More Pennies

[secret santa]

3 hours ago, Paddy said:

For me it is the "trench" around the ear

Around the right hand side like this ?

[Paddy]

That one is more worn, but doesn't look the same. On the one I posted before the trench is more noticeable down the left side and around the lobe.

[Avocet]

If you think of the ear as an ellipse, the feature I find most readily identifiable is a crease running along the line of the shortest axis. Well-worn examples of a 1915 and a 1916 to illustrate:

Both of these pass the broken tooth test. Note that the tip of the ear remains distinct despite the considerable wear.

[King Kenny]

Thanks Avocet. That makes it a lot easier. 

[absence of uniformity]

For me its all about the top curve of the ear, a thin defined line broken tooth or not, with overall wear to coin or not.

The top curved part of the ear looks rounded without any flat spot.

You can clearly see flat worn areas on this coin but the the top curved part of the ear remains thin and defined. Coins listed as uncirculated which are not recessed ear types dont have the definition to the top part of ear. For me thats the easiest way to know with or without a broken tooth.

Edited May 4 by absence of uniformity

[absence of uniformity]

Here it's clear cut, the "uncirculated" coin does not show the flat/worn areas on the face highlighted by red cicles  on the worn coin yet the the top curved part of the ear on the uncirculated coin is not a thin defined line. I know strike and die wear are factors on this year. But how can a worn coin have a more defined ear if the ear is not recessed? Given its hard to find a sharp struck 1915 with or without a broken tooth if the ear is finely defined IMO its a recessed ear. It really stands out to me.

Edited May 4 by absence of uniformity

[absence of uniformity]

The challenge is to find a uncirculated 1915 with the thin defined ear, regret to say I have not found one yet.

[Peckris 2]

On 5/4/2026 at 2:49 PM, Avocet said:

If you think of the ear as an ellipse, the feature I find most readily identifiable is a crease running along the line of the shortest axis. Well-worn examples of a 1915 and a 1916 to illustrate:

Both of these pass the broken tooth test. Note that the tip of the ear remains distinct despite the considerable wear.

Those prove my point about it being easier to see on more worn examples - the ear on those is far better preserved than you'd expect looking at the obverse as a whole.

[Peckris 2]

On 5/4/2026 at 9:40 PM, absence of uniformity said:

Here it's clear cut, the "uncirculated" coin does not show the flat/worn areas on the face highlighted by red cicles  on the worn coin yet the the top curved part of the ear on the uncirculated coin is not a thin defined line. I know strike and die wear are factors on this year. But how can a worn coin have a more defined ear if the ear is not recessed? Given its hard to find a sharp struck 1915 with or without a broken tooth if the ear is finely defined IMO its a recessed ear. It really stands out to me.

It's not the thinness - it's the recessed area as you say. On the left coin you can clearly see a hollow surrounding the ear which is absent on the Unc example.

[Avocet]

13 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

Those prove my point about it being easier to see on more worn examples - the ear on those is far better preserved than you'd expect looking at the obverse as a whole.

The recessed ear is a three-dimensional phenomenon, but most photographs are taken from directly above. With a coin in the hand I'm sure we all look from a variety of angles without thinking about it.

With the images above I purposely used an angle to help accentuate the contours. It might be interesting to look at a similar view of a near uncirculated coin. Not to be found in my collection sadly!

[secret santa]

There is a collection of pennies in the next London Coins auction with several rare examples that I don't have on my rare penny site. Does anyone know more details of the seller (assuming they don't want to remain anonymous) ?

[Paddy]

I wonder if it may be Father Andrew Alexander's collection?

I made contact with my old school. Father Andrew's collection was passed to his brother on his death. I asked if they could pass on my contact details to the brother, but I have heard nothing since.

 

[terrysoldpennies]

1863 Slender 3   F44     Well I just can't believe my luck on this one,  I never thought I'd ever manage to get my hands on one of these 🤩

 

[terrysoldpennies]

Obverse

[secret santa]

Where did you find it, Terry ?

[Paddy]

On 5/3/2026 at 9:42 AM, Paddy said:

This 1915 Penny looks very much to be a recessed ear variety, but seems to lack the broken tooth. Any thoughts?

(Screenshot from online so no sharper image possible.)

 

I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:

[terrysoldpennies]

53 minutes ago, secret santa said:

Where did you find it, Terry ?

