The 1926 ME penny

[InforaPenny 21]

Not stealing thunder from the thread, but which bunhead date is most problematic EF and above (1882 London coin excepted)?

My vote goes for 1864 and maybe 1875H...

When the '26ME is found in high grade I have seen it to have booming lustre of an almost silky nature with a fairly decent strike. CC has one that may fit that description now....

I'd agree about the 1864 (both types) and the 1875H from the Victorian era. Even 1869 is easier to get in a very high grade than those two.

Also, I agree with earlier comments about the fallibility of the Freeman rarity estimates. Obviously they were never really any better than inspired guesswork. Nonetheless, that doesn't really explain why there are so few 1926ME's in high grade. For a coin a lot younger than the buns I referred to, and only 45 years old at demonetisation, it is hard to explain IMO.

If I had to put a guess on how many of the original mintage were modified, I'd say 15-20%, something of that order. Again though, pure guesswork. No real way of knowing.

Thanks for all the comments & opinions, chaps.

In 1926 there had been no pennies issued for 3 years. Then demand must have increased enough to warrant an issue, even though the modified effigy must have been close to readiness. Assuming the normal run of casual collectors who habitually put a BU penny aside, the first run of 1926s must have satisfied that urge. By the time the ME came along (at the end of the year?) would people have readily seen the difference between the two types anyway? By the time they did, the 1927 pennny would have emerged in large quantities so those got put aside instead. I'm really thinking the 1926ME 'slipped beneath the radar' as far as being noticed.

Not stealing thunder from the thread, but which bunhead date is most problematic EF and above (1882 London coin excepted)?

My vote goes for 1864 and maybe 1875H...

When the '26ME is found in high grade I have seen it to have booming lustre of an almost silky nature with a fairly decent strike. CC has one that may fit that description now....

I'd agree about the 1864 (both types) and the 1875H from the Victorian era. Even 1869 is easier to get in a very high grade than those two.

Also, I agree with earlier comments about the fallibility of the Freeman rarity estimates. Obviously they were never really any better than inspired guesswork. Nonetheless, that doesn't really explain why there are so few 1926ME's in high grade. For a coin a lot younger than the buns I referred to, and only 45 years old at demonetisation, it is hard to explain IMO.

If I had to put a guess on how many of the original mintage were modified, I'd say 15-20%, something of that order. Again though, pure guesswork. No real way of knowing.

Thanks for all the comments & opinions, chaps.

Surely rarity figures are all nonsence now due to decimalisation. I would guess only 10% of pennies exist now and all the so called rarities were stripped for circulatiion beforehand. The playing field is much levelled now a days and H and KNs are as common as 1967 pennies.

That's a very good point, though I'd hardly claim parity between H & KNs with 1967!!

The best estimate I have seen (and I have no idea where I got it from) was of about 400,000 ME's. I have to say that although I collected avidly from change for maybe 2 1/2 years, I never saw a 26 ME, but at the same time must have encountered 18-20 1926 ordinary effigies, so read into that what you will.

I think it is fair to say that if the only 1926 pennies issued equated to the small number of ME's then they would be far more common in higher grade. People (especially kids) used to put aside an example of each date and for 1926 this was most likely to have been an ordinary effigy. Variety collecting was in its infancy then and most collectors would be either unaware of the variety or just weren't that concerned. Added to this the fact that being produced from new dies which were presumably only brought into use when the old ones were worn out, the ME's were likely to have been issued last and quite conceivably not until 1927 by which time most collectors already had their BU 1926.

A fair bit of conjecture there, but it does seem to make sense and give a reasonable explanation of this coin's rarity.

We're on the same wavelength here Derek. As a schoolboy it took me a year to suss that my first-ever 1926 penny from change, was the ME ! Back in '26, I'm wondering how many people actually noticed, especially considering how few there were anyway?

It would be interesting to get some coin magazines/annuals from around that time to see whether or not they are mentioned.

The best we are likley to get are the studies of coins undertaken by various heroic numismatists in the early to mid 1970s when surveys of coins in circulation were being carried out and the results reported in Coin Monthly. I've got most of them, so if I find a spare hundred hours, I'll see what was being reported at the time. However, as has I think already been said, they were probably already taken from circulation by then.

