More Pennies

[Paddy]

That is a beauty! I would hang on to that one for sure!

 

[Peckris 2]

6 hours ago, Paddy said:

That is a beauty! I would hang on to that one for sure!

 

As the bishop said to the actress...

[Zo Arms]

On 12/8/2019 at 9:31 AM, terrysoldpennies said:

I have a few of what you would call dot / comer pennies . and in most cases they are never perfectly round as is the case with the 1897 , and I think this is because they were caused by a crack in the die having small pieces braking away , and then the sharp edges smoothing and rounding off.      Below is an unlisted 1934 penny with an extra dot, caused I think by a die crack.

A dot and a die crack

[Zo Arms]

On 12/8/2019 at 10:05 AM, alfnail said:

Round dot with die crack.....but which was there first?

Dot and a die crack

[1949threepence]

Talking about 1858 pennies, I've been collecting the various types of 1858, over the last month or so - and there are quite a few.

One thing has struck me with regard to the "small date", which pertains to 1857, 1858 and 1859. The small date is made distinctive by the 5, which is clearly different to the 5's on the other 1858's (same with the 1857 and 1859). I've now got an 1858 small date, which co-incidentally doubles up as an 8/6 overstrike. Now I'm not sure whether all the 8/6's are otherwise small date, or whether the 1858 small dates are all 8/6. 

Any thoughts? 

Thanks in advance.

   

[secret santa]

Also found in 1856 where PT is large date and OT is small date. I believe that 1858/6 is always small date whereas 1858/3 (or 2), 1858/7 and 1858/? (Bramah 25c) are large date.

1858 small date exists without overdate.

[Chingford]

2 minutes ago, secret santa said:

Also found in 1856 where PT is large date and OT is small date. I believe that 1858/6 is always small date whereas 1858/3 (or 2), 1858/7 and 1858/? (Bramah 25c) are large date.

1858 small date exists without overdate.

CP1856 PT both large and small, OT small date only

[alfnail]

8 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

Now I'm not sure whether all the 8/6's are otherwise small date, or whether the 1858 small dates are all 8/6. 

Hi Mike,

All the 1858/6's I have seen have particular legend features which suggests that there was a single die pairing for this particular overdate.

However, 1858 small dates which are NOT 8/6 are seen with a variety of minor date variations; the 5 and second 8 being in slightly different positions with respect to the border teeth...….also the second 8 is often seen struck over an earlier underneath 8.

I attach a picture to show some of these minor variations, which is the best I can do with the 500Mb limitation. The date at the top is the same as the one on Gouby's website, his Style E. The one at the bottom, which is also an 1858 small date, he references as Style F because of the slanted colon dots after DEF on the reverse. This date style is also the type which has a large 'Re-cut' Rose on the reverse.

If anyone wishes to have higher definition pictures of any of this then please PM me.

 

[1949threepence]

2 hours ago, alfnail said:

Hi Mike,

All the 1858/6's I have seen have particular legend features which suggests that there was a single die pairing for this particular overdate.

However, 1858 small dates which are NOT 8/6 are seen with a variety of minor date variations; the 5 and second 8 being in slightly different positions with respect to the border teeth...….also the second 8 is often seen struck over an earlier underneath 8.

I attach a picture to show some of these minor variations, which is the best I can do with the 500Mb limitation. The date at the top is the same as the one on Gouby's website, his Style E. The one at the bottom, which is also an 1858 small date, he references as Style F because of the slanted colon dots after DEF on the reverse. This date style is also the type which has a large 'Re-cut' Rose on the reverse.

If anyone wishes to have higher definition pictures of any of this then please PM me.

 

 

Thanks Ian, that's really interesting. I hadn't realised there were so many different small date varieties for this year. I never thought about Gouby's website and must take a look.

Somewhat surprisingly Peck only mentions different date sizes in relation to 1857, 1858 and 1859. Yet there are obviously a number of others. Richard and John refer to obvious differences with the 1856. Also, for a further example, the pics below show two 1853 pennies with obviously different date sizes. The first darker one is a plain trident, and the other an ornamental trident.

