Newly Acquired Halfpennies

[cathrine]

I'm primarily a Victorian halfpenny collector, both copper and bronze young head varieties. there's no thread for such coins, so I have no place to post some newly acquired specimens. Consequently, I decided to make a new posting and invite others to show me their latest and greatest!

Here's two NGC graded Victorian copper halfpennies that are both rather scarce in a high grade. I acquired both of them in the most recent Goldberg auction.

 

 

[cathrine]

Here's another hard-to-find in this or higher condition. I also bought this coin at the recent Goldberg auction.

[Rob]

I have plenty, but not many recent purchases having whittled down the number over the past 8 years by about two-thirds and in any case prefer the George III patterns and proofs.

So with that in mind, it will have to be old ones. First up, to add to your scarce 1847 and 1848, I will add the unique '1849'.

[Rob]

To add to your 1866, I have one with the tonnage figures 138/405, this being the one numerically preceding the cover coin on Michael Gouby's book (139/406). Sorry about the scan.

[Rob]

Freeman 329A, ex MJF

Compared with a normal one. Sorry about the scans again.

[Rob]

Or maybe Norweb's 1853 copper proof. This is a nice coin.

 

[Colin G.]

5 hours ago, Rob said:

I have plenty, but not many recent purchases having whittled down the number over the past 8 years by about two-thirds and in any case prefer the George III patterns and proofs.

So with that in mind, it will have to be old ones. First up, to add to your scarce 1847 and 1848, I will add the unique '1849'.

 

Did you make the date on that 1849 yourself 

[Rob]

8 minutes ago, Colin G. said:

Did you make the date on that 1849 yourself 

It's the piece referred to in footnote 2 on p.408 by Peck

[Stuntman]

Some very nice visual treats above.  I particularly like cathrine's 1848 and Rob's 1853 proof.

[Paulus]

So nice to see so many halfpennies being posted!

[Rob]

It depends on what the remit is. Catherine was talkiing about Victorian halfpennies. If any reign goes the options are quite extensive.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Rob

[Paulus]

3 minutes ago, Rob said:

It depends on what the remit is. Catherine was talkiing about Victorian halfpennies. If any reign goes the options are quite extensive.

Indeed so, but they don't often get much of an airing whatever the reign - unless they are yours or Conder tokens!

[Rob]

I don't want to hog the pictures. I appreciate halfpennies are unloved, so sticking a couple hundred images up might not be appreciated.

[mrbadexample]

I

43 minutes ago, Rob said:

I appreciate halfpennies are unloved...

Not by everyone! They're just a little penny, after all.

 

[RLC35]

43 minutes ago, mrbadexample said:

I

Not by everyone! They're just a little penny, after all.

 

 

Nice DF.I.....

[Rob]

1859 copper, 1861 bronze and 1860 Weyl copper pattern. All scans, so a bit flat.

[Rob]

1863 small 3, 1874H

[Rob]

An oddball for a change. 1859 pattern decimal halfpenny. P2037, ex -

Baron Philippe de Ferrari la Renotiere 399, Sotheby 27/3/1922

V M Brand

SNC May 1967/CC3075

M J Freeman Christies 23/10/1984 lot 221 part

SNC Oct.2002 MC1524C

St. James’s 3 3/10/05, lot 307

Edited March 20, 2017 by Rob

[Rob]

Second is a P2000 (F706A), ex Peck collection. Rated R20 by Freeman, but as there is another in the Mint Museum, R19 is more appropriate.

Third is a F689. ex -

Baron Philippe de Ferrari la Renotiere, Sotheby 27/3/1922 lot 399

 

V M Brand

 

SNC May 1967 lot CC3073 (incorrectly listed as P2002) £75

 

M J Freeman Christies 23/10/1984 lot 202

 

Heritage Auction #410 lot 13023 1/6/06

This was an important miss by Peck as he only recorded the P1983 where the reverse leaves face in the opposite direction, but this coin was illustrated in the Nobleman sale of 1922. This was one of only six Victorian decimal patterns not in the Norweb collection, and was omitted purely by chance. When the coin was listed in the May '67 Circular, it was attributed as a P2002, which she already possessed. Normally Mrs N would have had first bite at the cherry, but the misattribution allowed MJF to acquire it and recognise the variety for what it was. Purchased slabbed as a P1983, the coin is no longer in the plastic, thus saving NGC the embarrassment of a label error. This coin's exciting life included a 7 month period after the Heritage sale when it went awol on a world tour of various countries' postal systems. Thankfully it was returned to Heritage the following January. I was not happy at a unique coin going missing. The second coin like so many of the thinner flan patterns is laminating. This is more often the case than not.

And finally, Mrs N's P2002 which she had and so didn't get the misdescribed second coin. These are in the wrong order because of mixed sources. The P2002 is the undated one at the top.

 

Edited March 20, 2017 by Rob

[cathrine]

I've recently acquired a high grade specimen of an 1852 halfpenny. This coin is a the Reverse A die variety (Peck 1536).

Does anyone know why the mint introduced the Reverse B die in 1851, which was subsequently discontinued in 1858? 

[damian1986]

Some lovely stuff.

Not a recent acquisition but here's one I love to bits.

It belonged to Peck. 

 

 

[PWA 1967]

Nice coin and provenance.....Hat off and definately one to always keep 

[Rob]

10 hours ago, damian1986 said:

Some lovely stuff.

Not a recent acquisition but here's one I love to bits.

It belonged to Peck. 

 

 

Welcome back. In collecting mode again after the move?

[damian1986]

On 4/8/2017 at 9:32 AM, Rob said:

Welcome back. In collecting mode again after the move?

Hello Rob! Yes would certainly like to add to my coppers which remained intact. Picked up a couple of tokens over the past 18 months or so but nothing else really. The nice ones don't seem to be getting any cheaper.

[cathrine]

Here's a scarce 1848 halfpenny that I recently acquired from an eBay seller. It's graded PCGS MS 63 BN, and in my opinion, this is a much nicer specimen than the 1848 that I posted at the beginning of this thread. That coin was also graded MS 63 BN, but the grader was NGC. Personally, I feel that NGC is a "tougher" grader than PCGS, BUT that wasn't the case in this instance! Perhaps this specimen should have been a 64 instead of a 63; it is noticeably devoid of marks in the fields and on the design. Note that the reverse lettering is quite different; this coin has an abundance of re-punched letters and the second "D" has a missing upper serif.