More Pennies

[Citizen H]

...I still dont recall where these pennies came from, ...

this one was in a Bank Bag with others and it struck me that its quite a high grade...🤔

prior to chucking in with the scrap, though better to ask if its of interest and leaning towards the side of keeping the darn things? all and any input welcome. 👍

 

Edited December 19, 2025 by Citizen H

[PWA 1967]

Its OK, the 1947 had a mintage of 52 Million though and common in high grade, selling for about £10 each.

[Citizen H]

3 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Its OK, the 1947 had a mintage of 52 Million though and common in high grade, selling for about £10 each.

Many Thanks, its a nice grade, I have a younger relation who's kinda interested in some Ive shown, passing on to him some of the nicer pennies may inspire him to show more of an interest, once again, many thanks "H"👍  

[Peckris 2]

On 12/12/2025 at 9:51 AM, PWA 1967 said:

It was inside a copy of the 1970 First edition i bought a few months ago and hadnt seen one before.

I actually have the 1970 edition - I wonder if those errors were corrected in later printings? I bought mine new and I don't remember seeing that insert.

[secret santa]

2 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

I actually have the 1970 edition - I wonder if those errors were corrected in later printings? I bought mine new and I don't remember seeing that insert.

As I wrote in an earlier post - 

Regarding pennies, an addition not incorporated into the 1985 edition:

Page 31, number 80A (1875 8+H with H below date) - can we assume that this coin does not exist ?

Some of the changes/additions were incorporated in the 1985 edition but at least one (the one above) was not. I have only checked the comments on pennies.

[The Bee]

1868 Penny possibly with the Bar Missing in A in "Victoria"

I have a better 1868 Penny but not one potentially missing the bar (presumably grease or wear)  

[Peckris 2]

On 12/23/2025 at 7:21 PM, secret santa said:

As I wrote in an earlier post - 

Regarding pennies, an addition not incorporated into the 1985 edition:

Page 31, number 80A (1875 8+H with H below date) - can we assume that this coin does not exist ?

Some of the changes/additions were incorporated in the 1985 edition but at least one (the one above) was not. I have only checked the comments on pennies.

I meant printings, not editions. I know about the 1985 edition, but I imagine there may well have been more than one printing of the 1970 edition?

[terrysoldpennies]

1904  narrow date with 1 over tooth,  Lucky enough to pick this one up in uncirculated condition  Ex rare

 

[terrysoldpennies]

Obv.

 

[jelida]

5 hours ago, terrysoldpennies said:

Obv.

 

Lovely! I have one in similar condition, the Copthorne example and now yours are the only other ones I have seen.

Jerry

[secret santa]

I have now added this type to my rarest pennies site and would be grateful to see any other examples.

[alfnail]

On 3/9/2024 at 12:46 PM, PWA 1967 said:

A new scarce one not attributed ,with the sellers scans.

BP1874Nn , 7 over 7.

Another one of these sold on ebay a couple of days ago for over £260. Perhaps a little better than the one Pete pictured above last year, but not great. Again not attributed, but nevertheless attracted a lot of interest.  

[terrysoldpennies]

I had the luck to pick this one up on ebay , unattributed  😊 An F148  high tide 

[secret santa]

6 hours ago, alfnail said:

Another one of these sold on ebay a couple of days ago for over £260. Perhaps a little better than the one Pete pictured above last year, but not great. Again not attributed, but nevertheless attracted a lot of interest.  

I did message the seller to tell him what it was but he chose not to amend the description and luckily several people recognised it.

[Citizen H]

Aha, A few more raise their heads,

Interestingly one has the "H" Heaton Mint Mark...I understand that this may be the most interesting of the group?

open and honest I don't feel any thing for the Pennies, looking just to keep the important ones for the family.

any advise or guidance most welcome.

 

 

[Peckris 2]

1882 were nearly all minted by Heatons and therefore carry the H - a few were minted in London (just to test the new electronic presses?) and are very rare.

I'm baffled by the George III coins though - pennies weren't minted until 1797, "cartwheel" type. There's no 1773 or 1775 pennies, but there were halfpennies which are noticeably smaller than bun pennies unlike your 1773. The 1775 looks very wrong and is probably an 'evasion' type, i.e. a contemporary forgery produced in the US. The 1773 "penny" looks more like a genuine halfpenny should apart from the size , but is also probably wrong - REX is wider spaced than on a genuine example.

[Citizen H]

5 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

1882 were nearly all minted by Heatons and therefore carry the H - a few were minted in London (just to test the new electronic presses?) and are very rare.

I'm baffled by the George III coins though - pennies weren't minted until 1797, "cartwheel" type. There's no 1773 or 1775 pennies, but there were halfpennies which are noticeably smaller than bun pennies unlike your 1773. The 1775 looks very wrong and is probably an 'evasion' type, i.e. a contemporary forgery produced in the US. The 1773 "penny" looks more like a genuine halfpenny should apart from the size , but is also probably wrong - REX is wider spaced than on a genuine example.

