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.

Recommended Posts

can someone give me their wisdom please and tell me what is it in the Victorian Bronze coinage that changes after 1863 that results in a consistent mintage with few errors for many years?  Is it that the steel improves in quality so that they can simply throw away damaged dies rather than repair them.  apart from one error in the 1863 half penny with an  E over an E in PENNY and the 1865 over 3 nothing much happens.  the same in the PENNY 65 over 3 but then nothing until the Heaton years.   Was there a change in management and method? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrLarry said:

can someone give me their wisdom please and tell me what is it in the Victorian Bronze coinage that changes after 1863 that results in a consistent mintage with few errors for many years?  Is it that the steel improves in quality so that they can simply throw away damaged dies rather than repair them.  apart from one error in the 1863 half penny with an  E over an E in PENNY and the 1865 over 3 nothing much happens.  the same in the PENNY 65 over 3 but then nothing until the Heaton years.   Was there a change in management and method? 

My own tuppence ha'penny's worth: they encountered so many problems over the first 4 years of bronze that they eventually managed to iron them out. Also, it must have involved such a gargantuan effort between 1858 and 1863 that they may have decided to cut not only their losses but reduce such enormous expenditure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

My own tuppence ha'penny's worth: they encountered so many problems over the first 4 years of bronze that they eventually managed to iron them out. Also, it must have involved such a gargantuan effort between 1858 and 1863 that they may have decided to cut not only their losses but reduce such enormous expenditure.

yes it must have been quite exhausting.  They could, with a bit of artistic licence create quite a good soap opera or period drama out of it involving all sorts from the die setter to the Queen and all the intrigue in between .  Of course a bit of light relief when Wyon goes on his annual 6 weeks  holidays in the middle could always add a bit of scenery .  But then perhaps it might only intrigue a few old guys that collect some old coppers or bronze.   I'd watch it LOL

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The obvious answer is that when the bronze coinage was introduced the Mint faced many challenges involving short lived dies. Very many die pairings were tried out, without long term success. By 1863 much of this had been overcome when the best working die pairings had been put into effect, 6 + G for pennies, 7 + G for halfpennies and 3 + B for farthings.

That combination of die pairings then remained in effect until the next major changes in 1874. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what a French 5 and 10 centime collector of the 1850's would make of this conversation?

Did they show these problems, and if not, why not?      Same metal, same size, same company.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, blakeyboy said:

I wonder what a French 5 and 10 centime collector of the 1850's would make of this conversation?

Did they show these problems, and if not, why not?      Same metal, same size, same company.....

Yes I have often wondered that very question myself.  I have various tokens with Entente Cordiale with the head of Victoria and you would have thought that this friendly juice could have perhaps stretched to having a chat.  Perhaps it is an issue of the complexity of the design as much as anything.   Having looked at the   Canadian bronze from this period there don't seem to be quite so many errors.  I think I have one 1862 over 1861 

Edited by DrLarry
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should start a new thread to write episodes of the mini series ourselves.  I have a copy of Wyon's diary and have read some of the papers online of Victoria's diary. I am sure there is quite a bit in Hansard from parliament.   And we can ask Viking River Cruises to sponsor the holiday in Europe sections.   I am sure if they can make it up on the "The Crown" we could have a good shot at it.  Still my ideas rarely bolster a lot of interest and at times feel fictional.  Story of my life methinks LOL 

Edited by DrLarry
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2022 at 8:42 AM, DrLarry said:

Yes I have often wondered that very question myself.  I have various tokens with Entente Cordiale with the head of Victoria and you would have thought that this friendly juice could have perhaps stretched to having a chat.  Perhaps it is an issue of the complexity of the design as much as anything.   Having looked at the   Canadian bronze from this period there don't seem to be quite so many errors.  I think I have one 1862 over 1861 

Yes, we went from a large thick copper with a bold and heavy design, to smaller thinner bronze with what had to be a shallow design. Major change.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

Yes, we went from a large thick copper with a bold and heavy design, to smaller thinner bronze with what had to be a shallow design. Major change.

