1919 Penny with dot by date, how rare?

[bhx7]

Hi All

I have just been going through my stash of old pennies again and found this coin. Any idea how rare it is. The coin itself is fairly worn so not sure if it will have any value either.

Any info appreciated.

Thanks

PS Not sure if the photo shows it clear enough.

Edited August 19, 2015 by bhx7

[VickySilver]

Hmmm, looks like die nick as opposed to purposeful dot...

[bhx7]

Hi Vicky, you could be right but peculiarly it is exactly were the H would be if it was a Heaton Mint coin and in David Grooms book he does state that some plain 1919 coins have a dot in that place.

[bhx7]

For some reason I can't add or edit my post..... Anyway if it is the coin David is describing then I was just really curious of the rarity. I collect variants so its always nice to add to the collection. Thanks

[Nordle11]

Hmmm, looks like die nick as opposed to purposeful dot...

It does seem less like a purposeful dot just because of the faintness of it, but as with the other dot flaws they weren't purposeful (as far as anyone knows). There have been suggestions of the dot being used as a test for die wear and instead of the dot appearing faint and growing in size it started off as a prominent dot and slowly became clogged.

I've not got David's book to hand but if he does mention this dot variety it would be good to see if anyone else has any examples.

Furthermore, if it's in the exact place the H's appear, could it suggest a clogged H along with a lot of wear? I see that your example has a lot of wear too bhx?

[bhx7]

Hi Nordle, without question this 1919 penny is extremely worn, poor to good ay best. Will post it up against some of my 1919 H and 1919 KN coins later this afternoon. Curious to see were the topic leads. Cheers Brian

[Nordle11]

Definitely curious too, Ive checked any 1919s I have and none seem to have a dot in that place. Does the book give any sort of guesstimate as to how many are out there, or even how many have already been found?

I'd check but my book's in a different bloody country haha.

Matt

[VickySilver]

On my monitor it appears as more of a mini-gash with a bit of different toning about it, and not so much a dot? I agree the location curious but still don't see it the way other "dots" are, appearing as though a dedicated punch was at work. If a partially expunged mintmark, I would think more of a dished area in relief....

[bhx7]

Hi Vicky, definitely raised piece, no gash. As you have said it maybe just a die nick leaving a small raised piece of metal, but the area it is in makes it curious. I am not home at the moment but will post against pics of KN and H when I get back in. As I said I don't think it is of any value, more just a curiosity. Cheers Brian

[jacinbox]

I am convinced it's a deliberate dot.

Better pics showing the full reverse would be useful though.

[Nordle11]

Can you elaborate Jac? I can't find any literature regarding this type of dot, at least not amid the plethora of 'Australian dot below scroll' results :/

[Rob]

This ties in with a question I posed a few years ago which asked if the H & KN dies were recycled by the mint (can't remember the thread title to link the two). I personally think they were. For anyone with the technical ability it should be possible to overlay this onto known H/KN reverse dies.

[Nordle11]

I can't overlay where I am but as a side by side comparison it looks as if the positioning of the H is in the same place relative to what's left of the waves above the exergue line.

However, adding to what you've said Rob, if the dies were recycled wouldn't they be used for subsequent years as opposed to being used by Heaton or Kings Norton during 1918/1919 and then sent over to the London mint to be used within the same year(s)? It seems strange that the former 2 could afford to produce more dies while London were getting the hammy downs.. Unless H + KN stopped production before the year was out and London just used what was left for the remaining months?

I don't know specifically how long the contracted mints produced those coins and if it was for the full year that the coins were being made?

[Rob]

My thinking is that the punches were held by the RM, so they probably produced the dies and shipped them to Birmingham. As the two sub-contractors would have had a contract to produce a certain amount of coin, once the contract was filled the dies would be returned as there is no way the RM would want them to be kept where someone could produce coins illegally.

[Nordle11]

I see what you mean now, so possibly they fulfilled the quantity required before the year was out and sent back the dies.

I have nothing to negate the fact that they just reused the old dies, it really wouldn't surprise me.

One question I do have - was the equipment that the Heaton and Norton guys used subpar compared to London's? Because the striking was always a bit hit and miss at the best of times, so if it was down to the dies and not the machinery, surely the dies that were sent back and re-used would produce that 'mulshy' effect that we all know and hate but on the later London minted coins? Generally the strikes on the London coins from those years is a lot better, and to be given the contract in the first place I would have thought that any test pieces they provided to get the job would have been of a much better quality, i.e a problem with the longevity of the die and not the functionality of the machinery.

[bhx7]

Hi All

I have added 2 pictures of the coin against a normal 1919 H of about the same condition. See what you all think.

As I said the coin is very worn.

Cheers

Brian

[bhx7]

Here is the coin again this time with a 1919 KN and the with between both.

[bhx7]

Hi Matt,

In Davids book P.58 Minor Varieties No.6 " On the plain type some examples have been found with a raised dot where the H would have been, had the coin been a Heaton mint example."

[VickySilver]

Hi there, I meant gash to the die. I used some homemade calipers and compare the spot on your coin to the "H" and both upstrokes on the "N" and it (the "dot"/die ding) does not line up, at least with the placement of those particular H and KN mintmarks.

[bhx7]

This is with a different 1919H. There is some difference put let you judge!

i thought it lined up nicely with the N of KN.

Edited August 20, 2015 by bhx7

[VickySilver]

I'm still getting a delta (space difference) of greater magnitude from the left facing tip on the top stroke of the "1"to the nearer stroke of the H on the mint marked coin greater than on your specimen - if that makes sense.

[bhx7]

Hi there, I meant gash to the die. I used some homemade calipers and compare the spot on your coin to the "H" and both upstrokes on the "N" and it (the "dot"/die ding) does not line up, at least with the placement of those particular H and KN mintmarks.

Hi Vicky,

I have done quite a few measurements and it lines up very well with the N of KN. Both the slight raised section (dot) and the N are both 2.2 mm from the centre of the first 1 in date. I am getting a set of digital calipers shortly so will do some more testing once they arrive.

[bhx7]

I'm still getting a delta (space difference) of greater magnitude from the left facing tip on the top stroke of the "1"to the nearer stroke of the H on the mint marked coin greater than on your specimen - if that makes sense.

You are definately right about the Heaton Mint as it just doesn't fit at all. The N of KN does however.

[VickySilver]

I did a careful measurement, and came up with the measurement from the outer point of the "1" to the Left Upright of the "N" at the beginning of the diagonal downstroke is pretty much exact distance as that from outer point of the "1" to the mark on your coin.

I'm still not sure how there is not an area of increased relief around it as perhaps might be expected if the remainder of the mintmark was ground away on the die....

[Coinery]

Wouldn't they be filling the die letter, not grinding it off?