Ahhhhhh...! so the H mint coin had the potential to be of interest albeit for the fact 1882 was mass produced by Heatons.....bummer!!  1862 circulated so no interest 1773 & 1775 are possibly contemporary forgery produced in the US ..... now that got to be of interest ?!?!?! Did I mention  "I don't feel any thing for the Pennies!?!" all the very best "H"

[Peckris 2]

2 hours ago, Citizen H said:

Ahhhhhh...! so the H mint coin had the potential to be of interest albeit for the fact 1882 was mass produced by Heatons.....bummer!!  1862 circulated so no interest 1773 & 1775 are possibly contemporary forgery produced in the US ..... now that got to be of interest ?!?!?! Did I mention  "I don't feel any thing for the Pennies!?!" all the very best "H"

Americans love the 'evasions' so would possibly snap up the 1775? As for the 1773, it's worth keeping - I've never seen anything that size before, so even if a fake it's got great novelty value! The 1882H is nice enough to keep though only worth a few £.

[Citizen H]

A bit off topic...however it may be of interest...? 

Victorian Farthing, 1838 there is a line that links NIA in the word BRITANNIAR some of the A's look like solid Bars along the bottom ....unless these are common? 

any input and if its a "keep" greatly welcome 👍

   

 

[Peckris 2]

1 hour ago, Citizen H said:

A bit off topic...however it may be of interest...? 

Victorian Farthing, 1838 there is a line that links NIA in the word BRITANNIAR some of the A's look like solid Bars along the bottom ....unless these are common? 

any input and if its a "keep" greatly welcome 👍

First, the As : do be aware that the legend on farthings is very small so the serifs on - e.g. - a letter A will tend to join together after very little wear. This is quite normal.

As for the NIA line, I'm not seeing it - can you post a larger reverse picture please?

[Citizen H]

8 minutes ago, Peckris 2 said:

First, the As : do be aware that the legend on farthings is very small so the serifs on - e.g. - a letter A will tend to join together after very little wear. This is quite normal.

As for the NIA line, I'm not seeing it - can you post a larger reverse picture please?

this isnt the best photo, I will see if i can get a better one...👍

 

[Peckris 2]

Oh yes, I see it. That's a classic die crack/flaw. 

[martinross44]

Hi folks, I picked this 1913 freeman 177 up today. On close inspection, it appears to have significant offset doubling on the portrait. No signs of double strike on the legend. 

Any thoughts on how this could have happened, and does anyone else have or has seen a similar example? 

[alfnail]

Just back from holiday.

Whilst away, on 26th January, I bought a lot of 25 low grade Victorian pennies.

One coin amongst them was the very rare 1889 with the 9 high right in the exergue.

After 2 to 3 days I enquired of the seller when he intended to post the lot, as he was supposed to have sent tracked, but no details yet on ebay. After a couple more days, and further chasing, he advised that he had sent them, but not tracked. Anyway, a package was received by my neighbour on 3rd February, so I thought that was ok after all.

I returned home today, and opened the package to find that the 1889 was not as I expected. The return window has also closed earlier today!  

I just wanted to check with other members that you agree with me that the received 1889 is not what I bought. The picture on the sale was not great, but I still think that the differences are clear enough. Apart form the different numeral 9 location, I believe there are several other obvious differences. For example, around Britannia's head the received coin has a more pointed top to the plume, a dent in the head and a dark mark on border. 

I feel fairly confident that the delay must have been because someone else has alerted the seller as to the rarity of this variety, and he has swapped it with a different 1889. However, bearing in mind the poor quality of the image, I would welcome the thoughts of other members before I complain.

   

[martinross44]

7 minutes ago, alfnail said:

Just back from holiday.

Whilst away, on 26th January, I bought a lot of 25 low grade Victorian pennies.

One coin amongst them was the very rare 1889 with the 9 high right in the exergue.

After 2 to 3 days I enquired of the seller when he intended to post the lot, as he was supposed to have sent tracked, but no details yet on ebay. After a couple more days, and further chasing, he advised that he had sent them, but not tracked. Anyway, a package was received by my neighbour on 3rd February, so I thought that was ok after all.

I returned home today, and opened the package to find that the 1889 was not as I expected. The return window has also closed earlier today!  

I just wanted to check with other members that you agree with me that the received 1889 is not what I bought. The picture on the sale was not great, but I still think that the differences are clear enough. Apart form the different numeral 9 location, I believe there are several other obvious differences. For example, around Britannia's head the received coin has a more pointed top to the plume, a dent in the head and a dark mark on border. 

I feel fairly confident that the delay must have been because someone else has alerted the seller as to the rarity of this variety, and he has swapped it with a different 1889. However, bearing in mind the poor quality of the image, I would welcome the thoughts of other members before I complain.

   

They are two different coins.