DrLarry

Reverse D OBV 7 wide and "narrow" date

sorry yes I should have listed the errors in Reverse D OBV 7 first off there do appear to be two date ypes ne with the date spaced wide and the other the 1 closer to the 6 one of the values in making these catalogues to share is that it forces me to re-examine and spot new things. In total I have 6 reverse D's if anyone is collecting data The first error I think has been noticed before with a 1 over 1 but in the example I have the 6 is also doubled image of 1 over 1 6 restamp on the obverse the B of BRITT is over a B wide date and "narrow " date

HAIF REVERSE E Best if I start with reverse E the LCW , whilst my favourite is reverse F there are any errors in reverse E's I have collected a sample of 30 , 18 of them have some type of error , of course there is nothing statistic in this sample as I select out errors. I will start with the reverse and then proceed to the obverses unless there is something interesting associated with something unusual on the reverse The HAIF error exists on a few half pennies two in 1860 . there is an interesting obverse die break again through the R in BRITT

1861 B OVER R . The 1861 half penny seems to more packed with errors than the 1860 some errors in the proper sense and many restamp errors. I remember a conversation a few years back when the debate on varieties came up which pretty much went along the lines of ignore them there simply is not enough space to list them all. Perhaps this is true. Previously a Geologist it makes me think where would we be if someone said " ignore the microfossils, they cannot be seen so what value is there in them" . Someday someone may be able to gain some value so here goes. The first two are B over R's the second two are suspect a die break I think that joins the B and the R giving the impression of an R over a B . I have never seen as example of the R over B but this is not it

Thank you . When I started collecting in 2015 I had no interest other than to think all these varieties were a bit navel gazing but as time went on my peculiar brain seems to like spotting them. I will start listing the 1861's now then the 62's I am sure it will help someone look for more. Congratulation with the HAIF, the L is partially present well there are fragments I will search for yours and compare ..

Unusually on the beaded 1860 I have never found any serious date errors or corrections apart from one which has the 0 restamped that just about does it for my 1860 examples I would be very happy to see any examples you may have found or thoughts you might have had. There is one feature of them I have found interesting which is what appears to me to be two distinct legend stamps. Many of you have been clear enough to suggest this is nothing unusual but as I mentioned before it was sufficiently important to Wyon to have recut and hardened a different set presumably because of failures or is error in calculating the size when he forgot to take into account the F:D in his design. To me at least it seems interesting that an "OLD" curly based lettering finer in nature was replaced by a more "SOLID" squared off legend. These older bases can often be seen (I think) as remnants. I should add that all these examples above have been collected in the last 6 years since I started collecting and all have been purchased off E BAY so there will be more I am sure

this one appears to be an attempt to correct for a broken F

The E in REG and the E over P I showed earlier

Here are other examples of the I in BRITT Error . there is a lot of misalignment of the R and the I

the last few "unusuals " are obverse errors BB 1860 . The I of BRITT is replicated mistruck higher interestingly on some there are other letters also struck too high. the gap is pretty significant and the degree to which the inner circle is remodelled suggests this was done by a less proficient man or it was done in a hurry or both. The error associated with the E in REG has I am certain been recognised for many years but the multiple attempts to restamp it may have eventually resulted in the E over P I illustrated earlier. This would explain the large nob above the E and it is not difficult to see how the numerous correction would eventually meet giving the impression of the P ...just a though these images are all from the same coin

Half pennies sometimes seem to be the poor relative of the Bronze world many of the errors I have started to list on the half penny variety thread. Some have been previously identified but I think there are others that are still to be found. I have started with my 1860's I admit to having at least two for my own desire to verify it as an error variety. But I am always happy to sell some for the charity.

1860 T over T in BRITT first T I will add these images tomorrow

T OVER T IN VICTORIA 1860 BEADED There are two T over T errors in the beaded obverses both show complete misplacement of the letter the T in Victoria seems to be more common than the T over T in BRITT ,. However that may well be more down to the clarity of the error . The T over T on the first and the second T in BRITT is harder to spot. these three examples illustrate the error nicely .

This one is a follow on of Reverse B subvariety HAIF in this the blockage of the L in HALF also occurs in the H with the bar missing and the A bar blocked Many of the letters are also blocked n the obverse and numerous breaks in the die occur especially through the O . It appears to one of the crooked 1 in the date group

double or triple D's 1860 beaded ; the first example is associated with significant remodelling of the inner circle done in many places to a very low standard. I noticed after I posted this that the C of Victoria has been completely moved and the scar exists of the previous C to the right.

1860 TWO TAILED R or RUDE R .......OR your choice of name perhaps suggest one I have had this one for a few years 1860 toothed . No die break around the R and the extension is has a smooth appearance it looks like the tail end of an R and there is a lot of confused recutting of the inner circle above it ...any suggestions I've only so far found one

E over P in REG Beaded Obverse 1860 half penny . Here is an interesting half penny from 1860 BEADED the example is not the best and the verifying second example lack credibility because it was buried and has therefore crystalised and I am always untrusting of what they show. But the original one found a few years back I feel is better if somewhat low in grade. Interestingly on both on the reverse there is a flaw in the N of Penny hard to explain other than a break in the die or the N being reversed ? is that possible. If interested I will image the whole coin ....I will have to load the second example later , the two below are from the same coin. I would think that the error may have been created by too high a restamp of the F once possible twice I am unsure what that protrusion is on the top the join appears to be continuous so perhaps a die break as in he F over P in HALF in the 61

An interesting additional aspect to these toothed half pennies from 1860 is that the Stamp used to set the legend seem to have a number of difference. The P of PENNY for example has two types used for different reverses 1. has an "OPEN" P the other a 2. "CLOSED " P . I know that there have been comments about the letter stamps used in previous discussion but it is still of interest that when Wyon prepared the first set of legend stamps for the bronze series he had to prepare a second set. I know many will ask r say that it is in the hands of the preparer of these hardened steel stamps and why does it matter that there are minor variations. Of course it might not matter but then what does any of this exploration into old bits of metal. If it is there to be noticed then it is , in my opinion, of interest . I believe we have an OPEN P and a CLOSED P in the pennies so why not the half pennies. Of course this variation may be due to pressure used but to me the shape appears different one a restamp

I also have a F over F in two specimens of Reverse C 1860 toothed both show the same position of the F over the F so I assume we can find others ...a nice error this I hope you enjoy it too

I thought I might start listing some of my half penny characters. It would be mice to have them listed so others might look see if we have matches . I am not going to argue that they are varieties they are anomalies and this would seem , to me at least, to be the best place to share them 1860 toothed 8 over 8 it is the rounded lighthouse type the A is over the older curly based A in HALF and there is a very clear error in the placement of the I in Victoria on the obverse I HOPE THIS INTERESTS SOME ...MANY THANKS

Oh yes I have a few half pennies with 8's over 8's from 1860 61 and 62. Whilst they seem of little interest to many I am trying to discover how they fit into other legend errors often associated with them. It's for interest alone

I can see no evidence of a repeat strike, if I view the 6 upside down (the six not myself) the tail appears to be slightly longer and something looks different . Silly question but do we know if the 9 and the 6 stamps are exactly the same? I wondered looking at it today if it might be larger the second six.

Ok that's good then perhaps we can all look out for a second to verify it 66's seem a bit harder, than one would expect, to find I wonder if the figures for production are accurate. Thanks for the help and wisdom

thank you I am happy to have spotted something different. Goulby shows three very different varieties in the most recent updates. But the second 6 is very differently placed .

you may be correct perhaps I am misinterpreting the BP 1866 Aa