Embedded Files
5th Variety of the 1931 Australian Penny
Based on an article by Yuri Rapoport published in the Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia (Vol 29)
https://numismatics.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/naa-journal-vol-29-rapoport.pdf
Introduction
Introduction
Following many years of discussion, numismatists have so far acknowledged the existence of only four varieties of the 1931 penny.1 Indeed, given the small number of rare varieties recorded to date, any reported peculiarities that pointed to the existence of a fifth variety have been difficult to validate. This paper examines the key physical attributes of the 1931 penny and draws upon new as well as previously overlooked evidence to suggest that a fifth variety should be considered.
Following many years of discussion, numismatists have so far acknowledged the existence of only four varieties of the 1931 penny.1 Indeed, given the small number of rare varieties recorded to date, any reported peculiarities that pointed to the existence of a fifth variety have been difficult to validate. This paper examines the key physical attributes of the 1931 penny and draws upon new as well as previously overlooked evidence to suggest that a fifth variety should be considered.
Known 1931 Penny Varieties
Known 1931 Penny Varieties
Due to the onset of the Great Depression, the Commonwealth Government issued no orders for pennies in 1930.2 As a result, the Melbourne Mint saw a substantial drop in coin production, leaving staff with considerable time to focus on improving coin manufacturing processes.3 Accordingly, throughout 1930 and up to the end of July 1931, the Melbourne Mint carried out practical experiments with the aim of extending the life of dies. It undertook numerous controlled tests using different dies and steels to strike a number of 1930 and 1931 pennies.4
Due to the onset of the Great Depression, the Commonwealth Government issued no orders for pennies in 1930.2 As a result, the Melbourne Mint saw a substantial drop in coin production, leaving staff with considerable time to focus on improving coin manufacturing processes.3 Accordingly, throughout 1930 and up to the end of July 1931, the Melbourne Mint carried out practical experiments with the aim of extending the life of dies. It undertook numerous controlled tests using different dies and steels to strike a number of 1930 and 1931 pennies.4
Official production of the 1931 penny commenced in August 1931, with a currently recognised total of four die pairing combinations, yielding four different penny varieties.5 By convention, the relevant die pairings are referred to as 1+A, 2+A, 1+B and 2+B, where 1 = English obverse, 2 = Indian obverse, A = London reverse, and B = Birmingham reverse. Chronologically, the first die pairing of the 1931 penny to be minted was 2+B, which was followed in sequential order by 1+A, 2+A and 1+B (Figures 1 to 4).
Official production of the 1931 penny commenced in August 1931, with a currently recognised total of four die pairing combinations, yielding four different penny varieties.5 By convention, the relevant die pairings are referred to as 1+A, 2+A, 1+B and 2+B, where 1 = English obverse, 2 = Indian obverse, A = London reverse, and B = Birmingham reverse. Chronologically, the first die pairing of the 1931 penny to be minted was 2+B, which was followed in sequential order by 1+A, 2+A and 1+B (Figures 1 to 4).
According to W. J. Mullet (a senior officer at the Melbourne Mint), the first variety of the 1931 penny was struck with the same Indian obverse die as the vast majority of the 1930 pennies (die number A2B10), and some 46,000 of these 1931 pennies were produced.6 About a month later, the second variety of the 1931 penny was struck. It is estimated that between 279,000 and 393,000 of these coins were minted.7 Prior to an estimated 481,000 of the fourth variety of the 1931 penny being struck (between September 1931 and July 1932), a brief ‘nil’ run of less than 1000 coins of the third variety was struck on 11th September 1931.
According to W. J. Mullet (a senior officer at the Melbourne Mint), the first variety of the 1931 penny was struck with the same Indian obverse die as the vast majority of the 1930 pennies (die number A2B10), and some 46,000 of these 1931 pennies were produced.6 About a month later, the second variety of the 1931 penny was struck. It is estimated that between 279,000 and 393,000 of these coins were minted.7 Prior to an estimated 481,000 of the fourth variety of the 1931 penny being struck (between September 1931 and July 1932), a brief ‘nil’ run of less than 1000 coins of the third variety was struck on 11th September 1931.