Reading Bramah's book, it's clear he didn't really rate date size variations as being of special relevance. At page 108 he states: "The figures of the date yield innumerable minor varieties of size, shape and position". He then only refers to one such variety in his year summaries, that of type 24a (1857 plain trident) "date in much smaller figures. (Numismatic Circular March 1895, col 1108)"       

 

[alfnail]

Yes, it's definitely worth taking a look at Michael G's website. 

Your 1853 top picture is his Style A (Italic 5), and the bottom picture is his Style C (I think this is the most common type of 5 in 1853). Like the 1858's there are many minor variations of both these types in 1853...……………….and they both appear on PT and OT, although very difficult to find a decent grade Style A on a PT.

Seen less frequently is Gouby 1853 Style B, with yet another type of numeral 5, as per the picture below. Looks a bit like this 5 is on holiday doing the Rumba.

I actually booked a holiday today, but not until June 6th 2022. I thought I had better make an effort, because clearly the most important thing for the UK economy to survive (and perhaps the rest of Europe for that matter) is that all the Brits can go on holiday again.

 

 

 

[1949threepence]

Out of interest, have any pre 1860 penny collectors bothered trying to separate out the different 1858/7 varieties? Bramah notes: "at least five dies have been altered in this way, the varieties being perceptible by the slightly differing positions of the 8 in relation to the 7 below it". Peck makes reference to 1858/7 as a single variety. 

As Bramah didn't use any photos or illustrations, it would clearly have been extremely difficult for him to adequately describe each 8/7 variety in words only, as the differences would probably have been too subtle to lend themselves to word description only.

It was different for the two identified 1848/7 varieties, 10b & 10c, which are very obviously different from each other. He described them perfectly, and of course, they are both available in relative abundance.

  

[1949threepence]

6 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

Out of interest, have any pre 1860 penny collectors bothered trying to separate out the different 1858/7 varieties? Bramah notes: "at least five dies have been altered in this way, the varieties being perceptible by the slightly differing positions of the 8 in relation to the 7 below it". Peck makes reference to 1858/7 as a single variety. 

As Bramah didn't use any photos or illustrations, it would clearly have been extremely difficult for him to adequately describe each 8/7 variety in words only, as the differences would probably have been too subtle to lend themselves to word description only.

It was different for the two identified 1848/7 varieties, 10b & 10c, which are very obviously different from each other. He described them perfectly, and of course, they are both available in relative abundance.

  

*won't let me edit my post*

Should just add that Michael Gouby has identified five of them, but has anyone here collected them as a stand alone variety?

[Chingford]

1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

*won't let me edit my post*

Should just add that Michael Gouby has identified five of them, but has anyone here collected them as a stand alone variety?

As with the 48/7 the position of the upstroke divide is right smaller, and equal. I have seen 48/7 with left smaller, but not 58/7

The other three are smaller fat 7 with tooth, without tooth and the longer slim 7

I am sure you could get more with positioning and date widths

[1949threepence]

2 hours ago, Chingford said:

As with the 48/7 the position of the upstroke divide is right smaller, and equal. I have seen 48/7 with left smaller, but not 58/7

The other three are smaller fat 7 with tooth, without tooth and the longer slim 7

I am sure you could get more with positioning and date widths

Indeed - the coin shown in this link is a very clear example of  a Bramah 10b

Whereas the one in this other link is an equally good example of a Bramah 10c 

As you say, there are no doubt more than 5 types of 1858/7.

[alfnail]

Hi Mike,

On Page 104 of Bramah for the 1848/7 he says:-

104         ENGLISH REGAL COPPER COINS

 

    10b. ALTERED DATE. 0. - The die has been altered

            from 1847. The 7 shows very plainly beneath

            the 8, its up-stroke dividing the lower loop of

            8 into two unequal parts, that on the left being

            much the smaller.

    10c. ALTERED DATE. 0. - The die has been altered

            from 1847.  The 7 does not show so conspicuously

            as it does on No. 10b. and its up-stroke divides

            the lower loop of 8 into two fairly equal portions.

