secret santa

Thanks - that's a cracking coin !!!!

I have just realised/discovered that 1856 PT pennies have large dates and 1856 OT pennies have small dates - how strange !

I'll add this to my varieties website - does it only occur on 1848 (without overdate) ?

yes, indeed - there are many other variations associated with these copper penny dates but there does seem to be genuine confusion over the large and small date. You only have to look through LCA archives, for example, to find large date coins described as small date because the numbers are slightly closer together, for example. My earlier comments about the style of the 5 seems to be a reliable guide.

Yes - which is why I raised a topic on 1858 large & small date pennies - I was finding it hard to tell the difference when looking at a single coin in hand. You are not alone....................

And, as Peck says, 1857 pennies are found with small dates (similar to 1858 & 1859). Large date & Small date

Having potentially cracked the issue regarding 1858 pennies, I have taken a look at my 1859 large and small date pennies to see if the same "rule" applies. Certainly, the examples on Michael's website indicate that the same differences in the 5 apply to 1859 pennies. I then checked my own examples and found that all my 1859 pennies, including my really nice small date, have the same figure 5, i.e. that of the wide date format. Fortunately one of my 2 spare small date pennies has the appropriate 5. I then checked the LCA archives and found a few 1859 pennies misdescribed as it isn't always obvious what's a large or small date. Obviously I'm not the only person who's found it confusing !

I agree that the 5s look very different: Large date small date If this is consistent, it does seem a an easy and foolproof means of distinguishing between the 2 dates. What about my second question regarding overdates ? Both my 1858 over 6 specimens appear to be small dates. Does anyone know whether 1858 overdates occur on both large and small dates ?

My question explicitly refers to 1858 copper pennies and how to tell which a particular variety is in hand without needing to compare it to either photographs or other coins.

I still have some difficulty distinguishing between 1858 large and small date pennies. Even all the examples on Michael's Gouby website ( http://www.michael-coins.co.uk/cp_1858.htm) don't make it absolutely clear. He only mentions the small date once as CP1858E and gives no guidance other than Smaller numerals '5 & 8's'. It appears from his pictures that the key distinguishing feature of the smaller date seems to be that the bottom of the 5 is left of the larger bead on the smaller date (see picture from his website below) but pretty much directly over the larger bead on the larger date. The actual date numerals themselves seem to me to vary in size and distance apart throughout the range of varieties. However, I have also seen what appear to be small date specimens with the 5 over the left side of the large bead - see below. Can anyone offer me a foolproof way of distinguishing between the large and small date ? Also, I have previously assumed that all 1858 overdates are the large date variety, but is this true ? My 1858 over 6 looks like a small date to me.

I received an interesting email from Baldwin St James today announcing that Sixbid has been hacked and fake invoices created for Baldwin's last sale: Unfortunately, the online auction platform Sixbid was hacked and those responsible have been able to create FAKE, and convincing, invoices in relation to our last auction. They have googled our uk companies house number and have thus created these fraudulent invoices. We want you to be able to spot a fraudulent invoice, should you receive one. They then listed some things to look out for. I could post this information if people want more details.

I think it might actually be their attempt at a round top lighthouse (rev f) ?

I have now mentioned the possibility on my varieties website.

He also describes it further down as an Edward VII 1902 penny - keeping his options open !

Flattery will get you everywhere !!!!!!!!!!

In the paperback reprint of Freeman's book in 2016 I made some suggested Freeman classifications (such as Obverse 2* for the 145 tooth obverse that you found and 4* for Gouby's obverse G) but, unless a revised version of Freeman is agreed and published, they can only ever be suggestions with no formal authority. With Michael Freeman no longer interested in the subject, I guess we are left with Michael Gouby who, at least, is open to recording new varieties and types with their associated Gouby identifier.

You can see why Freeman didn't differentiate between the 2 !

Yes, and the top of her dress is complete on ja but just fades away on j.

They are both reverse ja - in my opinion, the long/short hair is a red herring and just happened to be shorter on the specimen that Michael Gouby pictures in his book. On good specimens, the hair is only slightly shorter. For me the key differentiators are the size of the dome of the helmet (larger on ja) and the lower rear of the helmet (convex with a rim on ja). rev j on left; rev ja on right

Yes, my 1839 prof cost £250 in 2001 and my 1853 copper proof cost £300 on 2000. Since then they've gone through the roof.

A rare chance to get a beautiful proof 1863 penny for £1 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Victoria-1-Penny-1863-Proof-AEF/333185317437?hash=item4d93647a3d:g:PEoAAOSwrZFc0F9P

Still, a beautiful coin that I was outbid on.

The other Heritage photos were more impressive:

Thanks Bob, you're a star !!!!!!!