Accumulator

Well spotted Gary. I checked, and indeed my 1841 'no colon' exhibits these differences too. Not sure why my photo is so blurry, but here it is:

Welcome to the forum Nicky. I would venture to suggest that you've increased the female population by 100% (unless there's something strange going on), but then I'd be accused of being to maths what Peckris is to english Ahem. Isn't an increase from 2 to 3 an increase of 50%? Or is my maths in inverse proportion to my command of English? Seriously, welcome to the forums Nicky. You can check 50p pieces in your change, but you might then want to look at the older larger 50 pences which I think are nicer, being bigger. Some of them were only available in the specimen sets issued by the Mint, but the rarest currency piece of its day was the 1985 50p. Anyway, happy collecting and here's to a long and fruitful time in this forum. I didn't realise we already had 2 females! I was working on the basis that we had gone from 1 to 2. Your maths is correct then Debbie. I need to pay more attention!

Welcome to the forum Nicky. I would venture to suggest that you've increased the female population by 100% (unless there's something strange going on), but then I'd be accused of being to maths what Peckris is to english

I've seen Bramah references several times but not taken a great deal of notice. Wikipedia makes interesting reading.... the very same Ernest Bramah was a noted witer of fiction apparently. George Orwell is said to have been influenced by him! One of his titles is indeed the coin book. See here

Does your Peck have any provenance, Steve? How long have you had it, and have you any idea who the seller was? Unfortunately not. Just a purchase from a second hand bookseller in London some years ago. There's nothing in the book itself to suggest the past owner(s).

I've been on a lookout for an upgrade for some time without success; so i guess this ultrawide 1896 is rare, as is the wide date 1895, again mine being the only example I've seen I've noted the date widths vary.When I got my Freeman's I went through my pot of spares and found a R13 1879.(close date) The date spacings on the veiled heads I had noted but not pursued.Thanks for everyone's input I'm one of those who thinks the bun penny "wide date" and "narrow date" varieties are distinct and separate designs (as Freeman also notes; there are usually other differences too) - I would certainly treasure an 1879 narrow date. The Old Head date spacings don't float my boat nearly so much, as they aren't distinctive in any other way, and Freeman ignores them. They are a curiosity though, especially the biggest spacings. Not the best:

As an aside, my copy of Peck contains several old handwritten notes tucked between the leaves. I've always wondered which collector may have written them. Any thoughts? Here's and example:

Very rare, the reverse is likely from the 1841 proof die, the mane to Britainniars helmet and repaired 2nd A in Britainniar are consistent. John Thank you for those pointers John! I hadn't noticed the triple mane (rather than the single) to the helmet. I'd noticed the repaired 'A' but not thought anything of it. I don't spend much time with my copper pennies (normally focussing on bronze). I have Peck but it contains little on the varieties. Is there another book worth getting for 1837-1860?

I'd never have guessed from the photo showing just the date... but you're right, it's not the best example!

Thank you for that info. I've never added any of my coins as none have been slabbed by me. I've just accumulated them over the years and some may even still show up in other people's collections, I have never checked but perhaps should! Logging in to the CGS site, I can't view your coins though I can see your username in the league tables. As you suggest, it must be necessary for me to list at least one of my own coins first.

I have access to the CGS site, and own a few slabbed coins myself, but wasn't aware that I could view other people's coins without the UIN number. Is this possible? Alternatively you could post a few UINs to look at. I have a some crowns myself but mainly focus on pennies.

