Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Something that has always puzzled me slightly, and I've never yet been able to find a definitive answer. Why is the 1869 penny worth so much (£2,500 in unc, for example), yet its mintage of 2,580,480, is more than twice that of the 1868 penny (1,182, 720), yet the 1868 in unc is worth a mere £550.

No doubt this will be elementary to most of you, and I aplogise in advance for sounding a bit thick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's because the mintage fugures are not by 'date' but rather the number of coins struck that year. So, clearly in 1869 they were probably still making 1868's for most of the year (or started the 1870's early).

Only in the 1950s do the figures become more accurate, but even they should probably be taken with a pinch of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's because the mintage fugures are not by 'date' but rather the number of coins struck that year. So, clearly in 1869 they were probably still making 1868's for most of the year (or started the 1870's early).

Only in the 1950s do the figures become more accurate, but even they should probably be taken with a pinch of salt.

There is also a rumour that a lot of them were lost on a ship en route to Australia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it pops up in a few places.

1925 halfcrown had 1.5 million yet is worth more then the 809k 1930

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris is right on about the 1869 mintage. Many of the Pennies minted in 1869, actually were still being dated 1868! In Michael Gouby's "The British Bronze Coinage" He states this, and estimates the actual mintage of coins dated 1869 to be about 400,000 coins.

The real thing about the 1869 Penny is condition. There are plenty of the 1869's available in Poor to Fair condition, but to find one in EF or UNC is really hard, and they command a hefty premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks folks. That was really informative :)

I never thought about the mintage for any given year, including some still dated the previous year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it pops up in a few places.

1925 halfcrown had 1.5 million yet is worth more then the 809k 1930

There's something similar with 1835/36/37 half crowns. The 1835 is very hard to find yet the mintage figures are by no means low, but I suspect that they include a large number struck in 1835 but dated 1834. The very low mintage figures for 1837 (less than 1905) aren't borne out by the fact that you see a fair number of them, at least in lower grades. Again, I suspect that many more were struck in 1838 from 1837 William IV dies to make up a shortage while new designs for Victoria were still on the drawing board.

Geoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK thanks folks. That was really informative :)

I never thought about the mintage for any given year, including some still dated the previous year.

The first explanation I read was that the figures are the number of coins issued into circulation in a year. "That makes sense", I thought. They had loads left over from last year and didn't use them all up until Autumn, so there's not much time to make coins with this year's date. The same thing seems to happen with modern coinage today... sometimes you don't see new coins until Christmas.

But now it seems that they carried on making coins with last year's date. Are they doing this to eke out the last useful life from last year's dies before making new ones?

Are the mint allowed to do what they like with regard to dating coins? For example, all the 1967 pennies and 1925 sovereigns... do they need special permission to mint coins with anything other than the date at the time of minting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wern't 1967's minted all the way through to 1970?

dunno about the dies though, the early 2008's were littered with die errors lol, i'm guessing with the modern figures its more or less accurate but earlier ones would be vague, would there be someone counting? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are the mint allowed to do what they like with regard to dating coins? For example, all the 1967 pennies and 1925 sovereigns... do they need special permission to mint coins with anything other than the date at the time of minting?

For the 1967 dated coins, I'm not sure if it required an Act of Parliament, but it was certainly the result of an announcement by the Chancellor in the House of Commons.

One interesting thing : if you have a copy of Rotographic's first ever coin booklet - "Check Your Change" 1968 - you will notice that coin values, especially for George VI and Elizabeth I, are almost exclusively based on mintage figures. It makes fascinating reading, especially in the light of what is known now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One interesting thing : if you have a copy of Rotographic's first ever coin booklet - "Check Your Change" 1968 - you will notice that coin values, especially for George VI and Elizabeth I, are almost exclusively based on mintage figures. It makes fascinating reading, especially in the light of what is known now.

I meant Elizabeth II of course. I tried a "Quick Edit" but there appears to be a bug in the software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK thanks folks. That was really informative :)

I never thought about the mintage for any given year, including some still dated the previous year.

The first explanation I read was that the figures are the number of coins issued into circulation in a year. "That makes sense", I thought. They had loads left over from last year and didn't use them all up until Autumn, so there's not much time to make coins with this year's date. The same thing seems to happen with modern coinage today... sometimes you don't see new coins until Christmas.

