Open 3 pennies

[1949threepence 3,366]

Just thinking - interesting that these occur in just 2 years, 40 years apart, 1863 and 1903. Both also feature different types of threes, with the 1863 having a straight horizontal top and straight side bar at a 45 degree angle, before the normal curved base. No three after that, until 1937, featured such a three.

Moreover, the open quality is pretty much identical in both years. 

Haven't read anything about why these open 3's occurred. Looked, but found nothing. Maybe I'm missing something somewhere.

Anybody got any thoughts?

        

[jelida 1,196]

The fact that there are three subtlety different ‘open three’’s in 1863 would suggest that this was a deliberate experiment and not a one-off mistake, though I cannot tie it in with the 1903. I suppose it could have been an alternative way of marking individual dies, more subtle than die numbers in what clearly was a year for study/experimentation. But I am not aware of any serious study on the topic.

Jerry

[alfnail 756]

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 

[Peckris 2 2,042]

1 hour ago, alfnail said:

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 

From those pictures, and the one Mike posted, it looks very much as though the serif was added separately. Maybe due to a later decision to add one, or perhaps because it was difficult to engrave a 3 + serif in one go?

[jelida 1,196]

32 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

From those pictures, and the one Mike posted, it looks very much as though the serif was added separately. Maybe due to a later decision to add one, or perhaps because it was difficult to engrave a 3 + serif in one go?

True,  the serif does very much look like an afterthought especially in the second and third versions shown. The serif in the first image does look far more conventional. I wonder whether there was ever a ‘no serif’ die.

Jerry

[alfnail 756]

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

[1949threepence 3,366]

Very interesting. Thanks for the replies, gents. I knew there were some subtle differences in the 1863 open three, especially with regard to the serif (or spike, as Gouby calls it). But none, as far as I know in the 1903 one. Nevertheless, the basic shape of the open 3 is pretty much the same in both cases.

I'm still somewhat perplexed as to why they bothered, especially in the case of the 1903. But that goes with the territory on old coins where detailed records no longer exist. With the 1863, there's the possible experimentation aspect to lend considerable credence to, as Jerry alludes to.    

[Peckris 2 2,042]

3 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

I'm still somewhat perplexed as to why they bothered, especially in the case of the 1903. But that goes with the territory on old coins where detailed records no longer exist. With the 1863, there's the possible experimentation aspect to lend considerable credence to, as Jerry alludes to.    

Purely guesswork but.. this was the first 3 in a date since bun pennies. Could the open 3 be the first attempt which was replaced after an unsatisfactory production run?

[1949threepence 3,366]

8 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Purely guesswork but.. this was the first 3 in a date since bun pennies. Could the open 3 be the first attempt which was replaced after an unsatisfactory production run?

It's a plausible consideration, Chris.