The best information I’ve seen is from the survey by V. R. Court (Coin Monthly, October 1972, page 42-43) who found 20 M.E. out of a total of 835 1926 pennies, giving an estimated mintage of 107,750 (i.e. about 2.4%). The reason these are so difficult in high grade, may be due to the existence of the M.E. coins not being noted until about 1960 (in Peck’s book). That is, there is no mention in Seaby’s 1949 book on copper coins, which provides coverage of many bun penny varieties. This may have allowed the M.E. pennies to circulate for 35 years or more, before collectors began looking for them. Just my 2 cents, or approximately one pre-decimal penny’s worth.

Best Regards,

[Peter 615]

who is looking for them, you dont expect them, how many people spot the 1992 10p and 20p varietys?

Yep

I have no interest whatsoever.

[scott 142]

so how many 1897 high tides are there, wonder if people noticed those

[Rob 3,106]

It would be interesting to get some coin magazines/annuals from around that time to see whether or not they are mentioned.

Their presence was certainly known within the collecting fraternity from the start. Henry Garside issued a monograph on the subject of British Imperial bronze coins in the Circular. He added to this in the August 1927 circular listing both the old effigy and the new one described as quote

" O. - Similar to the obverse of 1, but the King's effigy has been remodelled, His Majesty's hair is treated differently, the eye has a different appearance, the top of the ear is more rounded, the initials BM (Sir Bertram Mackennal, K.C.V.O.), on the truncation of the neck, are more to the right, with less space betwen them, and no stop between and after them.

R. - Similar to the reverse of 1, but dated 1926"

Garside's list was updated every August. In 1926 this update included only the 1925 halfpenny with the revised reverse. The 1927 update included both types of 1926 penny and the 1927 penny; 1925, 1926 & 1927 ME halfpennies; 1926 & 1927 ME farthings.

Therefore we can assume that the ME pennies appeared in circulation after the August 1926 Circular went to press. This would be in keeping with the low mintage for the year irrespective of type and is not unreasonable given there were no pennies dated 1923-5. Rather more surprising is the inclusion of the 1925 ME halfpenny in the 1927 update as this should have been reported in the previous year assuming the update was timely. Whether this means that the 1925 coins were actually issued in 1926 I can not say as I don't know the date the ME dies were first used, but whatever, there is an inconsistency here which needs to be resolved. The Mint Records would be helpful here if anybody has them.

[davidrj 194]

so how many 1897 high tides are there, wonder if people noticed those

Freeman gives the 1897 high tide as a newly discovered variety in his 1964 Victorian Bronze Penny

He found 26 out of 4297 1897s (ranking them as R14)

David

[1949threepence 3,367]

The best information I’ve seen is from the survey by V. R. Court (Coin Monthly, October 1972, page 42-43) who found 20 M.E. out of a total of 835 1926 pennies, giving an estimated mintage of 107,750 (i.e. about 2.4%). The reason these are so difficult in high grade, may be due to the existence of the M.E. coins not being noted until about 1960 (in Peck’s book). That is, there is no mention in Seaby’s 1949 book on copper coins, which provides coverage of many bun penny varieties. This may have allowed the M.E. pennies to circulate for 35 years or more, before collectors began looking for them. Just my 2 cents, or approximately one pre-decimal penny’s worth.

Best Regards,

Very interesting mintage stats ~ which are often found in random places you might not necessarily expect.

As far as mention of the 1926ME within coin circles, is concerned, what you say, appears to be at odds with what........

Their presence was certainly known within the collecting fraternity from the start. Henry Garside issued a monograph on the subject of British Imperial bronze coins in the Circular. He added to this in the August 1927 circular listing both the old effigy and the new one described as quote

" O. - Similar to the obverse of 1, but the King's effigy has been remodelled, His Majesty's hair is treated differently, the eye has a different appearance, the top of the ear is more rounded, the initials BM (Sir Bertram Mackennal, K.C.V.O.), on the truncation of the neck, are more to the right, with less space betwen them, and no stop between and after them.

R. - Similar to the reverse of 1, but dated 1926"

Garside's list was updated every August. In 1926 this update included only the 1925 halfpenny with the revised reverse. The 1927 update included both types of 1926 penny and the 1927 penny; 1925, 1926 & 1927 ME halfpennies; 1926 & 1927 ME farthings.

