1853 Penny - Peck 1503

[Accumulator 52]

Those who hate micro-varieties, look away now!

At last weekend's London Coins auction I picked up an 1853 penny described as: "Penny 1853 Copper Proof Peck 1503 Reverse upright nFDC with traces of lustre". There were several other bidders.

Having examined the penny closely I have a number of questions. Peck lists the following varieties of 1853 ornamental trident:

Peck 1500 DEF_:

Peck 1501 DEF_: Bronzed proof, rev inverted

Peck 1502 DEF:_ Copper proof

Peck 1503 DEF_: Last colon slightly nearer F

In my copy of Peck is a handwritten note titled "1853 Penny", stating the following:

"The difference between the normal issue with ornamental trident, P1500 and the colon variety P1503 is slight and needs keen sight, even with the aid of a lens, to detect. In both versions the distance between the colon following DEF and Britannia's toe is approximately 3.7mm and in both cases the centre of each dot forming the colon is nearly halfway between the F and the toe, being about 1.8mm from the F in the normal issue P1500 and 1.7mm in P1503. In the only specimen examined the lower dot of the colon in P1500 was slightly to the right of the upper, whereas in P1503 the dots of the colon are one above the other. Consequently the lines joining the two dots form a slightly different angle with the circumference of the coin in each case."

Based on the above, I do indeed have a P1503 as the lower colon dot is definitely at a different angle to the upper. I established this using Adobe photoshop and overlaying the images.

However, Peck doesn't say that P1503 is in copper or a proof, as described by London Coins.

To further confuse, Bramah, who doesn't mention proofs, copper or bronze lists two versions of the 1853 "Ornamented Trident", described as follows:

No. 14

O - As type

R - As type. The trident is ornamented with a little scroll work below the head. The last colon is approximately midway between the F and Britannia's foot.

No. 15

O - As type.

R - As the reverse of no.14 but the last colon is 1mm from F and 2 1/4mm from Britannia's foot.

So, my question is; how many varieties are there and what exactly do I have?

Below is a Peck 1500 (on the left) and my possible Peck 1503 (on the right)

[Rob 3,152]

If I remember, the Adams catalogue showed three distint positions for the colon, with no need to measure with a micrometer.

[Colin G. 147]

If I remember, the Adams catalogue showed three distint positions for the colon, with no need to measure with a micrometer.

It is more obvious when you line the colon up with Britannia's drapery, one would appear to line up with the step back of the drapery and the other hits the furthest projection of the knee drapery...as for the number of combinations........I am a farthing man...sorry

[Chingford 166]

Those who hate micro-varieties, look away now!

At last weekend's London Coins auction I picked up an 1853 penny described as: "Penny 1853 Copper Proof Peck 1503 Reverse upright nFDC with traces of lustre". There were several other bidders.

Having examined the penny closely I have a number of questions. Peck lists the following varieties of 1853 ornamental trident:

Peck 1500 DEF_:

Peck 1501 DEF_: Bronzed proof, rev inverted

Peck 1502 DEF:_ Copper proof

Peck 1503 DEF_: Last colon slightly nearer F

In my copy of Peck is a handwritten note titled "1853 Penny", stating the following:

"The difference between the normal issue with ornamental trident, P1500 and the colon variety P1503 is slight and needs keen sight, even with the aid of a lens, to detect. In both versions the distance between the colon following DEF and Britannia's toe is approximately 3.7mm and in both cases the centre of each dot forming the colon is nearly halfway between the F and the toe, being about 1.8mm from the F in the normal issue P1500 and 1.7mm in P1503. In the only specimen examined the lower dot of the colon in P1500 was slightly to the right of the upper, whereas in P1503 the dots of the colon are one above the other. Consequently the lines joining the two dots form a slightly different angle with the circumference of the coin in each case."

Based on the above, I do indeed have a P1503 as the lower colon dot is definitely at a different angle to the upper. I established this using Adobe photoshop and overlaying the images.

However, Peck doesn't say that P1503 is in copper or a proof, as described by London Coins.

To further confuse, Bramah, who doesn't mention proofs, copper or bronze lists two versions of the 1853 "Ornamented Trident", described as follows:

No. 14

O - As type

R - As type. The trident is ornamented with a little scroll work below the head. The last colon is approximately midway between the F and Britannia's foot.

No. 15

O - As type.

R - As the reverse of no.14 but the last colon is 1mm from F and 2 1/4mm from Britannia's foot.

So, my question is; how many varieties are there and what exactly do I have?

Below is a Peck 1500 (on the left) and my possible Peck 1503 (on the right)

Unfortunately as with most of the copper series, both Pennies and Halfpennies, the colons in all locations are suject to postional variations, in most cases it is very slight in alignment and/or placement between the F and Foot as in this discussion,

The Peck 1503 in very different from the 1500 as it is one full bead closer to the F, as identified by Brahams.

The montage attached shows 5 variations in colon position of the 1500 the bottom right being the 1503.

I looked at the London Coin and based on my library my call was the 1500 proof.

[Accumulator 52]

Unfortunately as with most of the copper series, both Pennies and Halfpennies, the colons in all locations are suject to postional variations, in most cases it is very slight in alignment and/or placement between the F and Foot as in this discussion,

The Peck 1503 in very different from the 1500 as it is one full bead closer to the F, as identified by Brahams.

The montage attached shows 5 variations in colon position of the 1500 the bottom right being the 1503.

I looked at the London Coin and based on my library my call was the 1500 proof.

Thanks John. Based on the lower right image in your montage of photos, mine isn't a P1503, but a P1500 type coin, as you say. It would appear to be a proof, as stated by London Coins, and presumably in copper with an upright reverse. This would make it a P1502 then, I assume? Not as advertised by London Coins, but probably not worth making a fuss over. I wonder who catalogues their pennies though as I've found several mistakes over the past couple of years?

[Chingford 166]

You are correct 1502,

I thought Paul Redford catalogued the coppers, I used to buy from him at fairs and 'Beefeater' on ebay, always seemed to have a good sound knowledge, but then having said that I have bought several Bramahs varities over the years from London Coins listed and priced as common.

[Accumulator 52]

You are correct 1502,

I thought Paul Redford catalogued the coppers, I used to buy from him at fairs and 'Beefeater' on ebay, always seemed to have a good sound knowledge, but then having said that I have bought several Bramahs varities over the years from London Coins listed and priced as common.

You're quite right. I've just been reminded of this similar thread