Peckris 2

Hahaha - for the first time, slabs begin to make sense!

In what way is this any different from the date width variations found on most years of OH pennies? Genuine question.

Sorry, I'm none the wiser!

yep, seems to work. (don't buy that penny, way overpriced!)

Sorry, I got my youtubes mixed up with my ebays - trying an ebay link: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/304031301636?hash=item46c9ad8004:g:bUYAAOSwPYFfSTt9

Works for me.

Who is that guy? If I knew, I could perhaps understand this post!

It seems like a microscopic difference really. However to me, the 1 on the variety looks thicker than it does on mine. That might be enough to account for the "just about over a bead" versus "exactly over a bead"? So, same die, but the 1 recut perhaps.

Is this one also? The second 1 is pointing to a tooth.

It seems to have a wider rim than usual?

Saxon Roman? He's certainly hedging his bets! Surprised he didn't include Greek, Persian, and plumber's mate too...

Agreed. I'd struggle to give that obverse even VF, though the reverse - as so often for this series - is a grade or so higher.

the caption is the best bit!

Nice find!

Shouldn't those be in wood not stone?

I was hospitalised for a couple of days after the first jab BUT... without MS I'd just have had a day off feeling extra tired and weak, nothing worse the second day in hospital I was fine but they wouldn't discharge me until they'd set up home help for a few days After the second jab, virtually no ill effects.

Ah, that explains it. That was during my absence from this forum.

I'm way out of date..

"Cooper" is about right, with all those holes..

Neil Paisley is now MD of Baldwins? Wow, I missed that. When did he leave Colin Cooke?

Yes. It's weird, the actual mintage is only small (19m) compared to 1969, but I guess people put the 1969s aside but not the 1970. Your average Joe would have wanted the first year I guess, and mintage figures were only relevant to collectors.

Apparently France converted from copper to bronze from 1848.

A lot of that - the tonnage data - is way over my head! However, do consider all the circumstantial evidence: I read somewhere (sorry, I don't have the source) that the changeover to bronze was originally to have happened in 1858, but there were so many problems with the thinner dies that it was pushed back. This makes sense if you then take into account all the very many varieties of 1858 penny - that they decided to use up existing dies resulting in several overdates. At greater leisure they produced dies for 1859 (very few varieties), which then got pressed into service again in 1860 when 30k pennies were needed in a hurry. If the changeover didn't happen until late in 1860, that would reinforce the 'low mintage' rationale. Meanwhile, if they didn't experience the same problems with the two smaller denominations, they would have gone ahead with minting those bronzes. The 1860 copper halfpenny and farthing - much rarer - could indeed have been mementoes not intended for circulation.

Ah, but they managed fine from 1861 - 63!