1853 Penny with Dot

[alfnail 756]

I think I have answered my own question!

It seems that I already have an 1853 Ornamental Trident GRATI.A penny in a bunch of lower grade coins I was going to sell. It has identical date and other obverse features as my dot coin paired with the Plain Trident reverse. Whilst it is lower grade I cannot see any signs of flawing around the dot so that would seem to fit with what one would expect i.e. this obverse die was first used paired with the OT reverse and then subsequently paired with the PT reverse once this latter type of reverse was introduced later in 1853. It would of course still be good if another member could find an 1853OT Dot penny in high grade where any signs of flawing around the dot would be visible if present.

Still quite interesting I think to discover that in 1853 a single obverse die was used paired with both OT and PT reverse dies.

[bhx7 222]

I have some better close up images. Will post them later when I get home. As you state there is no sign of further degrading from the dot.

Brian

[Nutsaboutcoins 105]

If the dot is associated with a flaw in the die, could it have been added to the die to stop a crack developing?

Apologies if I am totally wide of the mark.

Ian..

[bhx7 222]

Thats an intriguing idea Ian. Would be interested to see others thoughts on that one. I know they place holes in Metal work to reduce stress and cracking, maybe that could be why some of these dots are so perfect!

Anyway here is a close up of some of the parts of my coin to illustrate Alfnail's enquiries above. I will put them in different posts as i find I can't get the quality otherwise.

[bhx7 222]

This shows the protrusion from the bottom of the I of VICTORIA. My coin is a bit more worn than Alfnail's but it is definately there.

[bhx7 222]

Finally the date showing the protrusion coming from under the top of the left hand side of the 5. Again not as clear as Alfnails but definately there

[alfnail 756]

My view is that such dots, seen on several of the Victorian copper pennies series, are not intentionally placed in these locations, but rather the result of a ‘foreign body’ like a piece of grit getting on to the die. The minting process then impresses into the die leaving a small dent, generally quite circular in shape but not always……….most things take a circular shape when hammered!

I think that the resulting effect is often to leave a weak spot (no pun intended) on the die from which subsequent flawing can originate; I think this far more plausible than the dots being deliberately placed in these positions to prevent further cracking, and Brian has already confirmed that on his 1853 OT there is no additional flawing around his dot………...so the dot came first!

I attach a further picture of an 1858 dot penny (undocumented) where one can more readily see flawing around the dot. Collectors may also be aware of an 1854PT penny with a dot in the field under the first I of VICTORIA, and also an 1859 penny with a dot near to the border teeth above the DEF colon……….these latter two coins under high magnification also show weak flawing around the dot. The 1854 and 1859 have now been categorised as varieties by CGS, although I am not too comfortable about that. Whilst an interesting feature, I do not think they are true varieties because created by fluke of minting process rather than being an intentional or erroneous action of a person.

[Nutsaboutcoins 105]

My view is that such dots, seen on several of the Victorian copper pennies series, are not intentionally placed in these locations, but rather the result of a ‘foreign body’ like a piece of grit getting on to the die. The minting process then impresses into the die leaving a small dent, generally quite circular in shape but not always……….most things take a circular shape when hammered!

You may be correct, but I would expect that process to also create coins with indented dots when the crud was still between the flan and the die, do these exist, although I apreciate they would possibly be much scarcer?

Also these dots seem to be more prevelent on copper rather than silver, or am I wrong?

If they are and this is a random occurence would you not expect them to be on the same proportion of silver coins too?

Ian..

[alfnail 756]

Hi Ian, I don’t confess to know much about silver so will need to leave that question for other members to answer; it would be interesting to hear some views. Whilst I have given 4 examples of dots on Copper pennies none of these is often seen. I think the same applies to Bronze Victorian pennies (my other main collection) where the famous 1897 dot penny, and now the 1875 canon ball penny are also seldom seen. Michael Gouby has said (page 92 of his book) that the dot on the 1897 penny was “originally thought to be an identification mark, which has since been discounted”. So, on Victorian pennies this feature seems to be rare, but present, on both Copper and Bronze even though they have different chemistry……...so perhaps it will be the same for silver…….but I have yet to go to ‘the dark side’!!

[bhx7 222]

I am finding this a really interesting discussion and hope one of the silver collectors will be able to say if dots do appear on silver coinage too. I have not heard about any but as a novice on silver will wait to see.

Thanks Guys.

[Nutsaboutcoins 105]

Hi Ian, I don’t confess to know much about silver so will need to leave that question for other members to answer; it would be interesting to hear some views. Whilst I have given 4 examples of dots on Copper pennies none of these is often seen. I think the same applies to Bronze Victorian pennies (my other main collection) where the famous 1897 dot penny, and now the 1875 canon ball penny are also seldom seen. Michael Gouby has said (page 92 of his book) that the dot on the 1897 penny was “originally thought to be an identification mark, which has since been discounted”. So, on Victorian pennies this feature seems to be rare, but present, on both Copper and Bronze even though they have different chemistry……...so perhaps it will be the same for silver…….but I have yet to go to ‘the dark side’!!

