alfnail

Thanks for your reply Matt. It did fleetingly cross my mind that defective puncheons may have been used when the plain tail dies were first made, but I guess I may have mistakenly dismissed that idea thinking that the die makers would not knowingly want to make faulty new dies which had 4’s with the main part of their tails missing. I’m now thinking that may be exactly what happened, and it would certainly explain why I have never seen a piece which exhibits both a plain tail and tails up. Perhaps it was recognised that the very pointed tail of the 4 was always going to be a weak spot, and if they bothered to make a new puncheon then that would soon get damaged too. My findings over the years are that the type with complete tails is far rarer that the plain type.

....and the plain tails 44's

I am currently trawling through my Victorian Penny collection looking for opportunities to thin it down, but without disposing of anything I may later regret. I am currently looking closely at my 1844 pennies, of which I have 11 examples which I have kept up until now due to various die variations. Of these, I have 7 coins which I have categorised as plain tails to the numeral 4’s, and the other 4 coins have both 4’s with their ‘tails up’. I also believe that these 11 specimens cover 8 different date styles when one includes a further detailed analysis of exact numeral locations. Something which I had previously noticed, but have now had the opportunity to examine more closely with a digital microscope, is that all of the coins which I have classed as ‘plain tails’ seem to have the remnants of the upward tail to both their numeral 4’s. I am wondering, therefore, whether all 1844 dies started life with their tails pointing upwards, and that the plain tail ‘variety’ is merely the result of many dies becoming ‘clogged’ through use. If this were the case, however, I think one may expect to find some specimens where the two 44 numerals exhibit the two different tail types, i.e. because one would expect the clogging of the two numerals on at least one die to occur at different times. If members are Victorian Copper Penny enthusiasts then this may be of interest. In that case, perhaps such members could check their own collections to see if they can locate a coin with both tail types. Also, if anyone can think of an alternative explanation I would be grateful if thoughts could be shared. I attach example pictures taken at 100x mag. starting with the ‘tails up’ numeral type. On a further posting, which will follow on immediately due to picture size, there will be 4 examples of the ‘plain tails’ types, where I believe that upward tail remnants can still be seen on all the 4’s. Please note that all 7 of my plain tails coins have remnants, not just these 4 examples…………. I have kept a few obverse duplicates in my collection when paired with different reverses, for example where a single obverse is found to be paired with both the DFF and a non-DFF reverse. I can add higher definition pictures of given numerals if desired!

Thanks for your views on my farthing. I think I may be sorely tempted to part with it for that price as I only really collect Victorian pennies. I just keep one high grade piece for all other denominations and monarchs from George III to Elizabeth II, but guess I could find another high grade more common Victorian farthing to fit the bill. Hhmmm

Yes, I was meaning has anyone seen this on a Freeman Obverse 5 rather than Obverse 2. Interestingly the N/Z reverse is also seen paired with two different Obverse 2 dies, one with the R of BRITT rotated anti-clockwise as described by Bob (same as my F16 Obverse 5) and another with the R just slightly rotated, but this time clockwise as pictured below. This 2nd N/Z Obverse also has several other different repairs e.g. to the R of REG. I think these multiple obverses paired with the rare N/Z reverse may have been previously discussed on the forum.

Found this F16 with a rotated R in BRITT. I have not seen this on any of the 7 examples I have previously owned, anyone else got one of these?

It is believed that coins are often struck using dies from a previous year, but without altering the date. Similar to your 1869/1868 example, in the Victorian Copper Penny series the 1849 is clearly much rarer than an 1848 but the documented figures are 268K and 161K respectively. The best example is the 1852 Royal Mint Parliamentary return of 236K but no one has ever seen an 1852, so presumably those bear a date of 1851.

Lot 2408, is it just me?

Many thanks for feedback on my 1844 Farthing, have just looked myself at past sales on LCA website and see that it does compare well with all their past sales, apart from one which sold for £1400 +BP which is clearly much better

Being a penny collector I don't have a great deal of knowledge on Farthings; just wondered if the Farthing experts could perhaps give me a rough idea of value for this 1844 specimen.

Hi Pete, your post reminded me of the one I bought on ebay a few years back, sold as a group of 4 half pennies (!), bought for £40 and sold the rest for well over that.....so essentially a 'freebie'.......happy hunting

Agreed, prefer coins not to be slabbed, but I have kept just a few CGS graded until now as thought would devalue by removing.......they are now coming out.......and definitely not paying £99 out of principle.

Here is the aforementioned trident flaw, also a close up of the numeral 8. If my coin has a trident flaw which Rob’s doesn’t, but Rob’s has an 8 flaw which mine doesn’t, then by my reckoning that must mean the two coins have been struck from different reverse dies.

Apologies there is a reverse die crack through the right hand prong of the trident, sorry about that.

......and the two Reverse E close ups.....

Thanks for your post Rob. I think that the repaired F13 you seek may well be Gouby type BP 1860 La (E +d), which he describes on Page 37 of his 2009 book, saying ‘Known 1’. I attach Obverse / Reverse pictures of my own La specimen, and will immediately follow these with close ups of the two ‘E’ repairs. I am sure my coin is his type La, although interesting that the E of ONE repair on my coin still has a portion of the middle bar missing. As far as I can see my coin does not have any reverse die cracks, but the obverse does have a large one to the RHS of HONI………which I cannot see on your own coin. I find the use of die cracks to demonstrate continuity a very interesting subject.

Yes Pete, I did sell a low grade 1863 Die No. 4 last December. I listed first on ebay but then sold to an existing customer off-line together with an 1862 8/6, the 1863 sold for £870. Well remembered, Ian

For the Victorian Bronze penny collector of Gouby varieties I notice there is an 1860Je (6/6) on this website, MS64 at what some may consider to be a reasonable price of $375 http://atlasnumismatics.com/1017329/

Wasn't sure which topic to put this in but just wanted to point out that despite being NGC slabbed this ebay piece is NOT an 1897 High Sea Level, so please do not be tempted / mis-lead by the authoritative labelling, would be an awful lot of money anyway even if it was:- http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1897-Great-Britain-Penny-High-Sea-Level-NGC-MS-64-Red-Brown-/162088884604?hash=item25bd40197c:g:lZwAAOSwIjNXJp~w I have advised the seller so hopefully he will now either remove or add some additional comments

Now that this sale has completed, apart from a couple of pieces which seem to be rumbling on, I wonder whether members have views regarding selling one’s collection in this way as opposed to through a traditional auction house………. for example thinking of the recent Elstree collection.

Does this help clarify!?

......and the slightly wider Bx, but not as wide as Aa or Ca. Note that both type B's have the gap between R and E of REG. Apologies for picture quality of this one, sold many years ago so they are edited from my picture library.............as I retain everything!!

As promised final sets of pictures of the two 1889 narrow dates.....

No problem Richard. I will try to do the B and B* tomorrow, although the latter will not be to same definition as I unknowingly sold that coin not spotting the different narrowdate width.........at least I kept the old pictures.

....and Ad, widest 9 high in exergue