| Author |
 Replies: 886 / Views: 96,878 |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
190135 Posts |
Quote:
Here're some fairly slick Indians. Very nice! They did their job and did it well.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Quote:
They did their job and did it well For sure. An additional remark/observation I'd make is it appears that rather consistently with these the reverse holds up appreciably better than the obverse. Of my group, I think only that first 1865 (at the upper left) as an exception to the rule would have a real shot at being certified P01. The other 1865 had no chance of getting there on account of the date almost certainly becoming totally unreadable long before that reverse could be worn smooth. Colligo ergo sum
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
I'm fairly certain this is a farthing of George IV (and as such would be yet another example of a 19th century British copper remaining in circulation until an extraordinarily worn terminal state was reached).   Colligo ergo sum
Edited by Lucky Cuss
07/29/2018 12:08 am
|
|
Moderator
United States
190135 Posts |
Quote:
I'm fairly certain this is a farthing of George IV (and as such would be yet another example of a 19th century British copper remaining in circulation until an extraordinarily worn terminal state is reached). Very nice! |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United Kingdom
18031 Posts |
LuckyCuss - definitely an English farthing, but from the shape of the portrait I'd say Charles II rather than George IV. The George IV ones have a more modern Britannia that faces in the other direction. These coins could have remained in circulation for well over 100 years, certainly until the 1820s and maybe until 1869!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Quote:
...from the shape of the portrait I'd say Charles II rather than George IV. The George IV ones have a more modern Britannia that faces in the other direction. I believe you're absolutely correct. In reexamining it very closely, I can make out that the first two digits of the date are in fact "16" which rather clinches it. So this could've been changing hands in commerce for nearly two centuries, which actually reinforces my previous comment regarding how British minor coinage seems to have been used to death (and perhaps even a bit beyond that point). I suppose it's not beyond the realm of possibility that it might've circulated in the American Colonies! For more particulars, see: http://www.coinsgb.com/Charles_II/4-Farthing.htmlColligo ergo sum
Edited by Lucky Cuss
07/29/2018 10:07 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
75385 Posts |
Very nice lowball coin Lucky Cuss! I like it! Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21668 Posts |
Lucky Cuss-
Although your coin is well worn, it is not really
considered a "lowball" as it is ungradeable without a date.
A true lowball should grade PO1 or FR2
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Here's a pretty well used up Mexico 1840 Zs (Zacatecas mint) 2 reales.   Colligo ergo sum
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
190135 Posts |
Quote:
Here's a pretty well used up Mexico 1840 Zs (Zacatecas mint) 2 reales. Quote:
1883-O Morgan VAM1C2. Current lowball in the SSDC registry is AU50. I think this one is slightly lower... Nice examples! |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
24885 Posts |
1926 República Peruana 10 centavos.   |
|
Moderator
United States
190135 Posts |
Quote:
1926 República Peruana 10 centavos. Very nice! |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
732 Posts |
Capped Bust?   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
732 Posts |
Collection of penny's for various countries   |
| |
Replies: 886 / Views: 96,878 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 07/27/2018 8:52 pm