Therefore we can assume that the ME pennies appeared in circulation after the August 1926 Circular went to press. This would be in keeping with the low mintage for the year irrespective of type and is not unreasonable given there were no pennies dated 1923-5. Rather more surprising is the inclusion of the 1925 ME halfpenny in the 1927 update as this should have been reported in the previous year assuming the update was timely. Whether this means that the 1925 coins were actually issued in 1926 I can not say as I don't know the date the ME dies were first used, but whatever, there is an inconsistency here which needs to be resolved. The Mint Records would be helpful here if anybody has them.

Rob says.....

Maybe it was noted very early on, and then kind of "forgotten". Although I'm the first to admit that seems a somewhat vague and highly unlikely scenario. Rob seems very specific on the issue, although I'm not sure what the "circular" in question, actually was. What circular was it, or was it a coin magazine called the "circular" ? Excuse my ignorance, Rob

[Rob 3,106]

Rob says.....

Maybe it was noted very early on, and then kind of "forgotten". Although I'm the first to admit that seems a somewhat vague and highly unlikely scenario. Rob seems very specific on the issue, although I'm not sure what the "circular" in question, actually was. What circular was it, or was it a coin magazine called the "circular" ? Excuse my ignorance, Rob

Spink Numismatic Circular. 1926 p.441 and 1927 p.413 refer. Unfortunately the pages are too big to reduce the file size to less than 150kB if you want image clarity.

Another possible reason for their lack of inclusion in contemporary collections is that anybody who collected copper or bronze was considered a bit of an oddball. Even coins such as Soho patterns would be lumped together in bulk lots of dozens whereas today they would be given individual lot status.

[Red Riley 2]

We're on the same wavelength here Derek. As a schoolboy it took me a year to suss that my first-ever 1926 penny from change, was the ME ! Back in '26, I'm wondering how many people actually noticed, especially considering how few there were anyway?

To give you a little more background here, as I say, my checking through change lasted roughly two and a half years and it was actually quite a large scale opration. With my father running a busy shop, I was able to lean on him to get quite a large number of pennies from the bank - maybe £5 or even more every week, plus whatever came into the shop, so you could maybe estimate that I checked 15-20,000 or more pennies from 1969 to 1971. Not one ME, not one KN and not one penny from the fifties, so it may be that by then most of the interesting coins had already been sucked out of circulation leaving just the dross behind. Or possibly somebody at the bank was pulling the best stuff in their lunch break!

[DaveG38 401]

Not stealing thunder from the thread, but which bunhead date is most problematic EF and above (1882 London coin excepted)?

My vote goes for 1864 and maybe 1875H...

When the '26ME is found in high grade I have seen it to have booming lustre of an almost silky nature with a fairly decent strike. CC has one that may fit that description now....

I'd agree about the 1864 (both types) and the 1875H from the Victorian era. Even 1869 is easier to get in a very high grade than those two.

Also, I agree with earlier comments about the fallibility of the Freeman rarity estimates. Obviously they were never really any better than inspired guesswork. Nonetheless, that doesn't really explain why there are so few 1926ME's in high grade. For a coin a lot younger than the buns I referred to, and only 45 years old at demonetisation, it is hard to explain IMO.

If I had to put a guess on how many of the original mintage were modified, I'd say 15-20%, something of that order. Again though, pure guesswork. No real way of knowing.

Thanks for all the comments & opinions, chaps.

In 1926 there had been no pennies issued for 3 years. Then demand must have increased enough to warrant an issue, even though the modified effigy must have been close to readiness. Assuming the normal run of casual collectors who habitually put a BU penny aside, the first run of 1926s must have satisfied that urge. By the time the ME came along (at the end of the year?) would people have readily seen the difference between the two types anyway? By the time they did, the 1927 pennny would have emerged in large quantities so those got put aside instead. I'm really thinking the 1926ME 'slipped beneath the radar' as far as being noticed.

Not stealing thunder from the thread, but which bunhead date is most problematic EF and above (1882 London coin excepted)?

My vote goes for 1864 and maybe 1875H...