I'm no expert and this may be a question that the true answer may never be "proven".

• If it is an identification mark, you would expect this to be added at the start of the dies life and therefore for more examples of the same date/spot to be known. It would also be human nature to put them in a logical position eg in the legend or at 12 o'clock 6 o'clock etc.
• If it is a random foreign body to blame, then this could presumably happen at any point in the life of the die, so some varieties should be a lot more common than others depending on how far through the life of the die the damage occurred. Also as the flan is much softer than the die is a foreign body more likely to embed itself into the coin rather than the die when struck?
• If it was an attempt to stop a die flaw / crack from becoming worse, then this is more likely to be towards the end of the dies life making examples fare scarcer. Is it also possible that the die could show a sign of failing and a remedy be applied before it would appear on coins struck explaining why Brian's coin has a dot but no sign of a flaw, but this also suggests the drilling or punching of the die, didn't stop the deteriorating further.
• Or maybe there could be another explanation?

It would be interesting to see if these dots appear on all denominations in equal proportion to the number of coins minted.

Trying to establish a time line of coins produced by the same die showing dot or no dot flaw or no flaw may help in identifying a reason but may be impossible to do.

Is silver not the "shiny side" rather than the "dark side"

I am finding this a really interesting discussion and hope one of the silver collectors will be able to say if dots do appear on silver coinage too. I have not heard about any but as a novice on silver will wait to see.

Thanks Guys.

Hopefully Brian, but silver collectors may be reading the title and passing over the thread mumbling under their breath about pesky penny collectors

Ian..

[Rob 3,002]

I can't see how these can be anything other than die flaws. People are getting overly excited about dots that appear on coins over decades and centuries. People are still getting excited about warts on QE2's face. The mint was placing numbers below the date, letters by the lighthouse (both sides), numbers under the bust etc, so why they would go to the effort of putting an obscure dot on the die beggars belief. We do know that they appear to have scratched numbers into the obverse to indicate tonnage, so that would have been sampled every 110000 ish pennies struck or 175000 ish halfpennies (3500000 farthings).

I don't know how much the dies had improved from the situation they had in the second half of the 1840s, but I would think they should have got back up to 30000 struck per die pair if not more. So with only 3 -5 ish die pairs required before someone scratched a tonnage figure on an obverse, how much need would there be for an obscure and apparently random spot? Die numbers make sense, little raised bumps in the field do not.

It's a bit like Gypsy Rose reading tea leaves.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Rob

[bhx7 222]

Rob you maybe right but Ian does raise a good point. Nearly all these "DOTS" seem to be located on or near to the Legend in places which do not spoil the overall look of the coin and therefor can be easily over looked by most people. Also so far I can't seem to find anything about silver coins having this defect/die flaws. It seems very strange that this would be the case, silver also being a reasonably soft metal! I am quite happy to be proved wrong about the silver part as I have just been researching on the PC and waiting for one of the silver collectors to say one way or the other.

My Nana was always good at reading the tea leaves

Edited December 3, 2015 by bhx7

[Rob 3,002]

Sorry, should have also said that you would get only half the number of strikes per ton from YH copper dies, so a single die pair could strike a ton of copper pennies if it made 50000 or so.

The other point about them being a deliberate mark is that the randomness of position would suggest otherwise. That they are found near the legend could simply be a reflection of the stresses on the die or flan when they are cut. Metal that hasn't been properly mixed will laminate in all probability. Inclusions cold easily fall from the die. The one thing it is not likely to be IMO is rust, as the mint was working flat out and so there would be very little time for a die to get rusty from lack of use. Rusty dies do exist for this period, but they are few and far between and the rust tends to cover the whole surface. A single dot is more likely to be a piece of metal separated, possibly enhanced by an inclusion in the flan.

and if they really wanted to differentiate between dies, then all they had to do was put in the last digit or two with various spacings.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Rob

[RLC35 288]

Rob you maybe right but Ian does raise a good point. Nearly all these "DOTS" seem to be located on or near to the Legend in places which do not spoil the overall look of the coin and therefor can be easily over looked by most people. Also so far I can't seem to find anything about silver coins having this defect/die flaws. It seems very strange that this would be the case, silver also being a reasonably soft metal! I am quite happy to be proved wrong about the silver part as I have just been researching on the PC and waiting for one of the silver collectors to say one way or the other.

My Nana was always good at reading the tea leaves

There are a few of the "Dots" that do not appear in the legends. Here is a 1855 Penny, with a "dot" on Victoria's forehead!