Bramah appears, however, to have missed the type where the 7 is firmly towards the back of the 8. That is the type which Gouby has documented as his type 1848D

On the other hand MG has not documented on his website the type where the 7 is firmly towards the front of the 8, which Bramah appears to have documented as his type 10b.

I attach below close ups of these dates from my own collection.

I also believe there are two slightly different types of Bramah 10b, type with the 7 towards the front. These are my top two pictures, and you will notice amongst other things the depth of the feet on the numeral 1's are quite different.

Hope this helps with the 1848/7's.

I think I have also found 8 different varieties of 1858/7 and can send pictures of those too if you wish, although the 500Mb image limit may not be enough to show the detail clearly on the forum.

 

 

 

 

 

[1949threepence]

21 minutes ago, alfnail said:

Hi Mike,

On Page 104 of Bramah for the 1848/7 he says:-

104         ENGLISH REGAL COPPER COINS

 

    10b. ALTERED DATE. 0. - The die has been altered

 

            from 1847. The 7 shows very plainly beneath

 

            the 8, its up-stroke dividing the lower loop of

 

            8 into two unequal parts, that on the left being

 

            much the smaller.

 

    10c. ALTERED DATE. 0. - The die has been altered

 

            from 1847.  The 7 does not show so conspicuously

 

            as it does on No. 10b. and its up-stroke divides

 

            the lower loop of 8 into two fairly equal portions.

Bramah appears, however, to have missed the type where the 7 is firmly towards the back of the 8. That is the type which Gouby has documented as his type 1848D

On the other hand MG has not documented on his website the type where the 7 is firmly towards the front of the 8, which Bramah appears to have documented as his type 10b.

I attach below close ups of these dates from my own collection.

I also believe there are two slightly different types of Bramah 10b, type with the 7 towards the front. These are my top two pictures, and you will notice amongst other things the depth of the feet on the numeral 1's are quite different.

Hope this helps with the 1848/7's.

I think I have also found 8 different varieties of 1858/7 and can send pictures of those too if you wish, although the 500Mb image limit may not be enough to show the detail clearly on the forum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Ian - yes that Gouby D is very definite. No idea how common they are, but as Bramah missed them, probably less common than the other two. I haven't seen one yet, but no shortage of examples of the other two.

If you are able to send the eight 1858/7's examples, I'd very much appreciate it. But obviously if you run into technical issues, it's not a problem.

[alfnail]

Yes Mike, Gouby type D I have found to be far less common.

Here are close ups of the actual overdates on these 4 examples for reference.

 

[1949threepence]

Thanks Ian.

[Rob]

My minor contribution. Doesn't agree with any of D to Dd for various reasons, nor G.

[secret santa]

Interesting variation of Bramah 10c.

[Iannich48]

This coin looks like an 8/7. Do you agree folks?

[alfnail]

Gouby has identified two doubled variations of the Bramah 10c (his 1848C) on his website. He names these as types Ca and Cb, and I believe Richard's doubled example is a Ca, same as the one in my collection, 2nd picture below.

There are many examples of fully doubled dates in the Victorian Copper Penny series. Whilst these are interesting to look at I prefer not to think of them as true varieties because, unlike the man made repair of the 8/7, the fully doubled date has occurred as part of the striking process. Both the non doubled 1848C and the double 1848Ca are, therefore, I believe from the same die pairing. 

So, for example, on the 1848C, Ca and Cb I think you will find that they all have identical other legend features such as the picture of DEI which I also attach in an additional post immediately below so I can clearly show the protrusions .

1 hour ago, secret santa said:

Interesting variation of Bramah 10c.

[alfnail]

….and the DEI legend features

[1949threepence]

10 minutes ago, Iannich48 said:

This coin looks like an 8/7. Do you agree folks?

I must admit, it's not hitting me in the eye. Is it possible to have a closer up view of the date?

Possibly a Gouby D as explained by I

[1949threepence]

1 hour ago, secret santa said:

Interesting variation of Bramah 10c.

Double struck 8?

ETA: posted before I read Ian's post on the same subject !

Edited June 11, 2020 by 1949threepence