Owner Comments:
Although Peck lists this variety as
very scarce, describing them as anything but common would counter market availability. Collectors interested in adding an example of this type should hold out for a premium example, as they will undoubtedly get the opportunity to acquire a gem for a fair price. I bought my first example of P-1309 in the earliest days of my Soho Mint collection. I had little knowledge of general availability and rarity, but I was mesmerized by a coin dated “1805” in a PCGS PR-64BN holder that I could afford by simply spending a weekend tutoring undergraduate statistics. Purchasing it was a no-brainer at the time, but in hindsight, I could have waited for a better example. I eventually sold it to raise funds for one of my favorite pieces in my collection, but I always intended to find a replacement. Armed with knowledge, I opted to take the slow approach. Despite numerous opportunities to acquire a replacement, I wanted to hold off in search of one unlikely to ever be bested. I wanted a piece that was essentially “as struck” or a gem example with a provenance beyond reproach. I assumed I might eventually find a nice gem example from the Boulton Family collection or perhaps a solid PF-66BN, but I never imagined I would find a coin genuinely deserving of a loftier grade. The restrikes are often marred with less-than-ideal eye appeal paired with general imperfections, which often prohibits most from grading above PF/PR-66. You can imagine my surprise when an example appeared for sale in a PR-67BN holder. The provided images were less than ideal as the plastic holder is marred beyond reason. To be fair, they did a decent job considering the condition of the holder. Despite my skepticism, I bought this coin expecting that it would be likely undeserving of such a lofty grade, but I quickly realized my assumption based on the provided images was deeply misguided. This coin is stunning and embodies the quality typically seen on Soho Mint-produced proofs – a characteristic that is almost always absent on Taylor’s restrikes. The surfaces are even, the designs are well-struck, i is devoid of unsightly blemishes, and the bronzing was applied to perfection. Those with extensive experience with Taylor’s restrikes will undoubtedly understand how rare it is to find an example of his work produced with retouched Soho dies that possess any two of these characteristics, much less all of them!
The images are courtesy of PCGS’s TrueView service.
Obverse: The obverse depicts George III facing right. His hair (presumably a whig) is pulled tightly from his forehead. The top of his head is adorned with squiggly lines giving the appearance of slight curls. A row of three tightly formed curls appears just above his ear. A laurel wreath with twelve leaves and three berries rests upon his head. It is interesting to note that each berry is a different size, with the largest appearing in the middle. The lowest berry is very small and has a distinct stem. The wreath is tied behind his head by a riband with one bow and two loose ends, both of which flow freely outward behind him. A large patch of die rust appears at the top of the bow and in the field just below. Several large strands of curly hair flow beneath the wreath coming to a somewhat indistinct end at his right shoulder. A large locket of curly hair rests on either shoulder. The King is wearing a free-flowing article of clothing. The cloth appears to have an ermind border, which is secured by a brooch of eight irregularly shaped jewels. The uppermost jewel is distinctly square. Küchler’s initial (i.e., K) followed by three dots appears on the truncation line. Rust spots occur on the neck and jaw as well as a noticeable rust spot between “G” and “IUS” in the legend. These are noticeably less prevalent on the current specimen. There is also a large die crack just above his ear that runs from the back of his head to the middle of his upper cheek. The legend,
GEORGIUS III · D: G · REX. appears above the King’s effigy. Another area of die rust appears toward the rim at the point of the truncation. A somewhat unevenly applied beaded border appears attached to a moderately wide raised rim. It is interesting to note that the rim has been filed (likely to remove additional die rust); however, the filing is abnormally uniform in execution. Taken together with the incredibly well applied bronzing, it is clear that Taylor paid special attention to producing this piece. The obverse of this coin is unparalleled among the numerous P-1309s I have viewed over the years.
Reverse: The reverse depicts Britannia facing left (from the viewers perspective). She is perched upon a rocky shore and surrounded by waves and an open ocean. She is wearing a drapery that is rather tightly fitting on the top but flows more freely towards her lower half before ending with an ermind border. Her right arm is outstretched with a laurel branch in her hand. The laurel branch has ten leaves and four stubby berries. Her left arm falls to her side and slightly bent. A trident is clasped in her left hand and rests against her arm. An oval shield with the crosses of St. George and St. Andrew (heraldically colored) appears to her left, which is presumably resting against the rock under her. Her left leg is bent, but slightly extended. She wears a sandal on her left foot, which rests upon a flat area of the rocky cliff. In the distance in front of her appears a three-masted warship. Compared to Küchler’s work, this ship looks boxier and lacks much of the detail. This often referred to as a “stubby” appearance that is often associated with the restrikes. A minute area of raised die rust appears in the air just in front of the ship. The word “
SOHO” is inscribed on a small ribbonlike design appears just below to the right of center at the bottom of the shield. Küchler’s initial (i.e. K) usually appears between the butt of the trident and the shield but is entirely missing on this restrike. Peck speculates this was an intentional attempt by Taylor to create a variety. A row of waves appear below Britannia, which are described as “showing signs of being crested with foam”. This is somewhat peculiar way of noting the small dots that appears the crests of several waves. The sea is once again depicted to the right. The entire rocky cliff that Britannia rest upon is sharply cut in a semi-circle, which forms a sharp exergue. The date, “
1805” appears below. A small, slightly curved, imperfection runs mostly parallel with the straight upward part of the “5”. The “1” and “8” are noticeably doubled. The “0” is not entirely closed, with a gap appearing at the top, and die rust evident on either limb. The legend, “
BRITANNIARUM is perfectly centered above Britannia. The reverse is relatively free of die rust, but a series of raised parallel lines appear roughly at eight o’clock close to the rim. These are undoubtedly traces of Taylor’s efforts to retouch the reverse die. A somewhat unevenly applied beaded border appears attached to a moderately wide raised rim. It is interesting to note that the rim has been filed (likely to remove additional die rust); however, the filing is abnormally uniform in execution. The same conclusions made about the obverse equally apply to the reverse.
Notes: Taylor’s restrikes have a very distinctive appearance, especially the bronzed proofs, which he seems to have favored. It has been speculated that Taylor preferred to produce bronzed proofs as the bronzing often helped to minimize distracting imperfections; however, it appears he struggled to perfect this technique to the same degree at the Soho Mint. To this end, his bronzed proofs often present with a somewhat subdued luminosity (i.e., they lack the appearance typically associated with a proof). Furthermore, they tend to have a somewhat irregular color that is distinct from the bronzed proofs produced at the Soho Mint. The current piece is a notable exception. At first glance, one might easily assume this piece is not a restrike because of the even color, excellent bronzing, and fully struck devices. This might account for the auction firm mistakenly identifying this piece as an example of P-1301, which is an early Soho production. They did, however, provide an accurate (albeit modest) description of its quality: “superb surfaces and strike, a wonderful example of this pattern for the Soho Mint’s second copper coinage of George III”. The variety is not attributed on the label, but this will be corrected by PCGS when it is placed in a new holder. Despite the lack of specificity, it is the highest graded 1805 halfpenny at PCGS, even when collapsing across all varieties and color designations. The next highest graded example is a five-way tie at PR-65BN. Having examined three of these PR-65BN examples, I can say the current coin is superior in every way imaginable.