More Pennies

[Iannich48 196]

15 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

I wondered if anybody had any thoughts as to how rare or otherwise the 1858/6 penny was.

Somewhat curiously, it's not noted by either Peck or Bramah. Gouby mentions it in passing, but as far as I can see, does not speculate as to its scarcity.

I managed to get one from Britannia Coins in August 2020, toned aEF and issue free, for £66, which struck me as a slam dunk bargain.

Not a coin you see offered every 5 minutes, and when you do, close up examination usually reveals that the seller has got it wrong, and there is no giveaway vertical line on the left side between the loops of the final 8. Some even with a large date, whereas of course all 1858/6's are small date. The genuine article seldom spotted.

I'd have to say rare, possibly very rare.    

Rendall Ingram has one listed as 8/6, aunc for £275. I cannot say if it is the real deal.

[1949threepence 3,366]

50 minutes ago, Iannich48 said:

Rendall Ingram has one listed as 8/6, aunc for £275. I cannot say if it is the real deal.

Well it certainly looks different, but I don't think it's over a 6. If they were certain and it really was over a 6, I think they'd be asking quite a bit more. ETA: might be over a 2. Seems to have that characteristic die crack through the lower part of the numbers, although not especially well pronounced. Also, it's large, not small date. For 8/6, it needs to be small date.

 

Edited June 26, 2023 by 1949threepence

[alfnail 756]

Hi Mike,

I have checked my past sales and find that I have owned 10 x 1858/6’s over the years. A long time ago I realised that, like some other overdate pennies in the YH series, it is often possible to identify an 1858/6 without being able to see the date. All of my 10 coins have had the same features on both obverse and reverse which indicates that this type is always struck from a single die pairing.

Having said the above, and also just checked ebay where I can see at least 2 of these, I don’t think it is as common as an 1858/2 or an 1858/3, and far less common than combined 1858/7 types.

For 1858 known varieties my ‘top of the head’ guess would be to place it roughly on a par with Bramah 26a No WW Missing Serifs, but definitely more common than the two ‘Large Rose’ types.

Hope this helps.

I really need to attempt some 1858 stats from my 5-year ebay study!

 

P.S. The Ingram coin shown above is the type described by Michael Gouby as 1858/2

Edited June 26, 2023 by alfnail

[1949threepence 3,366]

7 minutes ago, alfnail said:

Hi Mike,

I have checked my past sales and find that I have owned 10 x 1858/6’s over the years. A long time ago I realised that, like some other overdate pennies in the YH series, it is often possible to identify an 1858/6 without being able to see the date. All of my 10 coins have had the same features on both obverse and reverse which indicates that this type is always struck from a single die pairing.

Having said the above, and also just checked ebay where I can see at least 2 of these, I don’t think it is as common as an 1858/2 or an 1858/3, and far less common than combined 1858/7 types.

For 1858 known varieties my ‘top of the head’ guess would be to place it roughly on a par with Bramah 26a No WW Missing Serifs, but definitely more common than the two ‘Large Rose’ types.

Hope this helps.

I really need to attempt some 1858 stats from my 5-year ebay study!

 

P.S. The Ingram coin shown above is the type described by Michael Gouby as 1858/2

Thanks very much, Ian. Again, incredibly useful info. You still don't see many of them offered for sale, and there are many misattributions, such as the Ingram specimen.  

With regard to the emboldened text above, may I ask what the feature is which marks out the 8/6, without needing to look at the date itself. 

 

[alfnail 756]

It's the combination of several things Mike. If you've got a decent example yourself you may be able to find them! It's knowledge like this that has helped pay for my own collection 😉.

[1949threepence 3,366]

5 minutes ago, alfnail said:

It's the combination of several things Mike. If you've got a decent example yourself you may be able to find them! It's knowledge like this that has helped pay for my own collection 😉.

Thanks Ian - I'll apply my detective skills !

[secret santa 2,016]

7 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Thanks Ian - I'll apply my detective skills !

I wait with bated breath (saves me looking !)

[blakeyboy 1,603]

9 hours ago, alfnail said:

It's the combination of several things Mike. If you've got a decent example yourself you may be able to find them! It's knowledge like this that has helped pay for my own collection 😉.