I'll have to pass on that question for now Richard , but I will let you know in due course

[terrysoldpennies]

35 minutes ago, Paddy said:

I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:

I think the problem is Paddy that without the broken/smaller tooth above the colon , you would be had put to convince a buyer that its a Recessed ear type .     Below is my coin which has a very slight damaged colon tooth , also another picture of a worn coin which is clearly a recessed ear, but you can see that the tooth is intact but very slightly smaller than the other teeth.  

If I were you I think I would try to find one with one of those faults on the colon tooth .

 

[Paddy]

25 minutes ago, terrysoldpennies said:

I think the problem is Paddy that without the broken/smaller tooth above the colon , you would be had put to convince a buyer that its a Recessed ear type .     Below is my coin which has a very slight damaged colon tooth , also another picture of a worn coin which is clearly a recessed ear, but you can see that the tooth is intact but very slightly smaller than the other teeth.  

If I were you I think I would try to find one with one of those faults on the colon tooth .

 

 

I am confident enough that it is a recessed ear, and that is good enough as it is going into my own collection. @Martinminerva also expressed the opinion that it was right in a previous post in this topic.

I already have an example with the broken tooth in only slightly worse condition, so I will keep both to cover my bases.

Neither will be sold until I pop my clogs, by which time I won't care anyway!

 

[Rob]

23 hours ago, terrysoldpennies said:

1863 Slender 3   F44     Well I just can't believe my luck on this one,  I never thought I'd ever manage to get my hands on one of these 🤩

 

Maybe p'ing in the wind as an idea, but given the shape of the three, is it a 3 with a damaged top half, then subsequently repaired with something like a Maundy 7 punch for example? Or any other smaller denomination for that matter? The reinforcing of existing legends is well documented, so to have such an unconventionally shaped 3 is fairly illogical, given the mint officials' mentality at the time. just trying to think outside the box given the relatively conventional lower loop.

[absence of uniformity]

1 hour ago, Rob said:

Maybe p'ing in the wind as an idea, but given the shape of the three, is it a 3 with a damaged top half, then subsequently repaired with something like a Maundy 7 punch for example? Or any other smaller denomination for that matter? The reinforcing of existing legends is well documented, so to have such an unconventionally shaped 3 is fairly illogical, given the mint officials' mentality at the time. just trying to think outside the box given the relatively conventional lower loop.

 

[Citizen H]

1864 half penny, looks like it had a crude hole made in it many years ago, a touch piece ?

  

[Peckris 2]

On 5/16/2026 at 5:42 PM, Paddy said:

I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:

Sorry to burst your bubble Paddy, but I'm almost certain from the pictures that it's NOT a recessed ear.

[secret santa]

This guy is flooding Ebay with spurious claims of "mint errors" on pennies - is there no way of stopping pr*ts like this ?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/358573465246?itmmeta=01KS2ZEPCZ3BQX2HE1YJJHDD10&hash=item537ca4de9e:g:QvAAAeSwrmVqDK5q&itmprp=enc%3AAQALAAAA4GfYFPkwiKCW4ZNSs2u11xDF7DyabZ4AGLot8%2FojbB73V2nPfs0S1D9cmT2nf7JgYxvoQ5VSqT8C2wwMWfic1z4VtgvhpJ9sjwqv4sOHcVhJM83piKWybOUgm39aotAzEhkq1jEcShhASx9yEcSEOummOpRJhtt9XxNB8326Diqagv0fXMiBWyGJI67%2FPPx3sbwg724jQlwjHbynd%2FbtfEHtTD1drdtlro6uS2MuDnhE7MXglt2Lq1OI3OnN93oePq8xaMZGqap9Llvvc2P6HPBIREPgViBuXeBTqs7k4uCA|tkp%3ABk9SR-Lmut_IZw

[Martinminerva]

Fortunately with his (or her - Linda??) outrageous prices, most people are fly enough to not fall for such bull, but I do see this one has sold:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/358558956337?itmmeta=01KS30XZG90WV7QVHWDYHQTRTW&hash=item537bc77b31:g:74IAAeSwAllqBx9t

Obviously, post mint damage.  Part of me thinks if some idiot has £500 to throw away on this sort of rubbish, more fool them, but I do take the point that naive people might get burnt. Don' know what the solution is. Ebay aren't ever interested in reporting items like these...