1839 Farthing variations

I have these 2 farthings, 1st 2 pictures are the same coin. Notice the one dot after DEF (also has die clashes on text) the 3rd picture has two dots after DEF, is this a known variation?

  Yes - my book says three 1839 coins - normal coin, DEF variety, trident variety.

Can you add these variations to the catalogue please

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces5501.html

 Done  

There are many cases of incomplete colons on the reverses of the Young Head farthings. These are often considered to be varieties however I personally agree with the argument put forward by Peck that these are not truly varieties. They occur due to the weakening of the dies during their working lives and so I would classify them as a type of error coin.

A number of these damaged colons are listed in Peck so I have put them below for anyone interested in collecting them.

P1553 1838 - (REG.) (FID. DEF.) (DEF.)

P1554 1839 - (FID.) (DEF.) (FID. DEF.)

P1559 1840 - (FID.) (DEF.)

P1560 1841 - (REG.) (REG)

P1565 1844 - (BRITANNIAR.) (FID.)

P1567 1846 - (REG.) (REG) (FID)

P1568 1847 - (FID.) (FID) (DEF)

P1569 1848 - FID.

P1570 1849 - (BRITANNIAR. REG. FID.) (REG. FID)

P1571 1850 - FID.

P1575 1853 - (FID.) (DEF.)

P1578 1853 - (BRITANNIAR.) (FID.) (DEF.)

P1583 1856 - (BRITANNIAR.) (FID.)

P1584 1856 - REG. FID.

how about this then 1 dot and no dot  broken trident and 1 upside down V (for an A) all on the 1 coin





cheers Don

Quote: fourmackhow about this then 1 dot and no dot  broken trident and 1 upside down V (for an A) all on the 1 coin





cheers Don

Nice!

Quote: Walder CoinsThey occur due to the weakening of the dies during their working lives and so I would classify them as a type of error coin.

maybe it's a term, I mean 'error coin' but from my point of view it's just a die spoiling. I prefer to safe the term 'error coin' for something more significant: wrong metal, wrong image, wrong date or other realities, spelling mistakes. The main feather of this type is the involving 'human factor'. The error coin is the result of human mistake. Here we have changes as the result of weak technology. No 'human factor' is involved in the process. The result of spoiling is random always. Just some dirt of grease hided in tiny details on the die, so part of image disappeared. It produced different image of coin, but it does not mean that this coin is a new variety. There are no two identical apples in nature, that means that there are no two identical coins in nature, they are differ for sure. But not every difference is a variety.

That is why die spoiling should not be in a catalog of varieties. From this point of view 'error coin' is a very attractive variety. But coins with die spoiling images could be in a collection as a sample of die damage and clog only so it's another part. There could be a note written in a catalog of varieties such as: these types of difference are resulted of die clog. No need to classify the clog.