It was not until the 1960s that the extremely rare third variety (i.e. 2+A die pairing) of the 1931 penny, otherwise known as the “1931 dropped 1 Indian obverse” (1931D1.Ind.Obv.), was properly identified. While Deacon initially assumed that the coin was related to the already famous 1930 penny,8 it was soon established that the two coins had neither their obverse nor reverse sides in common. Yet, despite having no link to the 1930 penny, the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny went on to become a benchmark variety and one of the most sought-after coins amongst serious Australian penny collectors.
It was not until the 1960s that the extremely rare third variety (i.e. 2+A die pairing) of the 1931 penny, otherwise known as the “1931 dropped 1 Indian obverse” (1931D1.Ind.Obv.), was properly identified. While Deacon initially assumed that the coin was related to the already famous 1930 penny,8 it was soon established that the two coins had neither their obverse nor reverse sides in common. Yet, despite having no link to the 1930 penny, the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny went on to become a benchmark variety and one of the most sought-after coins amongst serious Australian penny collectors.
The Fifth 1931 Penny Variety
The Fifth 1931 Penny Variety
When Dean compiled his 1965 catalogue of Australian coin varieties, he too identified only four varieties of the 1931 penny.9 He labelled the varieties and made notations next to each of the labels (Table 1).
When Dean compiled his 1965 catalogue of Australian coin varieties, he too identified only four varieties of the 1931 penny.9 He labelled the varieties and made notations next to each of the labels (Table 1).
Upon reconciling Dean’s notations with conventional die pairing combinations for the 1931 penny varieties,10 one is likely to arrive at the results set out in Table 2.
Upon reconciling Dean’s notations with conventional die pairing combinations for the 1931 penny varieties,10 one is likely to arrive at the results set out in Table 2.
However, a comparison of the 2+A penny with Dean’s description of the P31D variety reveals a significant discrepancy. Whereas the 2+A penny features a reverse with flat-base letters, Dean notes curved-base letters on the reverse of the P31D variety.11 It appears that from the 1960s onwards, collectors searching for examples of the P31D variety were able to locate only a very small number of 1931 pennies containing a dropped 1 and an Indian obverse. These were mainly examples of the 2+A pennies. Ostensibly, finding these coins was so difficult (with only about fifty identified to date),12that refining the search further in light of Dean’s curved-base letter notation may have been conveniently avoided.
However, a comparison of the 2+A penny with Dean’s description of the P31D variety reveals a significant discrepancy. Whereas the 2+A penny features a reverse with flat-base letters, Dean notes curved-base letters on the reverse of the P31D variety.11 It appears that from the 1960s onwards, collectors searching for examples of the P31D variety were able to locate only a very small number of 1931 pennies containing a dropped 1 and an Indian obverse. These were mainly examples of the 2+A pennies. Ostensibly, finding these coins was so difficult (with only about fifty identified to date),12that refining the search further in light of Dean’s curved-base letter notation may have been conveniently avoided.
Over the course of some fifty plus years following Dean’s publication, the ‘flat-base’ letter reverse seen on the 2+A penny went on to become a benchmark feature of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. coin, while Dean’s P31D variety with curved-base letter reverse (of which only six were recorded), fell into obscurity. However, the author can now draw upon evidence sourced from a number of coin collections across Australia that points to the reliability of Dean’s notations. The evidence appears to confirm the existence of the P31D variety, containing a number of distinguishable characteristics including a reverse legend with curved-base letters.
Over the course of some fifty plus years following Dean’s publication, the ‘flat-base’ letter reverse seen on the 2+A penny went on to become a benchmark feature of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. coin, while Dean’s P31D variety with curved-base letter reverse (of which only six were recorded), fell into obscurity. However, the author can now draw upon evidence sourced from a number of coin collections across Australia that points to the reliability of Dean’s notations. The evidence appears to confirm the existence of the P31D variety, containing a number of distinguishable characteristics including a reverse legend with curved-base letters.