But now it seems that they carried on making coins with last year's date. Are they doing this to eke out the last useful life from last year's dies before making new ones?

My take on this, for what it's worth, is that the mint make coins dated the correct year up until 31 December and then almost always change to the new year's date the following day (there are exceptions like 1967 pennies, cartwheel pennies etc.). However, there may still be a large number of the previous year's coins in storage at the mint awaiting issue, to which the new year's coins are added; the whole lot is not then issued until say, 20 January and hence go down on the figures as the following year's issue.

As I understand it, the mint, like most factories makes their products in batches which can have quite an effect on how the figures are recorded. Let's go back to the 1869 penny; the mint starts its final batch of 1868 pennies on 15 December, keeps knocking them out until 31 December. On the stroke of midnight 1869, new dies are brought in and the pennies carry on being produced until 5 January when it switches to making farthings. All the pennies are then issued on 15 January. This whole batch would therefore have gone down on the 1869 figures. If the final batch of 1868s had been completed by the end of October, then the anomaly would not have happened.

The only time where this theory falls down is where there is no production of a particular denomination in a given year, but the mint continued to produce the denomination until late on the previous year. Theoretically therefore a figure could have been given for coins issued in a year in which none bear that date, and I can't recall a case where this ever happened.

Another exception which has occurred to me concerns 1860 bronze which seemed to turn up in far greater numbers than those provided by the mint. Frankly, James Watt (who produced most of these coins) were the 19th century equivalent of British Leyland and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were still minting coins dated 1860 right up until June. And there were a fair few Friday afternoon coins too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I understand it, the mint, like most factories makes their products in batches which can have quite an effect on how the figures are recorded. Let's go back to the 1869 penny; the mint starts its final batch of 1868 pennies on 15 December, keeps knocking them out until 31 December. On the stroke of midnight 1869, new dies are brought in and the pennies carry on being produced until 5 January when it switches to making farthings. All the pennies are then issued on 15 January. This whole batch would therefore have gone down on the 1869 figures. If the final batch of 1868s had been completed by the end of October, then the anomaly would not have happened.

In a similar vein, I have a theory as to why 1923 halfcrowns are so easy to find in higher grades :

1923, produced in large quantities to meet demand, but by the end of the year, demand falls off sharply because of the collapse of WW1 inflation. The unwanted halfcrowns are stocked away somewhere.

Later in the year there is a modest demand for silver, and for the next three years (as we know) silver mintages are very low, especially halfcrowns and florins. The 1923 halfcrowns are forgotten about until maybe after the new coinage of 1927. All of a sudden they are found and belatedly issued.

Joe Public - with the new coins in circulation - sees gleaming 1923 halfcrowns and thinks "oh that's the old design, those aren't produced anymore, I'll put this one in a drawer as a keepsake".

Ok, it is mere speculation of course, but it makes you wonder ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hadn't realised there had been any more additions to this thread.

Some very interesting thoughts there, guys. I have to say the whole idea of batches of coins from a given year (dated that year) being held and then issued into general circulation up to several years later, sounds very plausible to me. In deed, I think it still goes on to some extent, as I have been handed uncirculated coins from say three years previously, at times. Not isolated examples, but say three totally uncirculated 2005 2p's given to you in your change in 2008, at Marks & Spencer, say.

Moreover, the point about years in which no coins were minted ~ ie: none dated that year, threepences dated 1947 for example, never having any mintage shown, kind of negates, to some extent, the theory about previous years coins as yet unissued, being issued in and included in the following year's mintage figures (viz, the 1868 penny) or coins minted in a given year, bearing the previous year's date.

Food for thought....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moreover, the point about years in which no coins were minted ~ ie: none dated that year, threepences dated 1947 for example, never having any mintage shown, kind of negates, to some extent, the theory about previous years coins as yet unissued, being issued in and included in the following year's mintage figures (viz, the 1868 penny) or coins minted in a given year, bearing the previous year's date.

Food for thought....

Ah - possible wires crossed there? The mintage figure only refers to coins actually struck in a given year, irrespective of the date which they carry. Coins struck but not issued until a later date, are still part of the mintage for the year they were struck, not when they were issued.

(My theory about 1923 halfcrowns was only to try to explain why they often show up in good condition - nothing to do with the mintage figure as such).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×