I am very pleased to point out that my reaction to this post has made Alfnail's points total equal the number of listings.- 692/692.

A full reaction point for every posting is a hell of an achievement, and just shows the quality of his postings.

[1949threepence 3,366]

42 minutes ago, blakeyboy said:

I am very pleased to point out that my reaction to this post has made Alfnail's points total equal the number of listings.- 692/692.

A full reaction point for every posting is a hell of an achievement, and just shows the quality of his postings.

Absolutely, not noticed that. It is extremely good going. 

[terrysoldpennies 691]

Acquired this 18.60 dot penny recently [ Gouby 1860Sx ], which also has the E in ONE trying to turning into an F      [ Its on Richards Dot penny list ]

When I received the coin I had a really good look at it and noticed something else . The obverse side also has a central cut ribbon, and smaller re'entered colon after F: D :  Making it a            [ Gouby 1860 Vc ] as well .  So three separate errors on one penny ?

Edited June 26, 2023 by terrysoldpennies

[terrysoldpennies 691]

Reverse

 

[terrysoldpennies 691]

Obverse

[secret santa 2,016]

12 hours ago, alfnail said:

A long time ago I realised that, like some other overdate pennies in the YH series, it is often possible to identify an 1858/6 without being able to see the date. All of my 10 coins have had the same features on both obverse and reverse which indicates that this type is always struck from a single die pairing.

A cursory examination reveals a die crack on the obverse from the C of VICTORIA to the rim and, on the reverse, the colon after DEF is misaligned.

[alfnail 756]

Hi Richard,

Well spotted.

All examples of 1858/6 which I have seen have a die flaw running from between two border teeth to the top of the C of VICTORIA. Later strikes, like the one pictured top left, have a more developed flaw.

Once you know that the 1858/6 is paired with a single reverse die you can then check for the reverse ‘features’, some of which are pictured below. You already mentioned the mis-aligned colon after DEF; the other colons (particularly after REG, see picture) are also mis-aligned. When examining all 4 sets of colon dot positions they become a good indicator of type.

The 1858/6 reverse also has some additional ‘features’ which provide further confirmation of type; some of these are illustrated below e.g., detached clover, botched repair to G of REG, and protrusions around some letters in the legend (e.g., NN of BRITANNIAR). There are a couple of others which are less obvious.  

Clearly if the ebay pictures are half decent one can also see that date, and at least be able to see that the coin is a ‘smaller numerals’ variety. This in itself significantly narrows down the possibility that it may be an 8/6.   

BUT BEWARE!! – See Post Below

[alfnail 756]

There is another 1858 smaller numerals (over)date obverse die which is paired with the exact same reverse as the 1858/6. Furthermore, it’s obverse looks very similar to the 1858/6 obverse!!

Please carefully examine the set of 4 pictures below, which shows flaws, and overdates, for both these obverses. Note in particular that the flaw commences in between border teeth for the 8/6, but the flaw commences in the centre of a tooth for the other type of overdate. Also, the flaws exit the base of the C’s at different locations, which means 2 different dies.

 

I would welcome views as to the other overdate e.g., is it an 8 over 8, or even a different type of 8/6 which this time has no bar down the left-hand side.

I have just seen that there was one of these on ebay, and bought it:-

1858 Penny (WW) - Victoria British Copper Coin - Very Nice | eBay

 

[1949threepence 3,366]

1 hour ago, alfnail said:

Hi Richard,

Well spotted.

All examples of 1858/6 which I have seen have a die flaw running from between two border teeth to the top of the C of VICTORIA. Later strikes, like the one pictured top left, have a more developed flaw.

Once you know that the 1858/6 is paired with a single reverse die you can then check for the reverse ‘features’, some of which are pictured below. You already mentioned the mis-aligned colon after DEF; the other colons (particularly after REG, see picture) are also mis-aligned. When examining all 4 sets of colon dot positions they become a good indicator of type.

The 1858/6 reverse also has some additional ‘features’ which provide further confirmation of type; some of these are illustrated below e.g., detached clover, botched repair to G of REG, and protrusions around some letters in the legend (e.g., NN of BRITANNIAR). There are a couple of others which are less obvious.  