A comprehensive table of the 1931 penny varieties is now proposed (Table 3), noting that a distinct London reverse die (A*) must have been used in producing the P31D variety.
A comprehensive table of the 1931 penny varieties is now proposed (Table 3), noting that a distinct London reverse die (A*) must have been used in producing the P31D variety.
The 'Unicorn' Penny
The 'Unicorn' Penny
Since the P31D variety has been so rarely seen, and its origins are somewhat mysterious, collectors have dubbed it the "Unicorn Penny" (Figure 5). While the Unicorn Penny displays similar characteristic to its extremely rare cousin – the benchmark 1931 D1.Ind. Obv. penny, other features point to it being a unique variety with a likely connection to the glamorous 1930 penny. Accordingly, with only eight confirmed Unicorn Pennies recorded by the author to date, they may hold a place among some of Australia’s rarest coins.
Since the P31D variety has been so rarely seen, and its origins are somewhat mysterious, collectors have dubbed it the "Unicorn Penny" (Figure 5). While the Unicorn Penny displays similar characteristic to its extremely rare cousin – the benchmark 1931 D1.Ind. Obv. penny, other features point to it being a unique variety with a likely connection to the glamorous 1930 penny. Accordingly, with only eight confirmed Unicorn Pennies recorded by the author to date, they may hold a place among some of Australia’s rarest coins.
Figure 5. The Unicorn Penny obverse and reverse.
Key Characteristics
Key Characteristics
The following overview compares the Unicorn Penny’s characteristics with those of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny, as well as other pennies minted around the same period.
The following overview compares the Unicorn Penny’s characteristics with those of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny, as well as other pennies minted around the same period.
Obverse and Reverse Dies
Obverse and Reverse Dies
The Unicorn Penny, like the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny, features an Indian obverse with 178 denticles and a London reverse with 174 denticles. Figure 6 shows the alignment of denticles and letters on both the obverse and reverse sides that are characteristic of the Indian and London die patterns, respectively.
The Unicorn Penny, like the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny, features an Indian obverse with 178 denticles and a London reverse with 174 denticles. Figure 6 shows the alignment of denticles and letters on both the obverse and reverse sides that are characteristic of the Indian and London die patterns, respectively.
Dropped 1
Dropped 1
A key feature that the Unicorn Penny shares with the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny is the dropped ‘1’ in the date (Figure 7).
A key feature that the Unicorn Penny shares with the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny is the dropped ‘1’ in the date (Figure 7).
Pointy Nose in Dropped 1
Pointy Nose in Dropped 1
Another distinguishing characteristic that the Unicorn Penny shares with the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny is the distinctly pointy nose on the dropped ‘1’, compared with the blunt nose numeral ‘1’ on the left side of the date (Figure 8).
Another distinguishing characteristic that the Unicorn Penny shares with the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny is the distinctly pointy nose on the dropped ‘1’, compared with the blunt nose numeral ‘1’ on the left side of the date (Figure 8).
From the observations above, it is clear how the Unicorn Penny and the 1931 D1.Ind. Obv. penny could have been easily confused with one another. Both pennies contain an Indian obverse, a London reverse and a dropped ‘1’ in the date. However, there are a number of distinguishing characteristics found in the Unicorn Penny that are not present in the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny.
From the observations above, it is clear how the Unicorn Penny and the 1931 D1.Ind. Obv. penny could have been easily confused with one another. Both pennies contain an Indian obverse, a London reverse and a dropped ‘1’ in the date. However, there are a number of distinguishing characteristics found in the Unicorn Penny that are not present in the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny.
Upright Dropped 1
Upright Dropped 1
An examination of the dropped ‘1’ in the date reveals that it is more upright than the counterpart numeral in the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny (Figures 9 and 10).
An examination of the dropped ‘1’ in the date reveals that it is more upright than the counterpart numeral in the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny (Figures 9 and 10).
