alfnail

Would anyone be interested in seeing some work I have done on Victorian Young Head Numeral 5 Fonts? If I get a few 'yes' replies I will put on the site, but I don't want to fill it up with large pictures for those who aren't interested. I can always send the details by PM........assuming she's still available...........ha ha!!

Hi Pete, Just checked back through all my 1896 sales and never had an Ad. Had all the other 1896 date widths though, so guessing it is fairly rare, although I never search for that type nowadays. I do still look for the 1889 wide date and was quite jealous when I saw the one you found!!

I see there's a nice rare commemorative version too!!!!

I was poor when I was young.I worked hard all my life, and now I am old.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/144753106390 Bargain!

When Uranus was in total eclipse by a full moon whilst in Libra.

Thanks all, and 'yes' of course Richard please feel free. If you want them modified in any way plz email me.

Yes, Richard I agree with your own findings. I was just trying to focus on the 7 fonts in the earlier post, not the full date numeral locations. I have actually found 5 slightly different numeral locations on the 1857 Date Style E's. These 5 obverse dies also have die flaws in different locations; that is what helped me realise there must be several obverses with this font, and then go on to examine the minor date differences. I had previously thought that the 'Long 7' variety was rarer than it is. Below are some initial stats from my '5 year' ebay study from yonks ago. I did it just to obtain Long 7 stats, and still need to do some work on other types of 1857, but you can also see the OT/PT split. 1857 Volume Analysis (5 Years all ebay listings) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TOTALS OT 27 33 42 43 43 188 32.36% PT 62 62 66 102 101 393 67.64% Cannot See Trident 9 4 2 13 13 41 PT Split Long 7 9 10 7 17 23 66 11.36% Cannot See Date 5 2 1 0 7 15 Other Date Types 48 50 58 85 71 312

Things which I have noted in second group of pictures:- · Date Style E is the only ‘7’ font which has a different height, at 1.75mm, instead of 1.64mm for all the others. I believe this is the variety recorded by Peck as P1514 (Smaller Date) and Bramah as B24a (Date in much smaller figures). Gouby, however, says “long ‘down’ leg with a short top bar. Possibly scarcer date font type to the other shorter squatter types of 7’s”. Personally, I prefer Gouby’s description, and find the Peck / Bramah ‘smaller’ references to be a bit misleading, even though the 7 is clearly ‘narrower’ on this font. I call it the ‘longer or slender 7’. · The bottom two pictures show coins which I don’t feel fit any of the recorded types. These coins do not have a down tooth which tapers to a point, but are rather a more rectangular shape with a flat end to the ‘tooth’. I have not found these types to be particularly uncommon, so you may well be able to find one if interested in adding to your own collection.

That’s nice thanks Mike / Bruce. I will attach two sets of 4 pictures, in two posts due to limit of 500MB (i.e. 8 different coins in total). These have all been taken at 140x mag. and by slipping different coins under the lens without changing any microscope settings. You will see that I have indicated the Gouby Date Style, where known, and also measured the height of the different looking numeral 7’s. I have not pictured Gouby Date Style B because I believe the numeral 7 to be same font style as Gouby Date Style A, it just has numerals 5 and 7 closer together. I can add a further picture of Gouby Date Style B, however, if you wish to see…..please ask. Things which I have noted in first group of pictures:- · On Gouby website, for Date Style C, he says “The 7 has no down tooth at end of top bar”. My picture indicates, however, that there may be a tiny down tooth, perhaps the remains of a once longer tooth. The other thing I have noted is that Date Style C appears paired with both PT and OT reverses, and these are from 2 different obverse dies with slightly differing numeral spacings, and repairs to numeral 8. Again, I can add full date pictures for both PT and OT Date Style C’s if anyone wishes to see these. Date Style C’s are quite difficult to find. · I am unsure how to classify the picture bottom right, hence the Gouby ? Thoughts welcomed.

Seeing we have been discussing 1857's recently would you, or anyone else, be interested in seeing some close ups of the different types of numeral 7 fonts (definite and possible) which I have recorded for 1857's in my own collection?

Afraid I had to withdraw the 1853 Italic 5 coin because I didn't agree with the way the lot was going to be sold. The coin with plain 5 date style is still up for their September sale, Lot 1518.

Thanks all for comments and Baldwins sale reference picture. I have just realised why I had cross referenced the link to the LCA auction in my collection, and put 'Proof?' alongside my own 1857 penny. It is because there are some legend features on both the obverse and reverse of my own coin which exactly match the London Coin pictures, which you can see if you enlarge the LCA pictures to better see the detail. I attach 3 of my own digital microscope pictures to show 3 of these legend repairs. My own coin doesn't look like a proof to me, but I'm happy to sell it for £789 to the first taker.......and no Buyer's Premium!!

Just came across this sale, which I cross referenced in my collection yonks ago. Can anyone shed light please, doesn't particularly look like a proof to me; is that what it's saying? http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/?page=Pastresults&auc=124&searchlot=666&searchtype=2

Just sold this coin to another member. Richard, you may wish to add to your rarestpennies website

The holes were practical in some countries, coins worn on strings around the neck, like this tiny West African 1/10th penny

Should have mentioned it is the large date obverse.

Sorry to interrupt the interesting Prisoner thread, but I thought I would talk about pennies again if that's ok. If 'The Future', or anyone else for that matter, is interested in rarer coins with holes in them, then they may want to purchase my spare 1858 Large Rose pictured below. Probably rarer than the 1860 Triple F, which went for £57.99, but I would be happy to sell it for less than that..........if anyone wants to wear it around their neck or something! PM me if interested.

In an attempt to get back to pennies, did anyone see this 'Triple F' on ebay a couple of weeks back? Sold for £57.99, with several bidders, even with the hole in it.

This was the obverse picture

Is this why we can't find an 1863 Die Number 1; they've gone and put it in the wrong place!? Numeral 3 looks a bit odd too.

Anyone bought this coin? It came up on ebay whilst I was on holidays and I couldn't have a proper look. It had a couple of early bids and then disappeared, as some rarer ones often do!! It looked to me like it may have been the rare reverse, and now I'm thinking it was an F24 with top leaf missing. In which case I'm guessing that Richard would like to add to the 5 pieces he has on his rarestpennies site. Maybe a member could confirm.

I've now had a chance to examine Mike's 1841 REG Colon and compare to my own. These are both coins with the flaws through the numeral 8, and VICTORIA legend. I attach full date pictures of both coins at 50x Mag. On the post which will immediately follow (due to image size restrictions) I will also attach close ups of the 18’s on both coins, now at 140x Mag. On the latter images I have also measured the distance from the left hand side of the first 1 to the left hand side of the numeral 8 (i.e. to allow for numeral flattening through wear). I conclude that both coins, as anticipated, seem to be identically spaced. I think that a couple of things have understandably tricked the eye, giving Mike the false impression that his coin may have been a new 1841 REG: Date Style. a) the top, and top right hand side of the numeral 1 on Mike's coin is a little damaged / and further flattened towards the numeral 8, and b) to the naked eye, the darker grime around both numerals gives the impression of them being closer. I have already communicated this with Mike, attaching the same pictures.

Very happy to do that Mike, if ok with you, as it would be very interesting to see if it's a different 1841 REG: date style.