Some idle musings on the F30, 33A & 39A pennies

[1949threepence 3,366]

With regard to the three above mentioned, if, as Gouby suggests, the repairer forgot that the die would be in reverse order to the coin, then how come we don't get specimens where both the 6 over 8 and 8 over 6 are present on the same coin? Especially on the 33A and 39A.

If he forgot that the die would be in reverse order to the coin, then by logical definition, if there is an 8 over 6, there should be a "preceding" 6 over 8.

Gouby also thinks that the reverse order theory explains the 1862, 2 over 1 specimens, as opposed to the re-use of old dies.

OK, I may be talking a load of old cobblers, but I did mention that it was idle musings.    

[secret santa 2,013]

5 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

if there is an 8 over 6, there should be a "preceding" 6 over 8.

Not necessarily - he's gone to repair the 8 with an "8" punch but altered the 6 by mistake. If he'd got it right it would be 8 over 8. There would only be a 6 over 8 if he'd tried to repair the 6 with a "6" punch and repaired the 8 by mistake. Or am I talking cobblers too ?

[1949threepence 3,366]

7 minutes ago, secret santa said:

Not necessarily - he's gone to repair the 8 with an "8" punch but altered the 6 by mistake. If he'd got it right it would be 8 over 8. There would only be a 6 over 8 if he'd tried to repair the 6 with a "6" punch and repaired the 8 by mistake. Or am I talking cobblers too ?

No, in fact you've clarified my thinking. The key is in repairing a single digit, an 8 or a 6, not multiple digits.

Thanks Richard. 

[Rob 2,999]

The important point to remember in my opinion is that it is always assumed that the well punched digit is the intended one, however, it is not guaranteed that the intended correction is punched in greater relief than the original. A clear case of this is the GEOE shilling. Nobody is going to change the final R to an E. I believe that the GEOE was punched in, but the intended correction wasn't deep enough giving the appearance of E/R. This is quite easy to justify if the die has been hardened. I can certainly show an example of a hammered coin where the overmark struggled to reach the same depth using numerous blows and there is no reason to expect a die for the milled coinage to be any different.

If the above is added to the list of permutations of die sinkers' errors and corrections, you are led to conclude that virtually everything is possible. e.g. Sometimes the date starts too far to the left or right, the correction leading to apparent overdates.