Different 9s and Date Characteristics
Different 9s and Date Characteristics
Another feature that distinguishes the Unicorn Penny reverse from the reverse of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny is the different numeral ‘9’ in the date. The latter (Figure 11) shows the ‘9’ with a distinctly broader top, resulting in a smaller void in the centre of the numeral, whereas the void in the ‘9’ of the Unicorn Penny is slightly larger due to the narrowing at the top of the numeral.
Another feature that distinguishes the Unicorn Penny reverse from the reverse of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny is the different numeral ‘9’ in the date. The latter (Figure 11) shows the ‘9’ with a distinctly broader top, resulting in a smaller void in the centre of the numeral, whereas the void in the ‘9’ of the Unicorn Penny is slightly larger due to the narrowing at the top of the numeral.
Interestingly, the ‘9’ in the Unicorn Penny is very similar to the counterpart ‘9’ in the 1929 Indian obverse penny, which incidentally, bears a close resemblance to the ‘9’ that appears in both varieties of the 1930 penny (i.e. the English obverse and Indian obverse pennies). However, upon closer examination (Figures 12 to 15), the Unicorn Penny date characteristics appear to be entirely unique and distinctly different from those of the 1929 Indian obverse penny, the 1930 penny varieties and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny. Unlike the blunt nose of the leftmost numeral ‘1’ in the date of the Unicorn Penny, the counterpart numeral ‘1’ in the dates of the 1929 and 1930 pennies has a pointy nose. Also, the spacing between the numerals ‘1’ and ‘9’ is slightly larger in the 1929 and 1930 pennies than in both the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny and the Unicorn Penny.
Interestingly, the ‘9’ in the Unicorn Penny is very similar to the counterpart ‘9’ in the 1929 Indian obverse penny, which incidentally, bears a close resemblance to the ‘9’ that appears in both varieties of the 1930 penny (i.e. the English obverse and Indian obverse pennies). However, upon closer examination (Figures 12 to 15), the Unicorn Penny date characteristics appear to be entirely unique and distinctly different from those of the 1929 Indian obverse penny, the 1930 penny varieties and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny. Unlike the blunt nose of the leftmost numeral ‘1’ in the date of the Unicorn Penny, the counterpart numeral ‘1’ in the dates of the 1929 and 1930 pennies has a pointy nose. Also, the spacing between the numerals ‘1’ and ‘9’ is slightly larger in the 1929 and 1930 pennies than in both the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny and the Unicorn Penny.
Furthermore, the Unicorn Penny does not contain the denticle die fault above the word ‘OF’ as noted by Bloom.13 Accordingly, the above observations suggest that the Unicorn Penny’s London reverse was most likely derived from a unique master die.
Furthermore, the Unicorn Penny does not contain the denticle die fault above the word ‘OF’ as noted by Bloom.13 Accordingly, the above observations suggest that the Unicorn Penny’s London reverse was most likely derived from a unique master die.
Reverse with Curlicue Lettering
Reverse with Curlicue Lettering
Figure 16 shows the London reverse of the Unicorn Penny with strong curvature at the base of each letter, and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny London reverse with decidedly flat- base letters.
Figure 16 shows the London reverse of the Unicorn Penny with strong curvature at the base of each letter, and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny London reverse with decidedly flat- base letters.
Interestingly, the extent of curvature in the lettering of the Unicorn Penny appears to be somewhat more pronounced compared with other George V pennies that also feature London reverses with strongly pronounced curved-base letters (Figure 17).
Interestingly, the extent of curvature in the lettering of the Unicorn Penny appears to be somewhat more pronounced compared with other George V pennies that also feature London reverses with strongly pronounced curved-base letters (Figure 17).
1924 (I)
1925
1926
1927
1927 (I)
1928
1929
1929 (I)
1930
1930 (I)
A further peculiarity of the Unicorn Penny is the curvature on some of the cross bars of the letters ‘A’ in ‘AUSTRALIA’, although these appear to be curved in the opposite direction to the letter bases (i.e. vertically inverted). While this observation may suggest that curlicue lettering was an intended feature of some penny reverse designs, Holland postulates that the curved-base letters were formed due to a process of ‘channelled flow’ of the softened die steel when striking derivative hubs.14 The process involves the formation of a low- pressure eddy in the wake of the striking process that takes place without a constraining collar, resulting in a ‘hollow’ at the base of the letter known as ‘fish-tailing’.