 

Clearly if the ebay pictures are half decent one can also see that date, and at least be able to see that the coin is a ‘smaller numerals’ variety. This in itself significantly narrows down the possibility that it may be an 8/6.   

BUT BEWARE!! – See Post Below

Indeed, well spotted Richard. I must admit, I hadn't even started to look. Immediately checked mine which also has the die crack running from the C of VICTORIA to the rim, between teeth (but not horizontally as on the example above). Also, the detached clover is present.

The logical presumption with the 8/6 is that it has to be based on the dies used for small date 1856's. I checked my PT small date and OT 1856's. The very noticeable clue is that the detached clover is present on the OT 1856 (which are all small dates), but the clover remains attached on the PT small date 1856. 

Should add that my OT 1856 is only fine, but thedetached clover is very clear.     

 

[secret santa 2,016]

Great work as always, Ian.

[secret santa 2,016]

21 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Should add that my OT 1856 is only fine, but the detached clover is very clear.    

Just checked my 1856 OT - detached clover is there but NOT the misaligned colon after DEF.

[alfnail 756]

On 6/26/2023 at 8:48 PM, blakeyboy said:

I am very pleased to point out that my reaction to this post has made Alfnail's points total equal the number of listings.- 692/692.

A full reaction point for every posting is a hell of an achievement, and just shows the quality of his postings.

Thanks Blake, not really sure what that means, but it sounds like a compliment....much appreciated.

[1949threepence 3,366]

39 minutes ago, secret santa said:

Just checked my 1856 OT - detached clover is there but NOT the misaligned colon after DEF.

In fact I'm not sure the detached clover is a reliable indicator as there are a number of other varieties and dates which also have it, including my 1860/59, several 1858's and going back, even my 1853 proof penny has a detached clover. 

My 1856 OT does seem to have a misaligned colon.

For me, the die flaw between the rim and C of VICTORIA seem totally unique to the 1858/6. 

[secret santa 2,016]

3 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

In fact I'm not sure the detached clover is a reliable indicator as there are a number of other varieties and dates which also have it, including my 1860/59, several 1858's and going back, even my 1853 proof penny has a detached clover. 

Ditto for me - I agree that the die crack looks to be a definitive identifier for the obverse. I'll look a little more at the reverse.

Edited June 28, 2023 by secret santa

[Kipster 157]

You boy's knowledge is always an amazement to me. Learn something new almost every day. Thank you.

[alfnail 756]

Agree that detached clover on it's own is not sufficient, there are definitely other dies which exhibit that. The clover is just a useful additional thing to check to give extra confidence after first looking for the obverse flaw and 4 colon positions on reverse. Those are usually the easiest things to see anyway. 

As you say Richard, the die flaw is the unique definitive identifier.

Just one other thought,  on the 8/? (similar die to 8/6), I have noticed that all 3 examples I have owned have the flaw clearly exiting bottom left of the C of VICTORIA. This is probably easier to see than whether the flaw starts between teeth or centre of a tooth, so should help members to identify the obverse die.....assuming it's always present!?

Picture below illustrates

 

[oldcopper 276]

4 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

In fact I'm not sure the detached clover is a reliable indicator as there are a number of other varieties and dates which also have it, including my 1860/59, several 1858's and going back, even my 1853 proof penny has a detached clover. 

My 1856 OT does seem to have a misaligned colon.

For me, the die flaw between the rim and C of VICTORIA seem totally unique to the 1858/6. 

Missing/incomplete stems in the floral exergue is presumably caused by die blockage. You'd expect fine line engraving to be the most vulnerable to blocking, see Charles II halfpenny date numerals. In proofs I've seen it on some 1831 pennies but not on others. Same with the George IV 1825 copper proofs. So this factor most likely develops on the die during use ie some will show it and some won't.

In this case it's a reused die overstamped, so it will be diagnostic if the blocked stem was already there when the overdating was done, which it probably was (unless anyone finds an example with full stems). 

Edited June 28, 2023 by oldcopper

[1949threepence 3,366]

From asking a fairly random question, I feel I've learned quite a lot - thanks Gents.