Let's see your Conder Tokens

I think my eyes may be slipping a bit as I graded the following slightly different that what PCGS did, but I still like them and say they are keepers.
BTW, if anyone disagrees with my grading please state what grades you believe and why........I need to figure out what I missed as I usually can grade fairly accurate.

1795 Tk 1/2D DH-13a Lothian, Edinburgh, BN MS62BN.....
I thought was an easy MS63




796 Tk 1/2D DH-14a Lothian, Edinburgh, BN AU58BN
I think this is a MS coin, at least MS62.....




1795 Tk 1/2D DH-60 Gloucestershire Brimscombe Port, BN MS63BN
I thought it was a MS62.....but I'll take a MS63




1793 Tk 1/2D DH-242b Warwickshire, Coventry, BN AU58BN
This one and the DH14a has me stumped the most as I do not see this or the Snuff shop as AU. The both have luster, very minimal hits or rubs. Bot both are weekly struct. Mainly the 242d.......I looked at all the graded and sold ones and never came across a fully struck horse or elephant on this particular one. If I'm wrong and someone has one.....please post it so I can learn!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I need help with the D&H Number with this.


The edge inscription is "PAYABLE IN BEDWORTH HINKLEY OR NUNEATON. Tilde and cross.

I did some Internet searching and did not find it. I can go to the university library later this week and look it up. I usually do my own attributions. But I am concerned about the misspelling of HINCKLEY as HINKLEY. Is this a contemporary forgery?

Thanks!

 

This is common but still one of my favorites.

 

As you might observe, I love these things. Copper is king.

 

Did I sell you that one? I have it in my sold pile on collective coin...I kind of miss it. Today I was just looking at the conders I have left and was trying to remind myself I want to SELL not BUY. And then you have to go and post that one. Sigh. I really should sell them.

 

This is a Warwickshire 242. And you are correct, it is a contemporary counterfeit variety.

 

I get 242a.

I don't see anything to suggest it's a counterfeit. What makes you say that please?

 

The name of the town HINCKLEY is misspelled as HINKLEY. But, to be fair, we get the same problem with Wilkinson/Wilkenson. We know that “the great Staffordshire ironmaster” (EB) John Wilkinson issued very, very many of these as advertising for himself. More to the point, he purposely presented a "royal" style portrait of himself, thus, to be accepted as the king of iron. Nonetheless, some of the WilkEnson tokens are attributed as issues he ordered and paid for, versus those with erroneous inscriptions that were made by others.

 

Thanks for the attribution and thanks for the link. I visited the site. I am not so invoived in Conders that I need the book. However, I did go to the Numismatic Bibliomania Society E-Sylum and found a review that the author, Michael Dlogosz, sent to editor Wayne Homren. https://www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v13n13a05.html
(The E-Sylum: Volume 13, Number 13, March 28, 2010, Article 5)
They also gave a nice write-up to his Spring 2018 Price List (here: https://www.coinbooks.org/v21/esylum_v21n16a34.html )

Thanks, again, to your pointers, I will find the token in the D&H at the university library.

 

Yours is a 242.

As per Arthur Waters 'Notes on eighteenth century tokens' 1954.

231-237 (1792) are genuine issue

Lutwyche manufactured the genuine pieces but was known counterfeiter / mule maker because it was profitable to sell to collectors. So he is likely responsible for 238-246 (1793-95) which are counterfeits. I don't have other details handy but will look through other resources when I have more time.

Mike

 

Again, my thanks. I found listings for the Waters book, published by Seaby. In fact, I find that Arthur W. Waters was a 19th century numismatist. Google Books has a Spink & Sons Numismatic Circular from volume 11, 1903, with a note from him. Continuing in Google Books, with the Spink NC, Waters was a regular contributor with many of these addenda as he uncovered them.

The University of Texas Library special archives (Ransom Collection) has a different book by Waters, but that's all. This is the aspect of numismatics that I really love, the dusty side paths that no one travels...

 

^indeed!

Waters lived a very long life and that 1954 book was toward the later part. I can't recall if he lived past 100... but I do remember thinking the life span was quite remarkable.

 

Beautiful conder tokens all! Wish my camera was okay and the right arm worked.

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist: Does your camera have a right arm? Mine only has a button. Damn you Canon.

I actually feel your pain. I have a hereditary tremble. Makes typing etc. I also do historical modeling mostly of Confederate and Union ironclads. I have created many work arounds as fine skills are shaky to say the least. I do hope your arm recovers. Would a remote button work?

 

I don't see the misspelling of the town name as any indication that the token is counterfeit. There are many Conder tokens which have the name misspelled, (or possibly an older form of a place name which evolves over time). Just off the top of my head, I can think of FOLKSTONE (for Folkestone), HYTH (for Hythe), DIMCHURCH (for Dymchurch) all on the Kent coast, and then RIPPON (for Ripon) and BEDAL (for Bedale, pictured) in Yorkshire. Literacy levels were hardly very high at the time.

The so-called "genuine" issues 231-237 all use the spelling HINKLEY where it is featured.

Please don't misunderstand the point of my post - I'm not saying that 238-246 are not counterfeit, or that what you're saying is not correct. I'm just asking the question. Dalton & Hamer make no mention of counterfeits. I don't have a copy of Waters (could you perhaps scan the relevant pages and post them up?)

If Lutwyche was counterfeiting his own tokens, I fail to see how you can distinguish between them?

 

Dalton and Hamer can be found as a PDF download at no cost.

 

I recently picked up this nice one. I really like the Anglesey pennies.



PARIS MINES COMPANY

Anglesey Copper D Penny

Dalton & Hamer #9, R

Significantly, this variety was the first full-weight 18th-century penny. This piece, a pattern D penny, lovely shimmering blue-brown color with proof-like fields. Rare, p/l Uncirculated

I find that is almost perfectly struck. Obviously, it has been well kept for the last 233 years.

 

I do not have the Waters book, either. I was taking my information from conderluva above in Post #650.

I do not have an answer for the last point, either, but I do look to the ubiquitous 1000 Mark notes from 1910 that Germany printed long into World War I and the depletion of the treasury. Chiang Kaishek's government in China c. 1945 did the same thing with at least one series of paper notes supposedly backed in silver but printed long after the silver ran out. That said, I do not have the details on the Coventry token in this discussion.

 

Picked up a couple of nicer budget grade conder tokens, I'm not sure if I have the obverse and reverse right on either of these.



Anyone know what "P P and W" refers to?



Both have cool edge lettering as well.

 

PP&W presumably stands for Preter Pew & Whitty as there are other tokens for Sherborne with these names in full and similar designs. Another token has "at the Bank..." on the edge, so they must have been the proprietors of that.
I drove through Sherborne only yesterday.