Also, of course, the old copper blanks were much softer and hence easier on the dies. Bronze being a harder metal meant many smashed dies/dies with a short life expectancy, before they finally got it right.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that not studying die wear and faults on bronze strikings carried out by Heaton before 1860 is a mistake.

The die variations and reasons behind them may well be more easily explained if earlier foreign bronze coinage was studied to the extent 

that bronze UK pennies and halfpennies 1860-63 have been.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Yes, we went from a large thick copper with a bold and heavy design, to smaller thinner bronze with what had to be a shallow design. Major change.

yes this seems to have flummoxed Wyon ( which is surprising again if he had studied continental mints and bronze) his original designs  had "too high relief" .  It is likely that the original designs were very different because he seems to take it as "looking back " to have the same old seated Britannia.  That along with illness and death of one of his children may have contributed to some of the technical errors in the anatomy on the bun penny.  I would have loved to have seen the "standing Britannia " he made drawings of on the coin it would have been a powerful statement  of a "proud Britain" making her sit down seems more passive. 

 

 

Edited by DrLarry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if Mr Wyon had not made any mistakes, the bronze coinage of 1860-63 would have been a lot less interesting.

Edited by Iannich48
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Iannich48 said:

Well if Mr Wyon had not made any mistakes, the bronze coinage of 1860-63 would have been a lot less interesting.

Very true !

It wouldn't solely be down to him anyway. As with every other major venture it was a collaborative effort involving many different personnel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Iannich48 said:

Well if Mr Wyon had not made any mistakes, the bronze coinage of 1860-63 would have been a lot less interesting.

well  the mistakes in the legends and dies are not really his mistakes though  I think as an artist he should never have made some of the anatomical errors but the issues is , as has been said before, these are pieces of art stuck on bits of metal.  Although saying that I have often wondered if taking his name off the design was some kind of statement either from the mint or himself.  I understand it is hard  when you are so used to seeing something to see some of these flaws, especially when you all love this design.  But it feels a little like Wyon designed something beautiful then the workmen at the mint altered it so simply get a product.  It would be like a Bauhaus Chair modern and new with clumsy oak feet added because they happened to be lying around in the factory.  The position of the trident and the hand is not humanly possible.  Still we shall never know 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it intrigues me because it is so yet I cant stop thinking your father had a perfectly modelled seated Britannia why not just copy it.  The hand is correct and the position of the trident in good balance, the hand grasps it just as it would naturally. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrLarry said:

it intrigues me because it is so yet I cant stop thinking your father had a perfectly modelled seated Britannia why not just copy it.  The hand is correct and the position of the trident in good balance, the hand grasps it just as it would naturally. 

the copper Britannia necessitated a bold and deep cut design. it probably wouldn't have translated in shallow form to bronze? so a new flatter design was brought in. having said that, I do like the bronze reverses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

the copper Britannia necessitated a bold and deep cut design. it probably wouldn't have translated in shallow form to bronze? so a new flatter design was brought in. having said that, I do like the bronze reverses.

I like them too.  I am sure no longer keeping  a resident engraver after the 1850's  at the mint may also have created limitations which made such a venture more complicated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Iannich48 said:

Well if Mr Wyon had not made any mistakes, the bronze coinage of 1860-63 would have been a lot less interesting.

Of course, i should have mentioned the other engravers etc, not all down to Mr Wyon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, secret santa said:

I'm surprised that there were no bids for that nice 1922 F192A yesterday - it's one of the best of a really rare bunch.

https://www.easyliveauction.com/catalogue/lot/0e729832873217a63d9c2c16c64c8331/0af8d24542e81eb9357e7ef448a6646f/timed-auction-of-750-lots-of-coins-medallions-and-silver/

Didn't even know it was up for sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2022 at 11:16 PM, Iannich48 said:

Of course, i should have mentioned the other engravers etc, not all down to Mr Wyon.

I don't know of any other bun head penny engravers, considering LCW is signed on both sides at some stage or another. The only other one that I know of was Minton for the rare coronet patterns.

