1861 One Penny.

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Just a quick one guy's, had a close look at a 1861 one penny, and noticed the last one has a smaller one above the top bar. Is this common, thanks jim.

[Peckris 579]

Picture please.

[Accumulator 52]

As Peckris suggests, without a picture it's impossible to know what you mean. The range from extremely valuable and unique coin, to worthless, scuffed washer is a wide one. Hopefully yours lies closer to the former!

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Here's a couple of image's

This is a metal detecting find which i have had for quite some time, all comments welcome, thanks james.

[Peckris 579]

The phenomenon you point to is where a date numeral on the die has been recut, usually due to wear - there are a lot of variations on the first few years of bun pennies 1860-63. That's what you have there.

What's more interesting is the metal - it appears to be silver or something similar like aluminium or cupro-nickel. Is it really that colour?

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Thanks peckris for the info on this one. About the colour of the metal do you mean the whole of the coin or the bit above the recut one?

[Peckris 579]

Thanks peckris for the info on this one. About the colour of the metal do you mean the whole of the coin or the bit above the recut one?

The whole of the coin - it's a whitish colour that copper and bronze doesn't usually have unless it's been coated in something like silver (compound) or chrome or even some kind of paint, though yours doesn't look painted.

[Peter 615]

I think the answer to the colour is "a metal detecting find"

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Peter is right, the majority of MD coin finds are this colour. This one is green, maybe the trickery of the light gave it a silver look.

[Peckris 579]

Peter is right, the majority of MD coin finds are this colour. This one is green, maybe the trickery of the light gave it a silver look.

"Green" is normal for buried coins. Your photo above isn't green in any way - it's a whitish silvery colour.

[MACKSILKY. 6]

I'll post another image of the full coin using a different cam.

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Another image using a different camera,

Earlier this week on ebay a worn vic one penny dated 1861 identical to the one here went for £26, seller listed it as 1861/1 victorian bronze penny- 1 over 1 in date- very collectable. My question is the recut of the one in the date, were they done in quantity, because i can't see them being cut individually?

[davidrj 194]

The date numerals seem to have worn faster than the die and were frequently repunched - sometimes sloppily

You can find pennies of the 1860s where one or more of the date figures are almost missing

Edited November 19, 2013 by davidrj

[Peter 615]

Hi Malcy

Nice find.

Great soil around your way. ?

I'm in Suffolk (heavy clay) which is good for your tators and bread but no good for copper.

I do have the joy of the brecklands on my doorstep.The soil is sandy/dry hence some great coins are recovered.

I've just had shingle delivered for fence/patio/french drains etc and have already found musket balls/devils toe nails.

Great fun.

[RLC35 288]

Here's a couple of image's

This is a metal detecting find which i have had for quite some time, all comments welcome, thanks james.

Macksilky,

Here are a couple more examples of the 1861, 1 over 1 Penny. It seems there are a lot of variables of this variety!

[Peckris 579]

Another image using a different camera,

Earlier this week on ebay a worn vic one penny dated 1861 identical to the one here went for £26, seller listed it as 1861/1 victorian bronze penny- 1 over 1 in date- very collectable. My question is the recut of the one in the date, were they done in quantity, because i can't see them being cut individually?

Yes, that's the normal colour of a coin that's been buried a long time.

Ignore the hype of eBay sellers - they will claim all kinds of weird and wonderful things as "rare", "unique", etc.

The recut of dates was usually done on the final figure of the date, as the date punches for the dies were either 18-- (last two digits blank), or created for a decade, like 186-. When it came to the final digit on the dies, yes they would punch them in individually, which is why you see such a variety of spacings and angles of final digit. This is especially true for 1861 and 1862, which was a combination of 1) the early days of bronze coinage production and 2) very high mintages (which was also the case in 1863, then it tailed off dramatically).

Bottom line - a recut 1 over 1 on a particular die for this particular date is not terribly exciting though it is interesting if you collect such things. A worn one for £26 obviously attracted one such collector, so if you put yours on eBay you might attract another, who knows?