A further peculiarity of the Unicorn Penny is the curvature on some of the cross bars of the letters ‘A’ in ‘AUSTRALIA’, although these appear to be curved in the opposite direction to the letter bases (i.e. vertically inverted). While this observation may suggest that curlicue lettering was an intended feature of some penny reverse designs, Holland postulates that the curved-base letters were formed due to a process of ‘channelled flow’ of the softened die steel when striking derivative hubs.14 The process involves the formation of a low- pressure eddy in the wake of the striking process that takes place without a constraining collar, resulting in a ‘hollow’ at the base of the letter known as ‘fish-tailing’.
Holland explains that flat-based letters on penny reverses were mainly observed up to 1919, as the dies used in striking these pennies were derived from high quality hubs imported from England and/or India.15 Further, the ‘strong’ curved-based letters that appear on pennies struck from derivative/cloned hubs in the earlier days of die manufacture at the Melbourne Mint (from 1919 to 1931) reflect the inexperience of the Mint workers. A significant reduction in the extent of letter base curvature on pennies struck after 1932 indicates that the Mint’s die-producing techniques were markedly improving.
Holland explains that flat-based letters on penny reverses were mainly observed up to 1919, as the dies used in striking these pennies were derived from high quality hubs imported from England and/or India.15 Further, the ‘strong’ curved-based letters that appear on pennies struck from derivative/cloned hubs in the earlier days of die manufacture at the Melbourne Mint (from 1919 to 1931) reflect the inexperience of the Mint workers. A significant reduction in the extent of letter base curvature on pennies struck after 1932 indicates that the Mint’s die-producing techniques were markedly improving.
While Holland’s explanation is compelling, it requires further reconciliation with certain attributes such as the previously mentioned inverse curvatures on the cross bars of the letters ‘A’ in ‘AUSTRALIA’. Similarly, the strong curved-base letters seen on some well-documented reverses of the 1930 specimen pennies (Figure 18) require further consideration. Specimen coins are normally inspected by the Mint Master to ensure that a high-integrity representation of the master die is achieved. Therefore, if curved-base lettering was a long-standing and constant characteristic of die manufacture at the Melbourne Mint, then arguably the 1930 specimen coins may provide evidence of the ‘fish-tailing’ defect being legitimised by the Mint as an accepted curlicue lettering style.
While Holland’s explanation is compelling, it requires further reconciliation with certain attributes such as the previously mentioned inverse curvatures on the cross bars of the letters ‘A’ in ‘AUSTRALIA’. Similarly, the strong curved-base letters seen on some well-documented reverses of the 1930 specimen pennies (Figure 18) require further consideration. Specimen coins are normally inspected by the Mint Master to ensure that a high-integrity representation of the master die is achieved. Therefore, if curved-base lettering was a long-standing and constant characteristic of die manufacture at the Melbourne Mint, then arguably the 1930 specimen coins may provide evidence of the ‘fish-tailing’ defect being legitimised by the Mint as an accepted curlicue lettering style.
However, for the purposes of validating the Unicorn Penny as a distinct variety, it matters little whether the Mint accepted curved-base lettering as a design feature. The salient point to be gleaned from the available evidence is that the Unicorn Penny was struck with a uniquely prepared reverse die.
However, for the purposes of validating the Unicorn Penny as a distinct variety, it matters little whether the Mint accepted curved-base lettering as a design feature. The salient point to be gleaned from the available evidence is that the Unicorn Penny was struck with a uniquely prepared reverse die.
Common Obverse with 1930 Penny
Common Obverse with 1930 Penny
The obverse die used in the production of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny was recorded as die number A2B16-107.16 This die contained a distinguishing fault in the form of a dot after the ‘S’ in ‘GEORGIVS’ (Figure 19). While there is evidence showing that this die was also used to strike a small number of 1930 pennies,17 the substantial majority of 1930 pennies were struck with the Indian die number A2B10, which did not feature the ‘S dot’ fault. The only other known penny that was struck using the A2B10 die during the 1930-31 production period was the first variety of the 1931 penny (i.e. Indian obverse, Birmingham reverse, aligned ‘1’).18 Given that the Unicorn Penny was also struck in the 1930-1931 production-period with an Indian obverse die that did not feature the ‘S dot’ fault, it is highly likely that it too was struck with die number A2B10 and shares its obverse with the 1930 penny.
The obverse die used in the production of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny was recorded as die number A2B16-107.16 This die contained a distinguishing fault in the form of a dot after the ‘S’ in ‘GEORGIVS’ (Figure 19). While there is evidence showing that this die was also used to strike a small number of 1930 pennies,17 the substantial majority of 1930 pennies were struck with the Indian die number A2B10, which did not feature the ‘S dot’ fault. The only other known penny that was struck using the A2B10 die during the 1930-31 production period was the first variety of the 1931 penny (i.e. Indian obverse, Birmingham reverse, aligned ‘1’).18 Given that the Unicorn Penny was also struck in the 1930-1931 production-period with an Indian obverse die that did not feature the ‘S dot’ fault, it is highly likely that it too was struck with die number A2B10 and shares its obverse with the 1930 penny.
Further evidence supporting a link between the Unicorn Penny and the 1930 penny obverses is the distinctly larger fourth pearl on the leading edge of the crown (Figure 20). This feature can be contrasted against the smaller fourth pearl that regularly appeared in pennies up to 1921.19 The larger fourth pearl also appears in the 1929 Indian obverse penny, which evidences the first use of an Indian obverse master die sent directly from London to Melbourne in 1922.20 The same die was later used in the production of the 1930 Indian obverse penny.21
Further evidence supporting a link between the Unicorn Penny and the 1930 penny obverses is the distinctly larger fourth pearl on the leading edge of the crown (Figure 20). This feature can be contrasted against the smaller fourth pearl that regularly appeared in pennies up to 1921.19 The larger fourth pearl also appears in the 1929 Indian obverse penny, which evidences the first use of an Indian obverse master die sent directly from London to Melbourne in 1922.20 The same die was later used in the production of the 1930 Indian obverse penny.21
Likely Origins
Likely Origins
While there are clear indications as to the likely origins of the Unicorn Penny’s obverse die, the origins of the reverse die are somewhat more elusive. A clue, however, may lie in some of Mullet’s notes, among which there is a report of a new penny master reverse die dated ‘193_’ that was sent from London and received at the Melbourne Mint on 18 March 1931.22 This was a different die from the punch received on 7 November 1930, which was used in the production of the second variety of the 1931 penny (English obverse + dropped 1).23
While there are clear indications as to the likely origins of the Unicorn Penny’s obverse die, the origins of the reverse die are somewhat more elusive. A clue, however, may lie in some of Mullet’s notes, among which there is a report of a new penny master reverse die dated ‘193_’ that was sent from London and received at the Melbourne Mint on 18 March 1931.22 This was a different die from the punch received on 7 November 1930, which was used in the production of the second variety of the 1931 penny (English obverse + dropped 1).23
Records show that the March 1931 master die was used to produce six reverse working dies on 17 August 1931.24 While Mullet argues that this notation was made in error, Holland submits that the original entry in the Melbourne Mint records is in fact correct.25 Holland makes a general inference that this new master die probably featured a Birmingham reverse and was of the ‘aligned date’ type. However, there appears to be no evidence to support this. If one resorts to conjecture, it is equally possible that the March 1931 master die was actually a London reverse die. Furthermore, given that the March 1931 master die was of the ‘193_’ type, it is likely that at least one of the six derivative dies was used in sample runs to yield a small number of additional varieties of the 1931 penny. It is not inconceivable that in the experimental rush to produce this penny, these sample coins could have had the ‘1’ inserted imperfectly (as seen in all of the 1931 ‘dropped 1’ penny varieties), resulting in an almost identical looking date arrangement to the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny, albeit with a dropped ‘1’ that is slightly more upright.
Records show that the March 1931 master die was used to produce six reverse working dies on 17 August 1931.24 While Mullet argues that this notation was made in error, Holland submits that the original entry in the Melbourne Mint records is in fact correct.25 Holland makes a general inference that this new master die probably featured a Birmingham reverse and was of the ‘aligned date’ type. However, there appears to be no evidence to support this. If one resorts to conjecture, it is equally possible that the March 1931 master die was actually a London reverse die. Furthermore, given that the March 1931 master die was of the ‘193_’ type, it is likely that at least one of the six derivative dies was used in sample runs to yield a small number of additional varieties of the 1931 penny. It is not inconceivable that in the experimental rush to produce this penny, these sample coins could have had the ‘1’ inserted imperfectly (as seen in all of the 1931 ‘dropped 1’ penny varieties), resulting in an almost identical looking date arrangement to the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny, albeit with a dropped ‘1’ that is slightly more upright.
The above suggests that the March 1931 master die could well be linked with the production of the Unicorn Penny. Exactly how many sample coins were struck using the dies derived from the March 1931 master die is unknown, however, the author notes only eight confirmed Unicorn Pennies recorded to date. A possible explanation for the low sample run of the Unicorn Penny is that the curved-base letters found on the working dies prepared from the March 1931 master die were at odds with the desired look (i.e. the flat-base letters) featured in the November 1930 punch (Figure 21). In fact, it is likely that the Melbourne Mint failed in its attempts to emulate the integrity and quality of lettering contained in the November 1930 punch, resulting in the production of a working die with strongly pronounced curved-base letters. It is clear from the reverses of pennies dated 1933 to 1936 that the Melbourne Mint was improving hub production techniques to achieve coins that featured flat-based letters. Therefore, it stands to reason that the strong curved-base letters seen on the Unicorn Penny’s reverse would have been inconsistent with the Mint’s standards for penny production in 1931, supporting the notion that only a handful of sample Unicorn Pennies was struck.
The above suggests that the March 1931 master die could well be linked with the production of the Unicorn Penny. Exactly how many sample coins were struck using the dies derived from the March 1931 master die is unknown, however, the author notes only eight confirmed Unicorn Pennies recorded to date. A possible explanation for the low sample run of the Unicorn Penny is that the curved-base letters found on the working dies prepared from the March 1931 master die were at odds with the desired look (i.e. the flat-base letters) featured in the November 1930 punch (Figure 21). In fact, it is likely that the Melbourne Mint failed in its attempts to emulate the integrity and quality of lettering contained in the November 1930 punch, resulting in the production of a working die with strongly pronounced curved-base letters. It is clear from the reverses of pennies dated 1933 to 1936 that the Melbourne Mint was improving hub production techniques to achieve coins that featured flat-based letters. Therefore, it stands to reason that the strong curved-base letters seen on the Unicorn Penny’s reverse would have been inconsistent with the Mint’s standards for penny production in 1931, supporting the notion that only a handful of sample Unicorn Pennies was struck.
Authenticity
Authenticity
Some experts may raise questions over the authenticity of coins like the Unicorn Penny.26 Their initial caution may well be justified given that rare and valuable coins are readily reproduced using a variety of methods and modern technologies. In considering whether the Unicorn Penny is a reproduction, one must first ask which coin did it intend to emulate. In terms of value, clearly the only relatively well-known 1931 penny worth reproducing is the extremely rare 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. variety. Given that both the Unicorn Penny and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. pennies feature an Indian obverse, London reverse and dropped ‘1’, there appears to be some merit to the hypothesis that the Unicorn Penny may have been created as a copy of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. variety. However, upon examining the techniques used in coin reproduction, it becomes apparent that such a hypothesis cannot stand. Coins can be reproduced in numerous different ways, including casting, laser engraving, electrotyping, die transfers and spark erosion. All of these methods rely on the availability of either an original coin or a high-definition image (e.g. a 3D scan) as a source. Given that there are too many design inconsistencies between the Unicorn Penny and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. (i.e. different ‘9s’ in the date, different tilt angles of the dropped ‘1’, curved-base instead of flat-base letters on the reverse legend, and two die faults on the obverse), the Unicorn Penny is clearly not derived from any accurate image source of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny.
