why in obverse 6 does the flaw in the last colon FD: persist from 1861 to 1874

[DrLarry]

I posted a question on the design and aesthetic in bronze Victorian pennies which I would like to open  a little.  Obverse 6 is a common obverse in pennies from 1861 to 1874 in fact it is maybe the most common obverse, and so it seems safe to assume the obverse was copied over and over again to accompany a range of reverses.  Yet there is a puzzle that I have mused over for a while and would be grateful for your thoughts.  One of the characteristic ways to identify the obverse is the flaw on the last colon after FD why would the flaw be copied over and over again?  Whilst the flaw is copied I have found a variety of legend alterations and corrections throughout this time span of 14 years of penny manufacture.  To me this is confusing as much as the flaw is small on a tiny part of the design why would it not be corrected ? is it that the Mint did not care about it? Does it really matter?  can it tell us anything about the history of the die?  I know I bore you all with my questions but it seems a little strange and I would be grateful for any reasoning.  Larry  

[terrysoldpennies]

Hi Larry , Though I don't know for sure, the most logical explanation is that a master die number 6 was first made, and the working dies were made from this , now it seem likely the die flaw was on that master so would then have appear on all subsequent dies, and that these working dies would have sometimes been themselves retooled giving further modifications now to be seen on coins from 1861 to 74.

[DrLarry]

ok thanks ..does that mean the master die survives through all the years and dies are cut from it in batch? No they would have had to have been cut from it each year as needed I suppose...sorry I wasn't saying no to your idea I just think out loud and type, I have a rule of leaving "alive" any thoughts LOL. I think I need to understand this die cutting business a bit better, it seems to be a very confusing aspect of my problem.  Although I do not think "the pattern" I see is imposed from the die per se if it did the same pattern would always be in the same place, which is not the case. So it would suggest that the pattern (if it exists at all!!!) is etched in either at the planchet blank stage randomly or imposed upon the rolled flat rods before the planchets are cut through some kind of inking and acid etching /cleaning process.  

I think I am right in that often blanks are cleaned with acid and alkali washes ??? 

[Mr T]

Die production changed over time - I'm not sure what happened in the the 1860s but I assume there was a single master die which was periodically used to produce hubs (I think) which were then used to produce working dies.

In Australia in the 1920s at least working dies were produced in batches of six - I don't know the entire process but I guess it probably made economic sense to produce in batches than as required but I don't know.

[terrysoldpennies]

Gouby suggests that the working dies when damaged sometimes had letters/ numbers filled, and then recut or re-stamped , this would account for the doubling/tripling of letters, also rotating and re-entering of out of positing colons, and if part of the fill subsequently gave way and fell out ,would account for some of digits on the dates being over stamped in a different position, as the punch used was probably placed in a position away from the original cut so as to not weaken the repair.

[Mr T]

Definitely. Possibly working dies were used as master dies too?

[terrysoldpennies]

Its a funny thin but I have bought two, and seen two other 1860 4+d pennies with the Gouby variation Type T. I.e the wide/narrow/ rotated colons after F:D:, all coming from Australia. Its thought that they all originated from the missing colon type . Well I wonder if a batch of colon less 4+d dies were sent to Australia and there having the colons re-entered onto the dies, hence me now seeing so many reappearing back from Aussi. It could also be that this was an error batch of pennies that were sent to Aussi. to cover up the Mints Error ???

[DrLarry]

well exactly that is my issue with it why would you keep making the same flaw.  Looking at where it is and the number of times we lose sections of the inner circle and colons is it possible by removing it you would weaken the die?  Once the reversed hole cut (flaw) is made it is not possible to fill the "hole" the only way would be to grind down the whole section and start again.  what confuses me is why keep cutting the hole/flaw on the die that you make each year surely a flaw would make the die more unstable as it connects to the inner circle.  Well it has always confused me at least these past four years. 

 

•  
• Quote
•  
• Edit

this is from the original posting 

That is interesting were dies sent around the world ?  once the other mints were established and prior to individual country coins I suppose if the mint existed as in Australia it would be a great deal easier to mint the coins at source.  When was the Sydney or melbourne mint established?  I see in the 1870's they are minting Sov's. The Canadian mint issued specific currency was "british" coinage used as currency alongside country specific coinage in later times? 