[declanwmagee 122]

were they done in quantity, because i can't see them being cut individually?

Just to clarify, the digit is punched on the die individually, not on the coin!

[Peckris 579]

were they done in quantity, because i can't see them being cut individually?

Just to clarify, the digit is punched on the die individually, not on the coin!

I assumed that was what was meant?

Edited November 19, 2013 by Peckris

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Thanks guy's for all the great info, i'm learning all the time. And yes peter we have good (canny) soil up here ideal for MD. Mine's always kept in the boot of the car just in case the wife want's to go on a tour.Great forum and great friendly members,cheers boy's.

[Garrett 76]

Have to agree it is a great forum too, I am very, very happy to have found it !

oh, and yes good find mate, well done.

Saw a ripped up council garden myself on the walk home from work this afternoon and lamented the fact I don't have a detector (..... yet).

cheers

Garrett

[1949threepence 3,367]

Another image using a different camera,

Earlier this week on ebay a worn vic one penny dated 1861 identical to the one here went for £26, seller listed it as 1861/1 victorian bronze penny- 1 over 1 in date- very collectable. My question is the recut of the one in the date, were they done in quantity, because i can't see them being cut individually?

Yes, that's the normal colour of a coin that's been buried a long time.

Ignore the hype of eBay sellers - they will claim all kinds of weird and wonderful things as "rare", "unique", etc.

The recut of dates was usually done on the final figure of the date, as the date punches for the dies were either 18-- (last two digits blank), or created for a decade, like 186-. When it came to the final digit on the dies, yes they would punch them in individually, which is why you see such a variety of spacings and angles of final digit. This is especially true for 1861 and 1862, which was a combination of 1) the early days of bronze coinage production and 2) very high mintages (which was also the case in 1863, then it tailed off dramatically).

Bottom line - a recut 1 over 1 on a particular die for this particular date is not terribly exciting though it is interesting if you collect such things. A worn one for £26 obviously attracted one such collector, so if you put yours on eBay you might attract another, who knows?

There's a lot of odd spacings on the 1864 as well, especially the crosslet. Many of the wider spaced 4's are barely visible.

[Peckris 579]

Another image using a different camera,

Earlier this week on ebay a worn vic one penny dated 1861 identical to the one here went for £26, seller listed it as 1861/1 victorian bronze penny- 1 over 1 in date- very collectable. My question is the recut of the one in the date, were they done in quantity, because i can't see them being cut individually?

Yes, that's the normal colour of a coin that's been buried a long time.

Ignore the hype of eBay sellers - they will claim all kinds of weird and wonderful things as "rare", "unique", etc.

The recut of dates was usually done on the final figure of the date, as the date punches for the dies were either 18-- (last two digits blank), or created for a decade, like 186-. When it came to the final digit on the dies, yes they would punch them in individually, which is why you see such a variety of spacings and angles of final digit. This is especially true for 1861 and 1862, which was a combination of 1) the early days of bronze coinage production and 2) very high mintages (which was also the case in 1863, then it tailed off dramatically).

Bottom line - a recut 1 over 1 on a particular die for this particular date is not terribly exciting though it is interesting if you collect such things. A worn one for £26 obviously attracted one such collector, so if you put yours on eBay you might attract another, who knows?

There's a lot of odd spacings on the 1864 as well, especially the crosslet. Many of the wider spaced 4's are barely visible.

Wouldn't surprise me - except you don't usually see enough 1864s side by side to make that comparison.

[MACKSILKY. 6]

Just starting to catalogue my coins, on closer inspection the E in one is also repunched. Just a quick question is it common to have a repunched numeral and repunched letter on the same reverse?

[Peckris 579]

Just starting to catalogue my coins, on closer inspection the E in one is also repunched. Just a quick question is it common to have a repunched numeral and repunched letter on the same reverse?

There's no rule about it. If the Mint decided there needed to be some re-punching, it could be just one character, or nearly all of them.