When the '26ME is found in high grade I have seen it to have booming lustre of an almost silky nature with a fairly decent strike. CC has one that may fit that description now....

I'd agree about the 1864 (both types) and the 1875H from the Victorian era. Even 1869 is easier to get in a very high grade than those two.

Also, I agree with earlier comments about the fallibility of the Freeman rarity estimates. Obviously they were never really any better than inspired guesswork. Nonetheless, that doesn't really explain why there are so few 1926ME's in high grade. For a coin a lot younger than the buns I referred to, and only 45 years old at demonetisation, it is hard to explain IMO.

If I had to put a guess on how many of the original mintage were modified, I'd say 15-20%, something of that order. Again though, pure guesswork. No real way of knowing.

Thanks for all the comments & opinions, chaps.

Surely rarity figures are all nonsence now due to decimalisation. I would guess only 10% of pennies exist now and all the so called rarities were stripped for circulatiion beforehand. The playing field is much levelled now a days and H and KNs are as common as 1967 pennies.

That's a very good point, though I'd hardly claim parity between H & KNs with 1967!!

The best estimate I have seen (and I have no idea where I got it from) was of about 400,000 ME's. I have to say that although I collected avidly from change for maybe 2 1/2 years, I never saw a 26 ME, but at the same time must have encountered 18-20 1926 ordinary effigies, so read into that what you will.

I think it is fair to say that if the only 1926 pennies issued equated to the small number of ME's then they would be far more common in higher grade. People (especially kids) used to put aside an example of each date and for 1926 this was most likely to have been an ordinary effigy. Variety collecting was in its infancy then and most collectors would be either unaware of the variety or just weren't that concerned. Added to this the fact that being produced from new dies which were presumably only brought into use when the old ones were worn out, the ME's were likely to have been issued last and quite conceivably not until 1927 by which time most collectors already had their BU 1926.

A fair bit of conjecture there, but it does seem to make sense and give a reasonable explanation of this coin's rarity.

We're on the same wavelength here Derek. As a schoolboy it took me a year to suss that my first-ever 1926 penny from change, was the ME ! Back in '26, I'm wondering how many people actually noticed, especially considering how few there were anyway?

It would be interesting to get some coin magazines/annuals from around that time to see whether or not they are mentioned.

The best we are likley to get are the studies of coins undertaken by various heroic numismatists in the early to mid 1970s when surveys of coins in circulation were being carried out and the results reported in Coin Monthly. I've got most of them, so if I find a spare hundred hours, I'll see what was being reported at the time. However, as has I think already been said, they were probably already taken from circulation by then.

The best information I’ve seen is from the survey by V. R. Court (Coin Monthly, October 1972, page 42-43) who found 20 M.E. out of a total of 835 1926 pennies, giving an estimated mintage of 107,750 (i.e. about 2.4%). The reason these are so difficult in high grade, may be due to the existence of the M.E. coins not being noted until about 1960 (in Peck’s book). That is, there is no mention in Seaby’s 1949 book on copper coins, which provides coverage of many bun penny varieties. This may have allowed the M.E. pennies to circulate for 35 years or more, before collectors began looking for them. Just my 2 cents, or approximately one pre-decimal penny’s worth.

Best Regards,

Thanks for this Inforapenny. You've saved me going through my old issues to find the article.

[TomGoodheart 378]

Interesting thread. I find the rarity of coins and the reason for their rarity interesting. I can't help but think of the 1988 (shield reverse) £1 coin. Not produce in huge numbers, no. But I seriously doubt I've ever seen even ten of the little blighters. And very few of those in decent nick - in fact one - and that's the one I picked out of change and kept with my year run from circulation.

Have they been taken out of circulation because, like me, people saw a new design and decided to keep one? Did they circulate somewhere else like the North East and just not often travel down to the midlands (unlikely)? Are there bags of the things sat in a bank somewhere? Who knows. I just know that, were I to judge by the number I've seen, they would appear rarer than I know they actually are.

But as for the penny, when I looked at Dad's little collection (again from change) there were plenty of (admittedly low quality) H and KN pennies. Why? They are fairly easy to spot I reckon. And people had heard of them. For all I know in the handful of coins of his I have left there might be a rarity. But I haven't the experience, skill (or interest) to check!