His 'bottom' was probably too (Christ, just had to edit and add an O to the to ) wide to fit inline on the screen, you can be so insensitive at times, Peck! On my 27" iMac both the photos appear side by side, so 'right' was right for me. You need a bigger screen Peck

Obverses. Recessed ear on the right again (note the telltale broken tooth by BRITT:)

Don't forget, the shilling suffers from the same syndrome as pennies; those often show Britannia with barely any facial or breastplate details. With shillings it's the lion face e.g. nose. This has nothing to do with what's conventionally called a 'weak' strike (which would show an overall weakness), nor a worn die. It's entirely due to the fact that first series George V coins have a very deep portrait, very high relief, much more so than any other monarch in the milled era. Where the reverse is strong and detailed as with halfcrowns, this doesn't really affect things, but where the reverse has a shallow design and rims - as is the case especially with pennies, halfpennies, and shillings - the obverse 'sucks' metal from areas of the reverse and they don't fully strike up. Would this affect all the coins of a given year? If not, what sort of percentage are we talking about? I'm presuming, if the percentage of sharp strikes is small, that a GEF fully struck up would attract a higher premium than a weak UNC? Difficult question. In the case of pennies, it's rare indeed to see a fully struck up Britannia before 1921/22. And yes, it would affect if not all, then certainly the vast majority of strikes. It's worth noting that on the 'recessed ear' pennies of 1915/16, Britannia is usually fully struck up, indicating that the Mint were aware of the problem ('ghosting' was the main effect they wanted to eliminate) and tried experimenting. Would a fully struck up Britannia command a premium? Very hard to say. It might, for example, go along with a not fully struck up portrait with weak hair detail which would actually be more noticeable and have a negative effect on value. Some dates are notoriously bad - the reverses of 1917 sixpences are a case in point - and a good example would almost certainly attract more buyers. In general, eye appeal counts for a lot, so in any reign a sharp and attractive GEF would nearly always score over a weak UNC. It's also a factor that collectors get so used to a feature - e.g. a not fully struck up Britannia on Series 1 Geo V pennies - that they expect it, and it therefore doesn't affect the value. So true, and as a picture tells a thousand words. Recessed ear variety on the right:

You have to hand him the award for most entertaining description. Even if it is total b*******! Apparantly, Brittania's holding a 'truncation' on the reverse. That must be the truncated olive branch. Or perhaps he meant 'trunk'!

Yes, I agree! They all seem to be like that, regardless of spacing. The pictures in Michael Gouby's book suggest the same.

You'd have to take a perfectly flat image, get it on your PC and draw some lines...the longer the lines, the more clearly you might see any differences. Here you go. Quite clearly the second '9' has a shorter tail:

Well now, looks like it to me. It's not even the same 9 ! I wonder if that's common - the further right the number is, the smaller it would have to be to squeeze under the exergue. If the accidental theory is to continue to hold water, we can't have them making design changes to allow for wide dates. Doesn't make any sense... I think that's just how they are for 1899. Here are mine: (apologies for the colour of the narrow date, its a CGS photo of my slabbed coin)

I was about to respectfully point this out: I stand corrected ! Here's my wide date 1895 Not in Gouby and seems to be pretty scarce Nice one! Not seen this one before either.

You are a brave chap to collect these.Very few circulated.Someone like yourself could maybe do a write up. Chris Perkins the owner of this site is a bit of a wreath man.I think he has had a few 1934's through his books.I would suggest his advice. The whole subject of separating proofs from currency or specimen strikes can be controversial. Side by side photos of an unc currency example and the suspected proof coin would go a long way to helping those on here decide, or at least comment further. I appreciate that often it's difficult to form an opinion without having the coin in hand and being able to play with reflected light though.

I was about to respectfully point this out:

Nice find!

Are we talking pennies here? The 1876H is commonly the narrow date variety, whereas the wide date is quite rare. Freeman has R9 for the wide date and R5 for the narrow date, so the wide date is considerably rarer:

Welcome. I think you have your answer, but if you want to see further photos of the two types of 1922 penny, just follow the link below my signature.

Hi, As Rob says, various different positions for the '2', aside from the expected, seem to be relatively common. The rare version of this coin has the the whole 1862 date formed using noticeably smaller numerals, usually described as being from the 1/2d. Here is a coin with similar spacing to the one you have, for comparison: