5th Variety of 1931 Penny discovered

[serenitystan]

It isn't so clear at all. If the masters were suffering from spread such that the letters were distorted (curved bases around the rim) then the proof dies would also have the CBL. Now hand finishing could fix minor defects but to overcome the fish tail appearance of dozens of letters would be a big task. And if they were incapable of fixing issues that involve far less work I doubt they could fix the curves. Those examples of issues they couldn't fix were things like chipped numbers such as the 8 on the blobby threepence of '48, poorly positioned numbers such as the dropped 1 penny and the erasure of the trefoil on a number of silver coins.
I'm sure that any number of proof coin owners can give examples of proofs that were less than perfect but suffice to say I can see faults in several pre decimal proofs I own caused by defects on the master and the defects also appear on the circulation strike dies from those masters.  What's the difference between a Unicorn Penny and a Unicorn??? Nothing there both fictional. :yahoo:

[Yurist]

It isn't so clear at all. If the masters were suffering from spread such that the letters were distorted (curved bases around the rim) then the proof dies would also have the CBL. Now hand finishing could fix minor defects but to overcome the fish tail appearance of dozens of letters would be a big task. And if they were incapable of fixing issues that involve far less work I doubt they could fix the curves. Those examples of issues they couldn't fix were things like chipped numbers such as the 8 on the blobby threepence of '48, poorly positioned numbers such as the dropped 1 penny and the erasure of the trefoil on a number of silver coins.
I'm sure that any number of proof coin owners can give examples of proofs that were less than perfect but suffice to say I can see faults in several pre decimal proofs I own caused by defects on the master and the defects also appear on the circulation strike dies from those masters.

Thanks Neal.  You make a fair point.  

On further consideration, I guess it would be difficult to judge whether CBL originated from the actual master dies or from derivative hubs.  However, the Mint Master would have needed to be satisfied that the proof coins were an accurate representation of either one or the other.  In other words, even if CBL was not an intended feature of the master die and was a 'defect' that occurred during hub preparation (due to the inexperience of the Melbourne Mint), such a 'defect' would have been accepted as the design standard that future coin runs were to meet.  Effectively, therefore, the proofs legitimise the 'defect'.   

I think it is important to understand that CBL did not originate during the actual penny striking process per se, but rather in the process of die preparation.  This is well covered by Paul Holland in his article in Vol. 28 of the JNAA.  We see (a) flat based letters that appear on pennies that were probably struck from imported working dies; (b) strong CBL on pennies that were struck from derivative/cloned hubs in the earlier days of the Melbourne Mint; and (c.) slight CBL on GV pennies struck after 1931, indicating that the Mint was getting better at hub production.   

Some points that I cannot, however, fully reconcile with Paul Holland's interpretation of CBL's origins (i.e. the 'channelled flow' theory) is the appearance of CBL on some pennies struck before 1919 - the year that the Melbourne Mint received instructions on working hub/die production.  Specifically, I am referring to certain examples of the 1917 penny that show slight CBL on the reverse.  See attached.  I assume that prior to 1919 the Mint relied exclusively on high quality working dies imported from England and India.  So, was the CBL on some of the 1917 coins an intended design characteristic of the master die - serving as a preview of future design tendencies, or just a lower quality imported working die?  This obviously needs more homework.  

The same can be asked about the cross-bar in the 'A' of AUSTRALIA that curves in the opposite direction to the letter bases in strong CBL reverse pennies.  To me they appear as an intended design characteristic rather than a by-product of hub/die production.  

Finally, one needs to research further the question of why we don't readily see CBL on the obverse of GV pennies.  Were the obverse dies not produced or cloned by the Melbourne Mint in a similar manner to their reverse counterparts?    

The underlying point, however, for the purpose of validating the 5th variety of the 1931 penny (i.e. the 'Unicorn Penny') is that the strong CBL featured on its reverse was either an originally intended or a subsequently accepted design feature, just as it was for the 1929, 1930 and other pennies of that period.  

It is, therefore, clear that John Dean was sighting the Unicorn Penny (P31D) in his 1965 catalogue - not the benchmark 1931 dropped 1 Indian die penny, which contains decidedly straight based letters on its reverse.  To further cement this point, both the Unicorn Penny and the benchmark penny contain a host of distinguishing characteristics that  confirm that they were struck from distinctly different dies.  

I am currently updating my online article on the 5th variety of the 1931 penny and will shortly republish a revised version containing the above points and more.  Stay tuned to https://sites.google.com/view/1931dropped1indianpennyvariety/home

[Yurist]

It isn't so clear at all. If the masters were suffering from spread such that the letters were distorted (curved bases around the rim) then the proof dies would also have the CBL. Now hand finishing could fix minor defects but to overcome the fish tail appearance of dozens of letters would be a big task. And if they were incapable of fixing issues that involve far less work I doubt they could fix the curves. Those examples of issues they couldn't fix were things like chipped numbers such as the 8 on the blobby threepence of '48, poorly positioned numbers such as the dropped 1 penny and the erasure of the trefoil on a number of silver coins.
I'm sure that any number of proof coin owners can give examples of proofs that were less than perfect but suffice to say I can see faults in several pre decimal proofs I own caused by defects on the master and the defects also appear on the circulation strike dies from those masters. 
What's the difference between a Unicorn Penny and a Unicorn??? Nothing there both fictional. :yahoo:

Clearly, just as fictional as your considered and well substantiated comment. :shok:

[fred lever]

To private messages and yurist, i'll get to an archive computer this after noon and email the 1931 pdf's.
Fred.

[nealeffendi]

It isn't so clear at all. If the masters were suffering from spread such that the letters were distorted (curved bases around the rim) then the proof dies would also have the CBL. Now hand finishing could fix minor defects but to overcome the fish tail appearance of dozens of letters would be a big task. And if they were incapable of fixing issues that involve far less work I doubt they could fix the curves. Those examples of issues they couldn't fix were things like chipped numbers such as the 8 on the blobby threepence of '48, poorly positioned numbers such as the dropped 1 penny and the erasure of the trefoil on a number of silver coins.
I'm sure that any number of proof coin owners can give examples of proofs that were less than perfect but suffice to say I can see faults in several pre decimal proofs I own caused by defects on the master and the defects also appear on the circulation strike dies from those masters. 
What's the difference between a Unicorn Penny and a Unicorn??? Nothing there both fictional. :yahoo:

Clearly, just as fictional as your considered and well substantiated comment. :shok:

Yurists spotting the CBL on the 1917 penny is another Doh! moment by me. After looking at thousands of 1917 pennies over the years I've never noticed the CBL or thought about it until now as I've concentrated on the obverse.

[Yurist]

To private messages and yurist, i'll get to an archive computer this after noon and email the 1931 pdf's.
Fred.

Thank you Fred.  Much appreciated!

[serenitystan]

It isn't so clear at all. If the masters were suffering from spread such that the letters were distorted (curved bases around the rim) then the proof dies would also have the CBL. Now hand finishing could fix minor defects but to overcome the fish tail appearance of dozens of letters would be a big task. And if they were incapable of fixing issues that involve far less work I doubt they could fix the curves. Those examples of issues they couldn't fix were things like chipped numbers such as the 8 on the blobby threepence of '48, poorly positioned numbers such as the dropped 1 penny and the erasure of the trefoil on a number of silver coins.
I'm sure that any number of proof coin owners can give examples of proofs that were less than perfect but suffice to say I can see faults in several pre decimal proofs I own caused by defects on the master and the defects also appear on the circulation strike dies from those masters. 
What's the difference between a Unicorn Penny and a Unicorn??? Nothing there both fictional. :yahoo: Fair enough!!. But do expect me to believe that the Mint would take the time effort + expense to commission engravers + engineers to make the Unicorn Master, only to knock out a couple of hundred coins!!!. HUMBUG...

Clearly, just as fictional as your considered and well substantiated comment. :shok:

[nealeffendi]

I should add that both Dean (1965) and Saxton listed the 1917 penny as FBL, so is the 1917 CBL shown by Yurist also a unicorn penny? Seems that no "facts" are definite when people like Yurist can show unicorns might exist by displaying them for us to ponder and dissect.

[Yurist]

Neal, no need to shoot the messenger.  I'm not the source of the posted image.  It's been available in the public domain for many years.  

https://www.allcoinvalues.com/australian-coins-and-notes/1917-australian-penny-value.html

[Yurist]

But these CBL 1917 pennies are not hard to find.  Here is one that's currently listed on eBay.  

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AUSTRALIA-1917-PENNY-COIN-DECEASED-ESTATE-FIND/193005299058?hash=item2cf0032572:g:c18AAOSwpkddNDEu

[serenitystan]

But these CBL 1917 pennies are not hard to find.  Here is one that's currently listed on eBay.  

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AUSTRALIA-1917-PENNY-COIN-DECEASED-ESTATE-FIND/193005299058?hash=item2cf0032572:g:c18AAOSwpkddNDEu

Good luck + all the best in your search for the Holy Grail..Always look on the bright side of like..whistle whistle whistle... :thank_you:

[nealeffendi]

Neal, no need to shoot the messenger.  I'm not the source of the posted image.  It's been available in the public domain for many years.  

https://www.allcoinvalues.com/australian-coins-and-notes/1917-australian-penny-value.html

:huh: Not shooting the messenger but praising him. Dean missed it, Saxton missed it, I missed it. How the 1917 CBL was overlooked for so long is just perplexing.

[Basil]

Pennyman had this Coin listed on Ebay for A$68,000,hhhhhhmmmmm,by the tone of the words(including 'Unicorn') in the listing he's been reading/posting on this forum. Its shows in Ebay's completed listings with no bids.  

[serenitystan]

Pennyman had this Coin listed on Ebay for A$68,000,hhhhhhmmmmm,by the tone of the words(including 'Unicorn') in the listing he's been reading/posting on this forum. Its shows in Ebay's completed listings with no bids.  
"Faaaarrk"" $65,000.00..Trust this bloke to try an weasel that amount from some poor soul..Feedback score-96.2 for only 211 items sold...HaHaHa what a joke this bloke is.. :yahoo: :yahoo:

[Mister T]

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/The-Unicorn-Penny-Australian-1931-Dropped-1-Indian-Obverse-Penny/192995072858?hash=item2cef671b5a:g:3UsAAOSwxOFdK8To