And so I just wonder if the MEs are scarce because they were tricky to spot unless you have the two coins side by side (plus the late issuing thing) and so just wore down in circulation and have now either been scrapped or the few, when noticed, were popped into collections?

[Peter 615]

Interesting thread. I find the rarity of coins and the reason for their rarity interesting. I can't help but think of the 1988 (shield reverse) £1 coin. Not produce in huge numbers, no. But I seriously doubt I've ever seen even ten of the little blighters. And very few of those in decent nick - in fact one - and that's the one I picked out of change and kept with my year run from circulation.

Have they been taken out of circulation because, like me, people saw a new design and decided to keep one? Did they circulate somewhere else like the North East and just not often travel down to the midlands (unlikely)? Are there bags of the things sat in a bank somewhere? Who knows. I just know that, were I to judge by the number I've seen, they would appear rarer than I know they actually are.

But as for the penny, when I looked at Dad's little collection (again from change) there were plenty of (admittedly low quality) H and KN pennies. Why? They are fairly easy to spot I reckon. And people had heard of them. For all I know in the handful of coins of his I have left there might be a rarity. But I haven't the experience, skill (or interest) to check!

And so I just wonder if the MEs are scarce because they were tricky to spot unless you have the two coins side by side (plus the late issuing thing) and so just wore down in circulation and have now either been scrapped or the few, when noticed, were popped into collections?

.

I had half a dozen 1988's plucked from circulation and then I bought a BU for £3.50 so I spent them.

[scott 142]

i have 2 1988's 2008's arms design is lower mintage, i sucked a few of those out of curculation instantly

[davidrj 194]

And so I just wonder if the MEs are scarce because they were tricky to spot unless you have the two coins side by side (plus the late issuing thing) and so just wore down in circulation and have now either been scrapped or the few, when noticed, were popped into collections?

I think there is a lot of truth in this. Back in the 60s we didn't have scanners or digital cameras to help us. just eyeballing worn coins from circulation

I find the whole saga of George V pennies interesting, and the various attempts to eliminate ghosting, none of which were successful until the small head was introduced.

Was ghosting a problem on other denominations?

Why didn't they try the Imperial portrait they used for Australia, South Africa & Jersey?

[scott 142]

ghosting happened even with the small head

i think it was on halfpennys and farthings as well.

so ME is either R3 or R4 :/

and i dont see 1897 high tide being R14 i can see there being more then 500 of those

i like the imperial portrait

Edited February 28, 2011 by scott

[davidrj 194]

and i dont see 1897 high tide being R14 i can see there being more then 500 of those

That's the trouble with rarity tables, in Freeman's 1970 book he has changed it to R9, probably as more had been discovered once folk knew what to look for. We still don't know how rare the Gouby X 1911 is for possibly the same reason

[£400 for a Penny ? 0]

Back in the 60s we didn't have scanners or digital cameras to help us. just eyeballing worn coins from circulation

For me, that's the big one.

Neither did we have internet forums where we could instantly post pictures to ask for peers opinions.

Neither did we have forgers stalking us.

Pre and post internet coin collecting, IMO, are two different sports.

[josie 8]

Back in the 60s we didn't have scanners or digital cameras to help us. just eyeballing worn coins from circulation

For me, that's the big one.

Neither did we have internet forums where we could instantly post pictures to ask for peers opinions.

Neither did we have forgers stalking us.

The US gov. is investigating the forgery on rare coins.

Expert post or reply on other subject regarding extremely rare of expensive coin should be limeted,depending on thier info. on whatever it is that the most post they will have is upto second identifier or reserve other authentiction and attribution info on the coin or have another secure section for expert it all up to the agreement of memvers or expert member if they like.

That other normal querries will be post fo general viewers.just a comment.

Pre and post internet coin collecting, IMO, are two different sports.

[1949threepence 3,367]

Back in the 60s we didn't have scanners or digital cameras to help us. just eyeballing worn coins from circulation

For me, that's the big one.

Neither did we have internet forums where we could instantly post pictures to ask for peers opinions.

Neither did we have forgers stalking us.

Pre and post internet coin collecting, IMO, are two different sports.