[bhx7 222]

IMG_2443.JPG IMG_2441.JPG

Rob you maybe right but Ian does raise a good point. Nearly all these "DOTS" seem to be located on or near to the Legend in places which do not spoil the overall look of the coin and therefor can be easily over looked by most people. Also so far I can't seem to find anything about silver coins having this defect/die flaws. It seems very strange that this would be the case, silver also being a reasonably soft metal! I am quite happy to be proved wrong about the silver part as I have just been researching on the PC and waiting for one of the silver collectors to say one way or the other.

My Nana was always good at reading the tea leaves

There are a few of the "Dots" that do not appear in the legends. Here is a 1855 Penny, with a "dot" on Victoria's forehead!

Hi Bob,

I saw thus on your page and was the reason I said nearly all Dots were found on or near the Legend. That's a canny wart she has there ?. Fantastic coin as well.

Brian

[bhx7 222]

Has anyone else got a 1855 penny with the same fault as Bobs? Would be interested to see.

[RLC35 288]

Has anyone else got a 1855 penny with the same fault as Bobs? Would be interested to see.

I saw one advertised in a on-line auction a while back, but I do not recall what auction Company it was...maybe London...not sure.

[Nordle11 564]

I think Pete has one, we were talking about this flaw the other day

Edited December 4, 2015 by Nordle11

[Michael-Roo 777]

IMG_2443.JPGIMG_2441.JPG

Rob you maybe right but Ian does raise a good point. Nearly all these "DOTS" seem to be located on or near to the Legend in places which do not spoil the overall look of the coin and therefor can be easily over looked by most people. Also so far I can't seem to find anything about silver coins having this defect/die flaws. It seems very strange that this would be the case, silver also being a reasonably soft metal! I am quite happy to be proved wrong about the silver part as I have just been researching on the PC and waiting for one of the silver collectors to say one way or the other.

My Nana was always good at reading the tea leaves

There are a few of the "Dots" that do not appear in the legends. Here is a 1855 Penny, with a "dot" on Victoria's forehead!

…. and here's one on George III's neck. He really should put a bit of ointment on that…….

[Rob 3,002]

IMG_2443.JPGIMG_2441.JPG

Rob you maybe right but Ian does raise a good point. Nearly all these "DOTS" seem to be located on or near to the Legend in places which do not spoil the overall look of the coin and therefor can be easily over looked by most people. Also so far I can't seem to find anything about silver coins having this defect/die flaws. It seems very strange that this would be the case, silver also being a reasonably soft metal! I am quite happy to be proved wrong about the silver part as I have just been researching on the PC and waiting for one of the silver collectors to say one way or the other.

My Nana was always good at reading the tea leaves

There are a few of the "Dots" that do not appear in the legends. Here is a 1855 Penny, with a "dot" on Victoria's forehead!

…. and here's one on George III's neck. He really should put a bit of ointment on that…….

That's quite clearly a rust spot. If you get a spot of corrosion, it will eat into the surface of the die and when the die is used rust will flake off. This will leave a pit which could be either regular or irregular. e.g. this halfcrown. You can't eliminate rust spots as the cause. It may just be that all of these dies have just a single one.

[Rob 3,002]

Or for a more extreme case, the obverse.

[alfnail 756]

I have an 1855OT Penny with this dot on forehead, picture attached. I will immediately follow on with a close up of the ‘spot’ and also the VICTORIA T repair which I have found on all 4 specimens of this coin which I have ever owned. Bob is correct that there is one for sale at LCA on Sunday, LOT 2792 CGS75 Ex Dr Findlow. I won’t be bidding because I think my piece is better, but will be interesting to see what it now sells for….lol.

When I gave the additional ‘dot’ examples of 1854, 1858 and 1859 in my earlier post I decided to leave out this 1855 example because of the more irregular shape and I did not want to confuse the issue further; perhaps that was a mistake. Again, on this 1855 I think that a flaw exiting the top of the spot can be seen under higher magnification.

Whilst I have owned four of these specimens I do not think they are at all common. I have probably looked for it on well over a thousand 1855’s over the years and only ever seen a handful.

[alfnail 756]

......and the promised close ups.

By the way my name is Ian too.......now that is going to confuse!!!!

[Rob 3,002]

Only seeing a handful is probably about right.

If we take the mintage figures given in CCGB as accurate for 1855, then 5.27 million coins struck in that year all with the correct date and a postulated 30-50000 coins struck per die gives a figure of 105-175 dies used with that date. Assume that you get a consistent number of coins from each die pair and the reasonable assumption that the spot is not going to occur in the same place on two dies, this suggests that you should be seeing 5-9 coins per thousand with the feature. OK, a few assumptions here, but a fair back of the fag packet assessment in my view.

You could just as easily get one spot as multiple examples.