More Pennies

[alfnail]

.....and there is also this diagonal line, highlighted red

 

[Coinery]

28 minutes ago, alfnail said:

.....and there is also this diagonal line, highlighted red

 

Yes, that’s the diagonal I was referring to. You know what, that vertical line is far too straight in your example to be anything connected with the ‘curved’ numbers. Has anyone ever considered it might be a four, and that the remaining bottom loop and part serif is nothing other than a poor repair of the  eight with an old, possibly broken punch?

I’m sure you’ve all been over it a million times already. I guess it’s going to sit on the unidentified variety pile for some considerable time, maybe even forever?

[mick1271]

On 1/16/2024 at 7:44 AM, mick1271 said:

The 6th edition was issued in 1968 .I picked one up from a UK seller on ebay for a couple of quid .Should have it in a day or two.

Quote

 

Book arrived today ,and the 1858 over 6 was in it .

[alfnail]

3 hours ago, Coinery said:

Has anyone ever considered it might be a four, and that the remaining bottom loop and part serif is nothing other than a poor repair of the  eight with an old, possibly broken punch?

Yes, this was something I mentioned a couple of years back on 'more pennies'. I'm not at all confident about it being a '4' though, and still regard some of the overdates on these 1858 pennies as a bit of a mystery, especially the one that is found paired with the large rose reverse...........that can also be seen on the following link:-  

  1858/3 Penny - Page 3 - British Coin Related Discussions & Enquiries - British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

 

[Coinery]

Interestingly there’s an image on the other thread that makes me see a three for the first time, and a clear rear serif of a four!

Here’s a proposal…what about an original three, with a four inserted the following year, BUT it broke up during the insertion (bits in the red circle), making the die irreparable/useless until the next useable digit came along to cover up the mess, which could only be an eight or a nine?

[secret santa]

When one talks about the possible 1858 overdates, there is an assumption that previous dies from an earlier year were reused with the final digit being altered or over-punched, i.e the 1858 over 3 is an altered die from 1853 (or, as Gouby theorises, 1852). One assumes that the Bramah 25c above also results from these dies or 1854 or even other.

The problem is that the 1858 large date, 1858 over 3 and the Bramah 25c are clearly struck with the classic large date 5 with the distinctively shaped pointed top as seen below:

   (sorry about the different size of images)

But 1853 and 1854 (and 1851) pennies, however, were struck with very differently shaped 5s, suggesting that dies from those years were NOT re-used.

   

 

Unless I'm missing something ?

 

 

Edited January 20, 2024 by secret santa

[alfnail]

I agree Richard.

The 1858/6 has the smaller numeral 5 font, but all other 1858 overdates have the 5 font which you reference as 'classic' in your first picture above.

The only other years which also use that 'classic 5' font are 1856 (some PT's), 1857, 1858 and 1859.

It is difficult to see, therefore, how an 1854/3 (which does of course exist), can then become an 1858/4/3, when none of the 4 different 5 fonts used in 1853 are this 'classic 5' style. 

 

[secret santa]

And here's another example - listed as 1858 over 3 on Ebay but it doesn't have the characteristic die flaw through the base of the numerals, although it does have the "classic" large 5.

[secret santa]

On 1/16/2024 at 10:12 AM, secret santa said:

Given the large 5 was only used from 1856-59, could the last numeral be a combination of 7, 8 and 9 ?

[jelida]

1 hour ago, secret santa said:

Given the large 5 was only used from 1856-59, could the last numeral be a combination of 7, 8 and 9 ?

I think that is a real possibility, given that an 1858/7 die could well have remained in use into 1859,  and have been in need of repair to the second  ‘8’ upon which the mint worker instinctively reached for the final digit punch then in use - the ‘9’.  To me it certainly looks like a ‘9’ is in the mix.

Jerry

[alfnail]

I agree it's not a bad shout Richard (and Jerry).