The legend and date varieties will have been down to the die sinkers.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, oldcopper said:

I don't know of any other bun head penny engravers, considering LCW is signed on both sides at some stage or another. The only other one that I know of was Minton for the rare coronet patterns.

The legend and date varieties will have been down to the die sinkers.

For me the question is one of quality of work,  when I look at all other work Wyon Produced the attention to detail is excellent .  Of course, I know, we are dealing with a new metal but some of the quality of the design is just about C grade.  This is me looking at it from an anatomical point of view artistically.  Reading the diaries you get the idea he was pretty sick of the whole venture and I think the venture may have contributed to his sickness at this time too.  Sure, as I have said before,  the average punter sees something different and accepts it.   I have been struck looking at them solidly for the last 5 years or so since I have collected, how poor the design is "close up".  It is anatomically impossible to get a model into the position of the Britannia without dislocation or blunt trauma to the hand.  So I have wondered in my fairy dust tinkerbell moments if some of the engraving and alterations were done by someone a lot less able than Wyon.  It also does not surprise me that his name was taken off ....I would have asked to have it removed if I were the artist.  

 

Anyways it's all pie in the sky or Lucy along with her diamonds and if that particular chemical had have been involved I would certainly understand the eventual outcome.  I love the bun penny it is however just WRONG.  I offer a prize to anyone who can contort their arm shoulder and hand finger arrangement to match it and take a photo to prove it....   PERHAPS AN ANNUAL COMPETITION ON HERE FOR THE CLOSEST i'LL OFFER £20 AS A STARTER   

lol 

Edited by DrLarry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Didn't even know it was up for sale.

It was publicised in Coin News.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, secret santa said:

It was publicised in Coin News.

Missed it. I'd have been happy to fork out savings for that as well. As you say, a very nice specimen. 

Sounds as though I was far from the only one to overlook it though, as it didn't sell. Can't imagine for one miilisecond that it wouldn't have sold through LCA or Noonans, at probably well above the reserve price.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

For me the question is one of quality of work,  when I look at all other work Wyon Produced the attention to detail is excellent .  Of course, I know, we are dealing with a new metal but some of the quality of the design is just about C grade.  This is me looking at it from an anatomical point of view artistically.  Reading the diaries you get the idea he was pretty sick of the whole venture and I think the venture may have contributed to his sickness at this time too.  Sure, as I have said before,  the average punter sees something different and accepts it.   I have been struck looking at them solidly for the last 5 years or so since I have collected, how poor the design is "close up".  It is anatomically impossible to get a model into the position of the Britannia without dislocation or blunt trauma to the hand.  So I have wondered in my fairy dust tinkerbell moments if some of the engraving and alterations were done by someone a lot less able than Wyon.  It also does not surprise me that his name was taken off ....I would have asked to have it removed if I were the artist.  

 

Anyways it's all pie in the sky or Lucy along with her diamonds and if that particular chemical had have been involved I would certainly understand the eventual outcome.  I love the bun penny it is however just WRONG.  I offer a prize to anyone who can contort their arm shoulder and hand finger arrangement to match it and take a photo to prove it....   PERHAPS AN ANNUAL COMPETITION ON HERE FOR THE CLOSEST i'LL OFFER £20 AS A STARTER   

lol 

The anatomical anomaly you refer to started in the reign of George IV, and continued deep into the 20th century. Obviously the natural position for that posture and shield positioning, would have shown Britannia's fingers visible outside the shield, with her thumb behind, or maybe resting on top.

It does seem odd that it was never spotted through a magnifying glass by collectors, or if it was - and pointed out to the mint - why it was never rectified. Nor have I ever seen it mentioned anywhere else. 

I'd venture to say that at the time of Leonard Charles Wyon, Britannia's design was very much secondary to the Queen's head. He would have been far more concerned about pleasing her with a flattering portrait. Britannia's image was no doubt essentially cloned from previous designs, without too much thought. Very few members of the general public would ever have known, or if they did, cared.

There isn't a lot the "average punter" can do about it now. It's not stopped them, or me, from collecting.  

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

×