alfnail

….so for example these would be the date 'font' differences you would seek for your 1851 collection, instead of the numerous date width variations.

I think you have ‘hit the nail on the head’ with this comment Richard. If I was ever to attempt to re-categorise the Young Head penny series I think I would steer away from using date widths, and as far as date varieties are concerned would concentrate instead on the different numeral font types. If date widths are used then where do you draw the line in your collection, because ‘in my experience’ every die has numerals in slightly different positions? Using the above Long numeral 7 as an example, which only represents less than 10% of the entire 1857 population, I have found 5 different obverse dies, all with slightly different positions for the 57. In fact without the use of a digital microscope you would be hard pushed to know they were all struck from different dies………….fortunately they all have die flaws in different locations which makes life easier.

There is additionally a type of 1859 date style which is not currently recorded on Gouby's website. It has the same style numeral 5 as the small date (Gouby B, your right picture), but has yet another (3rd) font type for the numeral 9. I sometimes refer to this as the 1859 'Narrow' Date style, for what it's worth! My experience is that both these 'small' and 'narrow' date varieties have been struck from single die pairings, so only one date width is ever found for each of these two numeral types. This is not true of the larger numeral type of 1859 (Gouby A's) where so far I have recorded 6 different date types. Note that whilst the obverse of the 'Small Date' is clearly different from the 'Narrow Date' this is not true of the reverse dies for these two types, which have the same die flaws!! In my opinion the 'Small Date' obverse was first paired with this reverse die, and then the same reverse die was subsequently used with the 'Narrow Date' obverse...………...with these reverse flaws becoming even more extended, but commencing in the same locations!!

….and pictures (140x) showing height of small 5 and large 5 for coins in top and bottom picture above

The different styles of 5 in my experience is a consistent method of distinguishing between 1858 Small Date numerals (Gouby C and Gouby E) and the Large Date numerals found on all other date styles recorded by Gouby. In my opinion it is better to think of this difference rather than looking at date widths as there are many minor variations of date widths found on both the small 5 and large 5 numeral font types...………... the attached picture (same magnification on each image) illustrates.

The example which appeared on ebay a year or so ago was the same piece that was sold in the LCA December 2016 auction. I tracked down this ebayer and he said he made a mistake by putting a picture of the 1870 dot from his reference folder onto ebay, instead of the actual coin he had for sale! So that means 4 known so far, not 5

Did you get any of the other Proofs Richard, I was tempted by the 1853?

There were 4 nice Proof Victorian Coppers sold at Heritage a couple of days ago, the most expensive (worst condition of the four imo) was this 1859 at $5520. Interesting that the 59 date style on the proof is the same one which was over-stamped with 60 for the rare variety 1860/59

One was sold by London Coins in December 2016 for £400 + BP (Ex-Findlow, see link); I can't see that they have sold another one since. http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=155&searchlot=1202&searchtype=2 Other than yours, and the one Bob sold to Tony C, I am only aware of one other which I saw briefly on ebay (think about a year ago) and then it disappeared...…..not sure why! So my feeling is that it is rarer than the 1897 Dot, and probably on a par with the 1875 Canon Ball. Maybe other members know of additional examples, would be good to hear.

Did you buy it Mike?

I have similar on an F29

For reference, here's a close up of the London Coins type...……..where the serif doesn't look like an afterthought

Hi Cliff, how are you keeping? Was thinking maybe it's a trick 'double heads' penny then!!

Agreed Jerry, I think that these two types (pictures attached) both have downward serifs which point differently to the London Coins one which Mike has pictured

Did I miss something on this one, went for about twice what I expected? https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1860-QUEEN-VICTORIA-GREAT-BRITAIN-BUN-HEAD-BRONZE-PENNY-1D-COIN-/362550780257?nma=true&si=KU3owCk%2BD8%2Fos%2F2s%2FhI7oP0uhRo%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557 Perhaps some interesting ghosting, a flying ship and a broken index finger...………...… but I thought that all these things were quite common!

We're just back from The Gambia where they call the Dutch people Hollandish!!

Excellent, pretty sure that a pedant would want that correcting!!

D & H has the YORK Number 70 as 'Scarce', see bottom of first attachment. But I have found another reference by S.H. Hamer (second attachment) which says that only 200 of these were struck. Is that a printing error, because surely the rarity could not be just 'Scarce' if only that number were struck. I would have thought it would get an R rating, probably RRR. Thanks for any education offered.

That's excellent thanks Paulus, your help is much appreciated. The 3 coins I bought all seem to look even better 'in the hand'. All the best, Ian

Many thanks for this information. May I ask if numbers 63 to 67 which you have shown on this page are the only York tokens documented in this book, or are there more following on the next page? I did buy a couple of James Carlille HP tokens just the other day which I would have expected to see, these are pictured below. Thanks again,

Can anyone help with more information on this coin please? I do not own the coin; it is a picture I put into my reference notes many years ago when I bought a YORK Clifford's Tower + Minster 1795 Half Penny, but I don't think I have ever seen another York Minster one paired with QUEENS BAYS Cavalry...………….. so think it must be a rare piece. Not my area of expertise, but think I may now want to collect the YORK (my home town) Tokens as a bit of a side-line to Victoria Pennies, so if anyone can help improve my knowledge of those pieces that would be much appreciated.

….and here is a close up of the overdate on that coin. The 4/4 more convincing, with the front of the underneath 4 quite clear...………..as highlighted (red arrows)

One I picked up a few years ago. Don't really collect this series, so would sell to a serious buyer, plz PM me if interested.

Thanks Terry, another forum member has also contacted me and said 4/4, looks like plain tail 4 corrected to new crosslet 4