver sheen.

[Rob]

I don't like dipped coins. As long as the coin isn't black, I think that antique silver should be toned as it will do this as a natural process.

[Coinery]

I personally don't like the imbalance of the tone on this one! Balance is an important feature in my book, mostly derived from my interest in, and the vagarities of, hammered strikes (and tone of course)!

[Rob]

I personally don't like the imbalance of the tone on this one! Balance is an important feature in my book, mostly derived from my interest in, and the vagarities of, hammered strikes (and tone of course)!

Maundy is one series which often exhibits toning of this nature, particularly if it has been stored in a case. The more undisturbed the set, the more likely it is to see one side more heavily toned from contact with the case. Picking up the coin, even by the edge will inevitably leave minute deposits at the rim which increases the chance of toning at this point, even if we are looking many years into the future.

[azda]

I'm sure this one will get a rise out of a few haters. LOL

Unfortunately you got the wrong harter this time I think you need to tone your hatered of me down or else i'm going to be speaking to the forum owner about the possibility of you being removed. I have nothing against your coins but i'm now having a problem with your somewhat hate towards me. Now i've asked nicely this time.

Oh and p.s, you obviously don't seem to quite get it. I dislike AT toned coins where people practise this in order to gain mamy more $s than a coin is worth, this is practised mainly in America, the 4d you've displayed is an attractive naturally toned coin.

Edited November 25, 2013 by azda

[Peckris]

I'm sure this one will get a rise out of a few haters. LOL

I usually don't like toning, but that is a beautiful coin. With that said, the coin would probably bring a better price with a quick dip to remove the color, and restore the coin's natural silver sheen.

Despite being of 'rainbow hue', I get the feeling that that coin is naturally toned. I actually like it, as the toning has clearly spread evenly inwards from the edge, which indicates storage conditions to me.

A "better price from dipping" is sadly probably true, such is the prevalent ignorance of buyers and the dearth of good old-fashioned dealer advice and education.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Peckris

[Peter]

[brg5658]

Unfortunately you got the wrong harter this time I think you need to tone your hatered of me down or else i'm going to be speaking to the forum owner about the possibility of you being removed. I have nothing against your coins but i'm now having a problem with your somewhat hate towards me. Now i've asked nicely this time.

Oh and p.s, you obviously don't seem to quite get it. I dislike AT toned coins where people practise this in order to gain mamy more $s than a coin is worth, this is practised mainly in America, the 4d you've displayed is an attractive naturally toned coin.

NO WHERE did I say this post was about or intended just for you. Notice I mentioned a "few haters". Everything isn't about you. And, let us not forget who was the first to start the mud-slinging and vulgar/offensive personal attacks -- it wasn't me.

[brg5658]

I usually don't like toning, but that is a beautiful coin. With that said, the coin would probably bring a better price with a quick dip to remove the color, and restore the coin's natural silver sheen.

Despite being of 'rainbow hue', I get the feeling that that coin is naturally toned. I actually like it, as the toning has clearly spread evenly inwards from the edge, which indicates storage conditions to me.

A "better price from dipping" is sadly probably true, such is the prevalent ignorance of buyers and the dearth of good old-fashioned dealer advice and education.

Worry not, there will be no "dipping" of this coin anytime soon. I like it just the way it is, and I don't really care if it might achieve a better price if dipped. Dipping ruins coins. By definition, it removes surface metal and luster. No thanks!

[RLC35]

I usually don't like toning, but that is a beautiful coin. With that said, the coin would probably bring a better price with a quick dip to remove the color, and restore the coin's natural silver sheen.

Despite being of 'rainbow hue', I get the feeling that that coin is naturally toned. I actually like it, as the toning has clearly spread evenly inwards from the edge, which indicates storage conditions to me.

A "better price from dipping" is sadly probably true, such is the prevalent ignorance of buyers and the dearth of good old-fashioned dealer advice and education.

Worry not, there will be no "dipping" of this coin anytime soon. I like it just the way it is, and I don't really care if it might achieve a better price if dipped. Dipping ruins coins. By definition, it removes surface metal and luster. No thanks!

Lightly dipping a toned coin, only removes the corrosion, not metal...the corrosion itself (toning) is what removes the metal.... Heavily dipping (or cleaning) a coin is another matter.

Edited November 25, 2013 by RLC35

[Peckris]

I usually don't like toning, but that is a beautiful coin. With that said, the coin would probably bring a better price with a quick dip to remove the color, and restore the coin's natural silver sheen.

Despite being of 'rainbow hue', I get the feeling that that coin is naturally toned. I actually like it, as the toning has clearly spread evenly inwards from the edge, which indicates storage conditions to me.

A "better price from dipping" is sadly probably true, such is the prevalent ignorance of buyers and the dearth of good old-fashioned dealer advice and education.

Worry not, there will be no "dipping" of this coin anytime soon. I like it just the way it is, and I don't really care if it might achieve a better price if dipped. Dipping ruins coins. By definition, it removes surface metal and luster. No thanks!

By and large I agree. However, I have removed ugly tarnish from silver by dipping for the briefest time (10 seconds), followed by another 10 seconds if the first wasn't enough. That does work, but dipping for any longer ruins a coin, as you say.

[ChKy]

Treat silver coins with a mild detergent. That is sufficient

Edited November 25, 2013 by ChKy