1851 Victoria Farthing, "d Over Sideways D"

[Peckris 579]

surely 7 or 8 copper farthings would have only take 15 seconds or so to make.Do you think the rest were consigned to the melting pot? I dont think will ever know as the mint surely did not keep complete records untlil the 20th century

That's a possibility. Or else farthings are a different case from the pennies which were clearly intended for circulation. Perhaps a few pennies were kept back for whatever use the farthings (and halfpennies?) were intended?

[Gary1000 41]

I somehow disagree that the 1860 copper farthing , halfpenny , penny are currency.

The small number produced also points to them being a special issue for collectors done by the mint at the start of 1860 and sold/ given away to important people.

Even the condition of these coins is outstanding - how often do you find 1859 farthings in similar grade to these surviveing coins?

They were at least undoubtedly currency pieces

Produced for collectors? Then how do you account for the 60/59 overdate?

My view is that the 1860 issues were done very briefly to meet demand in the event of the bronze conversion running into a few delays. Though that only makes sense completely if the 1859 dies had been used up due to the anticipated changeover.

Wouldn't they have just knocked out a few more 59s even if it was just into 1860? To me changing dies would occur at the end of a run ie 60/61 not at the beginning of a run. So the 59 dies would be use in 60/61 to finish a run and save going to the 61 dies.

[copper123 1,426]

1860 copper halfpence are the rarest arn't they?(of all the 1860 copper coins.)

the penny being the most popular there are certainly a few around though i would say less than 50.

It's a good job as well because there are a lot of penny collectors out there and they would fetch eye popping prices if they were as rare as the farthings or halfpence

[copper123 1,426]

Forgive me but is there not an overdate on a early victorian proof set (1839) so the fact that it is an overdate on the copper pennies means very little, apart from thrift that is

[VickySilver 804]

OK, Rob probably knows the specifics but at some point there was a citation to the effect that a short run of pennies was required and some (59-60,000???) were struck with only a few - however many that was - getting out.

[Rob 3,095]

OK, Rob probably knows the specifics but at some point there was a citation to the effect that a short run of pennies was required and some (59-60,000???) were struck with only a few - however many that was - getting out.

No I don't know. I think the 60/59 pennies were done as an interim measure maybe through a shortage of the new dies or properly prepared blanks. You could knock up an overdate in an hour and be ready to strike coins with it, but a full die would take longer. What was the life span of a die at the beginning of the bronze coinage? We also know they were having a problem with laminating flans on the decimal patterns of 1857-59 that were struck in bronze, as quite a few varieties show this defect, with some unknown without it.

[davidrj 194]

I don't think any bronze coins entered circulation in 1960, given the technical difficulties Watt & Co were having

David

[Peckris 579]

I don't think any bronze coins entered circulation in 1960, given the technical difficulties Watt & Co were having

David

There were a whole load of halfpennies. Admittedly pennies didn't make an appearance until the following year, and there were of course no farthings.

[Colin G. 147]

Certainly for the farthings I would agree that whilst some may be struck on standard planchets from standard dies, I am not convinced they were actually circulating as currency, mainly due to the lack of circulated pieces and the number of pieces. I agree that some May have been produced as a back up due to the early issues with the bronze series, but perhaps only a handful of examples survived.

[VickySilver 804]

Goodness, they are what they are. We are not going to necessarily know intent, especially of the Royal Mint!

[Colin G. 147]

For me this is what is great about this forum, it is only by multiple trains of thought being proposed that some logical explanation can be put to individual issues and topics. The same as we are doing with the 1839 proofs. Many of us specialise in a single denomination and may have exhausted our search for information in relation to a specific issue, and then discussion from other members on other denominations can trigger off a new path of information.

Long may the debating continue

[VickySilver 804]

To diverge slightly, I wonder which you might prefer if given the choice? Proof or currency 1860 copper farthing?

[Colin G. 147]

I am not fussy, either will do

[Bronze & Copper Collector 408]

I am not fussy, either will do

Ditto

[Peckris 579]

Goodness, they are what they are. We are not going to necessarily know intent, especially of the Royal Mint!

I think the plethora of 1858 dies with overdates argues for a planned changeover to bronze in 1859. When that fell back, they would have needed a rush issue of 1859s, which though not rare, are very much scarcer than 1858. They probably had to produce new dies especially for 1859, as the 1858 "make do and mend" will have seen most unused dies already put to good use.

It's possible that a larger issue of 1860 coppers was planned with the bronze date delayed yet again, but then later in 1860 it finally happened and bronze started production. Two observations : 1) an 1860 copper issue, having begun, would then have to be aborted and mostly melted down as not required, but a few pieces escaped. 2) The bronze mintage for 1860, especially pennies, is very much lower than you'd expect for a huge changeover; the figures for 1861-1863 are massive in comparison. This argues for a late start to the bronze run in 1860. ,