1858/6 halfpenny query

[Rob 3,152]

Does anyone have an unambiguous 1858/6 halfpenny - Peck 1547. If so, could they post a close-up of the overstrike please. All of the examples so stated that I have seen have not been clearly so, including the 2 Nicholson pieces which I couldn't reconcile as an underlying 6. I have seen quite a few with something in the left hand recess of the 8, but all I would have described as die defects rather than an overstrike. Thanks.

[Bronze & Copper Collector 413]

Does anyone have an unambiguous 1858/6 halfpenny - Peck 1547. If so, could they post a close-up of the overstrike please. All of the examples so stated that I have seen have not been clearly so, including the 2 Nicholson pieces which I couldn't reconcile as an underlying 6. I have seen quite a few with something in the left hand recess of the 8, but all I would have described as die defects rather than an overstrike. Thanks.

This is a close-up of my 1858/6 half penny

Edited September 9, 2006 by Bronze & Copper Collector

[Rob 3,152]

This is a close-up of my 1858/6 half penny

[Chingford 166]

This is a close-up of my 1858/6 half penny

Thanks, that's clearer than I've seen with the top of the 6 showing. Given the degree of curvature of the back of the 6, is there any trace of the loop of it in the bottom loop of the 8? If so, by extension, it would have to be a shorter 6 than the 8 and in that case is the 8 the large date variety or not? I've seen a similar example with the left side underlying, but couldn't see any trace of a loop or the top of the 6.

[Chingford 166]

Images of different degrees of over strike

[Rob 3,152]

Images of different degrees of over strike

Thanks John. These both show a feature that I couldn't reconcile with an underlying 6. Both have an indent to a lesser extent than the overlying 8 but nevertheless a clear indent and that suggests to me an 8. It would have to be deformed a bit, but I have never seen a 6 with this feature. I would expect a 6 to have a straightish trending slightly convex outer border on the left side.

[Chingford 166]

Thanks John. These both show a feature that I couldn't reconcile with an underlying 6. Both have an indent to a lesser extent than the overlying 8 but nevertheless a clear indent and that suggests to me an 8. It would have to be deformed a bit, but I have never seen a 6 with this feature. I would expect a 6 to have a straightish trending slightly convex outer border on the left side.

[Rob 3,152]

Thanks John. These both show a feature that I couldn't reconcile with an underlying 6. Both have an indent to a lesser extent than the overlying 8 but nevertheless a clear indent and that suggests to me an 8. It would have to be deformed a bit, but I have never seen a 6 with this feature. I would expect a 6 to have a straightish trending slightly convex outer border on the left side.

It looks to me that the top of the six is removed to the greater degree, more of the lower loop of the six remaining and becoming the lower loop of the 'new' number 8.

The six is at an angle, leaning to the left and looks to be larger hence showing on both sides.

My images are a little bit on the large side to post more than two at once.

[Chingford 166]

I'll have a look through my records/coins and come back to you, I only pulled a couple of coins for these images.

I'll see if I can upload a series of images of the various overdates to the Gallery, but this probably wouldn't be until the weekend.

If there are any other types/dates, let me know and I'll get those done first.