[DrLarry]

as we have just said all my 67's do not have the flaw in others 62 to 73 the shape and form of the flaw and the colon vary 

[Peckris]

The matrix for the obverse dies could have been used over and over again until 1874, as the obverse didn't change unlike the reverses where a new date numeral required punching for each year.

[terrysoldpennies]

I just found that the die flaw which can be found on many obverse 6 s  is also present on the VIGTORIA penny, so I reason that it must have been present on the master die, and also must then have been passed on to the working die that subsequently found itself having a G re-stamped over a filled or possible damaged C.

[DrLarry]

there in lays another strange thing the C of VICTORIA always seems to have a small piece of metal midway on some samples I have examined the remnant of the G can be clearly seen as scars suggesting naturally that the G was cut away why was the small flaw left to remain as a small metal lump?

[DrLarry]

thank you for showing me your VIGTORIA I have searched in vain for one and it is lovely to see it would you be able to post the reverse image for me I want to be able to see the pattern also the obverse if you do not mind.  That is a special privilege   thanks 

[zookeeperz]

that flaw on the C is almost present on all obv 6's certainly the coins I have all exhibit that flaw 

 

[DrLarry]

5 hours ago, Peckris said:

The matrix for the obverse dies could have been used over and over again until 1874, as the obverse didn't change unlike the reverses where a new date numeral required punching for each year.

yes I agree but that does not explain why there are a number of variant overpunches why do to all the hassle of repunching letters and leave the flaw each time you prepare a new set of dies ....or are you saying that the flaw was not seen and corrected ? if the same die was used as the core why would some have the flaw and others no flaw at all ....if the flaw is the prominent feature that shows us obverse 6 if it is not there is it an obverse 6 if some like the 67 do not seem to show it surely it should be referred to as another die?

[DrLarry]

yes I agree it is always present ....I suppose it's another one where I ask why? 

[Peckris]

21 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

there in lays another strange thing the C of VICTORIA always seems to have a small piece of metal midway on some samples I have examined the remnant of the G can be clearly seen as scars suggesting naturally that the G was cut away why was the small flaw left to remain as a small metal lump?

Probably it was much easier to cut away the matrix die which, like the finished coin, has the details in relief unlike a working die which is incuse. It's always easier to remove by cutting away than by filling in.

[DrLarry]

yes .....

[DrLarry]

I take back that statement about all obverse 6 's have that flaw on the C just looking through my 62's found one that has the colon flaw but no c flaw 

[jelida]

I suspect that one of the ‘C’ punches in use had a little raised spike at its edge giving this mark on any dies prepared or reinforced using it. I doubt it was deliberate.

I am sure the tooth flaw on Obverse 6 was present on the master die, from fairly early in its life preparing working dies. I suspect that in the later ‘60’s a fresh master or masters was produced to the original Obverse 6 design (whether from large scale cast or hub I have no idea) but this effectively removed the flaw from working dies from this master.  Looking for other subtle changes in these ‘no flaw’ Obverse 6’s might be fruitful.

Jerry

[zookeeperz]

your wish is my command but look at this. all these are obverse 6 from 1860-1863 of mine but notice the bottom coin which is from 1860 no die flaw and the colons are different in make up. all obv 6 colons line up with the gap. the bottom coin 1860 no die flaw lines up with the border tooth  

 

[zookeeperz]

[jelida]

Is that the only difference in tooth alignment?  Count the teeth.

Jerry

[zookeeperz]

Jerry if you notice on a lot of the busts although they are all obverse 6 they are not all the same in design. Some are high relief some low relief. The very top picture has the widest rim edges of all which in comparison to the bottom picture where the rim edge is the thinnest. Also position of the bust relative to the toothed border changes as does the teeth. i'll have a count up on the 1860 and see if it differs . Scuppered coin has almost all teeth obscured from 10 to 2 on a clock

 

Edited June 7, 2018 by zookeeperz

[terrysoldpennies]

Its likely that there were more than one master die, and batches of working dies were made and stored, only then to coming back out of the cupboard, as and when required in a hap-hazard order over a long period .