Totally agree with that one. Before the internet, apart from coin fairs, and/or if you were lucky enough to have a coin club locally, coin collectors were often quite isolated individuals. The internet has brought together almost the entire numismatic community. Moreover the advent of e bay, on line dealers and other on line auctions, not only enables us to survey a much greater range of coins than before, but has also no doubt re-kindled long dormant interest in many whose previously youthful interest was put aside by the demands of making a living, married life and raising a family.

The problem I found as a young collector in the 90's (before the internet and when it was in its infancy), was that I hardly ever met anybody else who was even remotely interested in the hobby. It certainly wasn't the best chat up line with girls either, unfortunately

[SionGilbey 1]

"Is that a roll of coins in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me "

"Err... coins. Don't get your fingerprints on them they're Brilliant Uncirculated!!"

Edited February 28, 2011 by SionGilbey

[1949threepence 3,367]

"Is that a roll of coins in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me "

"Err... coins. Don't get your fingerprints on them they're Brilliant Uncirculated!!"

Ha ha ~ I was thinking along the lines of "do you want to come home and see my etchings ?" (in the time honoureed way) ~ or in our cases, coins !!!

[Accumulator 52]

Totally agree with that one. Before the internet, apart from coin fairs, and/or if you were lucky enough to have a coin club locally, coin collectors were often quite isolated individuals. The internet has brought together almost the entire numismatic community. Moreover the advent of e bay, on line dealers and other on line auctions, not only enables us to survey a much greater range of coins than before, but has also no doubt re-kindled long dormant interest in many whose previously youthful interest was put aside by the demands of making a living, married life and raising a family.

That pretty much describes my situation. Luckily, my interest has been revived from time to time and I've been able to put aside a few more coins along the way.

[Peckris 579]

The reason these are so difficult in high grade, may be due to the existence of the M.E. coins not being noted until about 1960 (in Peck’s book). That is, there is no mention in Seaby’s 1949 book on copper coins, which provides coverage of many bun penny varieties. This may have allowed the M.E. pennies to circulate for 35 years or more, before collectors began looking for them. Just my 2 cents, or approximately one pre-decimal penny’s worth.

Their presence was certainly known within the collecting fraternity from the start. Henry Garside issued a monograph on the subject of British Imperial bronze coins in the Circular. He added to this in the August 1927 circular listing both the old effigy and the new one described as quote

" O. - Similar to the obverse of 1, but the King's effigy has been remodelled, His Majesty's hair is treated differently, the eye has a different appearance, the top of the ear is more rounded, the initials BM (Sir Bertram Mackennal, K.C.V.O.), on the truncation of the neck, are more to the right, with less space betwen them, and no stop between and after them.

Rob says.....

Maybe it was noted very early on, and then kind of "forgotten". Although I'm the first to admit that seems a somewhat vague and highly unlikely scenario. Rob seems very specific on the issue, although I'm not sure what the "circular" in question, actually was. What circular was it, or was it a coin magazine called the "circular" ? Excuse my ignorance, Rob

Having a description of the changed effigy, and actually spotting them in your change, could be two very different things. Most of us know it took a while as newbies before the 'instant recognition' of MEs became 2nd nature.

To give you a little more background here, as I say, my checking through change lasted roughly two and a half years and it was actually quite a large scale opration. With my father running a busy shop, I was able to lean on him to get quite a large number of pennies from the bank - maybe £5 or even more every week, plus whatever came into the shop, so you could maybe estimate that I checked 15-20,000 or more pennies from 1969 to 1971. Not one ME, not one KN and not one penny from the fifties, so it may be that by then most of the interesting coins had already been sucked out of circulation leaving just the dross behind. Or possibly somebody at the bank was pulling the best stuff in their lunch break!

I was checking from banks between 1968 and 1969. I found - I think - one rather woebegone 18KN, and one 1953. The 26ME I was given in change on a bus, and was the first 1926 penny I ever got! My second was in change in 1970 - but again, I think was due to people not being expert at spotting them,

But as for the penny, when I looked at Dad's little collection (again from change) there were plenty of (admittedly low quality) H and KN pennies. Why? They are fairly easy to spot I reckon. And people had heard of them. For all I know in the handful of coins of his I have left there might be a rarity. But I haven't the experience, skill (or interest) to check!