Below are the 1858/7 variations in my own collection, so there are lots of opportunities for protrusions all over the place if some of those dies are then struck with a 9 as well.

 

[alfnail]

.......and of course there are a number of possible different '9' fonts to add into the equation:-

  

[Coinery]

Firstly, can I ask what you think the reverse grade of this coin might be (Sellers pictures, I haven’t seen it in-hand, yet)?

The obverse looks a clear unc to me, but the lighting/lustre reflections (or not) on the reverse are making me wonder whether I might have to downgrade that expectation overall? You’ll likely have made thousands more predictions of grade from seller photos than I have, so I’d really appreciate your insights.

Oh, and secondly, I don’t suppose anyone recognises it for a bit of provenance, perchance? The reverse, with its die-crack and ‘straight-edge’ toning at the second N of penny, through to the ship, is reasonably distinctive.

[copper123]

On 11/8/2023 at 9:20 PM, Kipster said:

Very nicely done. I was bidding on that as well and you pipped me to it. 👍

I would go for a "9" only a guess though.

[Peckris 2]

8 hours ago, Coinery said:

Firstly, can I ask what you think the reverse grade of this coin might be (Sellers pictures, I haven’t seen it in-hand, yet)?

The obverse looks a clear unc to me, but the lighting/lustre reflections (or not) on the reverse are making me wonder whether I might have to downgrade that expectation overall? You’ll likely have made thousands more predictions of grade from seller photos than I have, so I’d really appreciate your insights.

Oh, and secondly, I don’t suppose anyone recognises it for a bit of provenance, perchance? The reverse, with its die-crack and ‘straight-edge’ toning at the second N of penny, through to the ship, is reasonably distinctive.

 

I'd go for a grade of AUNC on that reverse - it may in fact be UNC but the 'lustre wear' together with the fact that it's a slightly weaker strike than the obverse would make me downgrade it a little.

[Coinery]

5 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

I'd go for a grade of AUNC on that reverse - it may in fact be UNC but the 'lustre wear' together with the fact that it's a slightly weaker strike than the obverse would make me downgrade it a little.

Thanks, Peck, appreciate you commenting…not my natural playground at all, and all the more difficult to judge from a poor image.

I’m looking forward to taking an in-hand photo!

[alfnail]

I picked up this 1870 penny recently and, checking Michael Gouby’s book, I thought it was the missing date width Ad. On page 54 he references an Ac and an Ad, but not an Ad.

Michael confirmed yesterday saying:-

“I left the Ad reference free as I always considered that a 12 to 12.5 teeth gap would eventually be found….” and “I will keep your images for future reference……”

I guess this coin might appear in future revised pages

Apart from 1889’s I have not tried to collect all the different date widths, so I will be selling this coin at some point!

[secret santa]

I have one of these and noted that it wasn't recorded by Michael but never sent him the pictures. I can now classify it as Ad.

[Michael-Roo]

I have a 13 width. How unusual is this?

 

[secret santa]

BP1870Ae - Gouby says rare.

[Michael-Roo]

Thank you!

[terrysoldpennies]

I'm sorry to have to disagree with you both as your two coins are both Ac with the 0 just to the left of the tooth.  below is a picture of all the different date widths I have found , and an  Ae to compare with.

 

[PWA 1967]

You have confused me Terry ,not sure what you mean  "they are both Ac with the 0 to the left of a tooth  "?

The ones first posted are not over a tooth or 12 teeth ,they are to the right or do you mean the last two wider ones.

Edited February 10, 2024 by PWA 1967

[terrysoldpennies]

Yes Pete , Richards and Michaels are Ac,  and the one I have shown is the Ae  13 tooth with the  0 directly over the tooth.

[secret santa]

On 2/9/2024 at 12:30 PM, secret santa said:

I have one of these and noted that it wasn't recorded by Michael but never sent him the pictures. I can now classify it as Ad.

Terry is saying that this is 1870 Ac but Ac has the 0 to the left of a tooth

.

Picture courtesy of Michael Gouby