Halfpenny ID check

[Zo Arms]

Not received coin yet, so sellers photos.

[Zo Arms]

Thinking this is a 14 + N pairing not listed by Freeman but recognised by Dracott?

Ob legend away from Lin circle, nearly touching head and high bridge/eye format. Wide date.

Not fussed if 15 though.

[Zo Arms]

[Mr T]

My only thought is... die fill has occurred, then somehow the build-up in the die has fallen off and been struck onto the coin. Maybe.

I'm not sure what else it could be.

[Martinminerva]

9 hours ago, Zo Arms said:

Thinking this is a 14 + N pairing not listed by Freeman but recognised by Dracott?

 Ob legend away from Lin circle, nearly touching head and high bridge/eye format. Wide date.

It certainly is, and quite a find - well done! (The easiest identifier is the less bulgy forehead than obv. 15) The condition is smashing too! I believe this might only be the fourth known? Is it yours? An eBay find? Hats off to you!!

Edited October 22, 2021 by Martinminerva

[Bronze & Copper Collector]

Sure looks like a 14 & N...

Nice find and nicer than mine

Edited October 22, 2021 by Bronze & Copper Collector

[Bernie]

7 hours ago, Martinminerva said:

It certainly is, and quite a find - well done! (The easiest identifier is the less bulgy forehead than obv. 15) The condition is smashing too! I believe this might only be the fourth known? Is it yours? An eBay find? Hats off to you!!

It does appear to be obverse 14, see if you can count the border teeth, 152 teeth for 14 and 149 for 15.

Well done, brilliant find !

[Zo Arms]

On 10/22/2021 at 9:02 AM, Mr T said:

My only thought is... die fill has occurred, then somehow the build-up in the die has fallen off and been struck onto the coin. Maybe.

I'm not sure what else it could be.

Mystery solved. The coin arrived yesterday. Both the reverse and obverse are unmarked, so I'm guessing that it's some form of reflection on the lens.

I do understand and like your die fill theory though.

[Zo Arms]

Very pleased with the comments on the 14 + N above. Thank you.

Not eBay. A Canadian seller. 19 Dollars Inc postage. Converts to around £11. Expected end of Nov.

[Mr T]

So in Iain Dracott's article in the November Coin News - I'm assuming that the C1 and J1 reverses he talks about are the C# and J# from his 2004 articles?

[Zo Arms]

11 hours ago, Mr T said:

So in Iain Dracott's article in the November Coin News - I'm assuming that the C1 and J1 reverses he talks about are the C# and J# from his 2004 articles?

Will try and pick up a copy tomorrow. Is it an update to his 2004 work?

[secret santa]

1 hour ago, Zo Arms said:

Will try and pick up a copy tomorrow. Is it an update to his 2004 work?

Let me know if you can't and I'll send a scan. I don't like to criticise but the penny section contains numerous narrative descriptions that really need photographic examples and there are a few errors, such as 1861 pennies with the "2" in various positions !!!

[Mr T]

7 hours ago, Zo Arms said:

Will try and pick up a copy tomorrow. Is it an update to his 2004 work?

I haven't looked closely to see if there is anything new but it's just a two page summary of new farthing, halfpenny and penny varieties since Freeman.

[Zo Arms]

On 11/6/2021 at 6:40 AM, Mr T said:

So in Iain Dracott's article in the November Coin News - I'm assuming that the C1 and J1 reverses he talks about are the C# and J# from his 2004 articles?

Seems like a fair assumption to me. The C1/# is mentioned in conjunction with 1873, so highly likely. Paired with 7, 3 now known. Guessing Martin's and Gary's are included.

A new obverse. 11*. And a couple of unique pairings, now have siblings.

If J#  has now become J1 but was formerly known as J,  I can't see that becoming confusing. Ever.

So, yes. An update on his previous article.

[secret santa]

Dracott describes the article as an update to his 2004 article but it's inconsistent to arbitrarily replace #suffixes with 1. He also describes 1873 7+C1 as a new die pairing with 3 known. I assume that this is the same as the previous 7+C# which was unique at the time of his 2004 article but, in theory could be an additional die pairing if C1 is "new" and different from C#.

The new article deserves expansion together with photos to illustrate the new varieties.

[Zo Arms]

It was the 8 +C# that was unique in his 2004 article. He doesn't list a 7 + C#. 

In a thread started by Gary "NEW UNLISTED VARIETY 1873 HALF-PENNY" Dec 8th 2008, his is the first known, with Martin listing a second, further down the thread. A new pairing since 2004.

But yes. Inconsistent to give it a second, different suffix. 

Could it just be a typesetting error? The 1862 mistake in the penny section. Parings instead of pairings, at least 3 times.

Edited November 7, 2021 by Zo Arms
Typesetting

[secret santa]

My apologies - you're quite right. I need to keep out of this as this is not my area of expertise.

[Bronze & Copper Collector]

For what it's worth, I have 1 8&c# and 2 7&c#

[Zo Arms]

1 hour ago, secret santa said:

My apologies - you're quite right. I need to keep out of this as this is not my area of expertise.

A little harsh on yourself. All views are valid. I'm a relative newcomer and had to flick between the new Freeman, the new and old Dracott and the threads here, to make sure that I was correct. And to check that there was no C1.

Are his penny listings useful?

[Zo Arms]

Also find it strange that Mal Lewendon's 1875 obverse 13# has no mention. 2005.

[Mr T]

So 11* is new - probably need a photo to make sense of it but a recut tie ribbon and overlapping berries make it sound a bit easier to diagnose than Freeman obverses 11 and 12.

1877 13+N also looks new though I'm not sure what the comment is getting as the obverse and reverse are both well-known.

1880 15+O* also looks new but based on the comment about all four die pairings, 15*+P* would seem to be the die. Or maybe it's meant to be 1881 where 15+O* was reported by him in 2004. Also I assume O* is Dracott O#.

Nothing new in the farthings that I can see.

[secret santa]

15 hours ago, Mr T said:

So 11* is new - probably need a photo to make sense of it but a recut tie ribbon and overlapping berries make it sound a bit easier to diagnose than Freeman obverses 11 and 12.

I'm inclined to take this with a pinch of salt. I'm not totally convinced that there's a deliberate design difference between obverse 11 and 12 let alone an additional obverse 11*. A high resolution photograph of a high grade example is essential before we accept this.

[secret santa]

On 11/7/2021 at 7:32 PM, Zo Arms said:

Are his penny listings useful?

Not really - subjective descriptions without photographic evidence (such as Michael Gouby's) are fairly meaningless, in my view.

[Mr T]

10 hours ago, secret santa said:

I'm inclined to take this with a pinch of salt. I'm not totally convinced that there's a deliberate design difference between obverse 11 and 12 let alone an additional obverse 11*. A high resolution photograph of a high grade example is essential before we accept this.

I don't disagree, but the comparators did seem more helpful than the subjective neck thickness and nose hookedness.

Does anyone have Iain Dracott's details to get some more information?

[Zo Arms]

A little help please. Thinking this is obverse 13. I'm using the last colon of F:D: as my identifier, in relation to the linear circle. Sellers photo.

Alternatively, confirmation that it's not 11, would be equally helpful.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Zo Arms
Addition.