And so I just wonder if the MEs are scarce because they were tricky to spot unless you have the two coins side by side (plus the late issuing thing) and so just wore down in circulation and have now either been scrapped or the few, when noticed, were popped into collections?

Yes, I think you've hit it there Tom. It is the hardest variety to spot unless you've become fairly expert - there isn't the precise line of an 02LT, the tiny letters of the H and KNs.

[Rob 3,106]

Yes, I think you've hit it there Tom. It is the hardest variety to spot unless you've become fairly expert - there isn't the precise line of an 02LT, the tiny letters of the H and KNs.

It isn't rocket science though when all's said and done. You are only going to look for something you are aware of; but once you know, a quick check of the date and if 1926 a check on the position of the BM. I haven't got the slightest interest in pennies, but wouldn't have any difficulty recognising one. Whether a date collector or a full-blown variety collector, both would check the date first because it's the most likely gap in the collection. There seems to be a presumption that previous collectors weren't able to recognise the variety, but the information has always been there if they were so minded. The obvious conclusion is that either collectors took no interest in contemporary currency (similar to the attitude of many collectors today regarding current mint output), or that the coins were never that common in the first place.

The former is more likely in my view as the great collections in the first half of the 20th century were focussed on hammered coinage of all ages with a smattering of milled thrown in. Lockett sold his milled currency at the end of the 1920's to concentrate on building up the best collection since Montagu and Murdoch. Would he have had a 1926ME penny? I don't know because I don't have a copy of his milled sale, so possibly, but the attraction would have been as great as putting a low denomination 2010 currency piece in your cabinet today. Most collectors of contemporary currency tend to be younger or poorer collectors as this is the cheapest way into the hobby. These are also people who may need to spend their collection on cars or other consumables as they get older or as fate dictates. Several factors mitigated against the hoarding of 1926 pennies such as economic depression, war and significantly, coin collecting became less popular throughout the 1930s compared to the 1920s, possibly as a result of the economic mess. All in all not a happy mix for collecting high grade pennies or indeed for ensuring a good supply of pieces for the future because fully two decades of potential circulation ensued before coin collecting became more popular again.

Edited February 28, 2011 by Rob

[Peter 615]

We are going through a phase of enlightenment...my kids appreciate 1698 & 1717 farthings etc but once questioned don't appreciate 1840 2 pronged farthings or R over E's.Look at Spink and it fails.

[Red Riley 2]

It isn't rocket science though when all's said and done. You are only going to look for something you are aware of; but once you know, a quick check of the date and if 1926 a check on the position of the BM. I haven't got the slightest interest in pennies, but wouldn't have any difficulty recognising one. Whether a date collector or a full-blown variety collector, both would check the date first because it's the most likely gap in the collection. There seems to be a presumption that previous collectors weren't able to recognise the variety, but the information has always been there if they were so minded. The obvious conclusion is that either collectors took no interest in contemporary currency (similar to the attitude of many collectors today regarding current mint output), or that the coins were never that common in the first place.

I'm not sure I entirely agree here. Any fool can spot an H or a KN but it takes practice to isolate an ME from the ordinary effigy. Coin collectors are like anybody else and their level of interest and thence skill will vary widely. Only a tiny minority will have had the interest to buy or borrow a publication which shows them what to look out for. My change collecting of pennies as it related to MEs went in three stages;

1) I had no knowledge of there being two varieties of 1926, although I did know about Hs and KNs;

2) I found out that there were two types but initially thought they had a small head like 1928-36. I hadn't picked up on 1927 being a different design;

3) Somebody pointed out to me what I should be looking for and after a while I could recognise one at ten paces.

As £400 and 1949 Threepence have pointed out, pre-internet collectors were often lone wolves and it took time to garner information about the subject. Many will have learnt more by borrowing Seaby's (now Spink's) from the library, as I did, but library books have to be returned and you can't learn everything in the two week period before the fines start to kick in. My point is that because of the level of skill involved there were always going to be less people looking out for MEs, although I suspect that like KNs (not Hs) the majority were eventually harvested from circulation but as this took a long time, they were typically in worn condition.