Some experts may raise questions over the authenticity of coins like the Unicorn Penny.26 Their initial caution may well be justified given that rare and valuable coins are readily reproduced using a variety of methods and modern technologies. In considering whether the Unicorn Penny is a reproduction, one must first ask which coin did it intend to emulate. In terms of value, clearly the only relatively well-known 1931 penny worth reproducing is the extremely rare 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. variety. Given that both the Unicorn Penny and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. pennies feature an Indian obverse, London reverse and dropped ‘1’, there appears to be some merit to the hypothesis that the Unicorn Penny may have been created as a copy of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. variety. However, upon examining the techniques used in coin reproduction, it becomes apparent that such a hypothesis cannot stand. Coins can be reproduced in numerous different ways, including casting, laser engraving, electrotyping, die transfers and spark erosion. All of these methods rely on the availability of either an original coin or a high-definition image (e.g. a 3D scan) as a source. Given that there are too many design inconsistencies between the Unicorn Penny and the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. (i.e. different ‘9s’ in the date, different tilt angles of the dropped ‘1’, curved-base instead of flat-base letters on the reverse legend, and two die faults on the obverse), the Unicorn Penny is clearly not derived from any accurate image source of the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny.
One must also consider the possibility that the Unicorn Penny is an altered coin intended to look like the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny. The simplest way to distinguish an altered coin is to identify the donor coin. However, in the case of the Unicorn Penny, no George V penny qualifies as an obvious example of this. Looking for possible candidates, there are four George V pennies which, like the Unicorn Penny, contain an Indian obverse and a London reverse with curved-base letters. These are the 1924, 1927, 1929 and 1930 pennies. We can immediately exclude the 1930 penny, as it is unlikely that someone would sacrifice it to create a 1931 penny. We can also exclude the 1929 penny given the distinctly different date characteristics compared with the Unicorn Penny. The 1924 and the 1927 pennies can also be excluded on the basis that the curved-base letters on their reverse legends are significantly less pronounced than those found in the Unicorn Penny. Furthermore, the leading edges of the crown on both the 1924 and 1927 obverses do not contain an enlarged fourth pearl.
One must also consider the possibility that the Unicorn Penny is an altered coin intended to look like the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny. The simplest way to distinguish an altered coin is to identify the donor coin. However, in the case of the Unicorn Penny, no George V penny qualifies as an obvious example of this. Looking for possible candidates, there are four George V pennies which, like the Unicorn Penny, contain an Indian obverse and a London reverse with curved-base letters. These are the 1924, 1927, 1929 and 1930 pennies. We can immediately exclude the 1930 penny, as it is unlikely that someone would sacrifice it to create a 1931 penny. We can also exclude the 1929 penny given the distinctly different date characteristics compared with the Unicorn Penny. The 1924 and the 1927 pennies can also be excluded on the basis that the curved-base letters on their reverse legends are significantly less pronounced than those found in the Unicorn Penny. Furthermore, the leading edges of the crown on both the 1924 and 1927 obverses do not contain an enlarged fourth pearl.
It is possible, although highly unlikely, that someone went to the enormous trouble of altering almost every letter on the reverse side of the 1924 or 1927 penny to make the curved-base letters more pronounced, and then combined that reverse with the obverse from the 1929 penny to create a cast of the Unicorn Penny. This explanation defies logic in light of the original hypothesis that the Unicorn Penny was intended to emulate the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny – a coin with a reverse that contains flat-base letters. Accordingly, there is no evidence that convincingly points to the Unicorn Penny being a reproduction.
It is possible, although highly unlikely, that someone went to the enormous trouble of altering almost every letter on the reverse side of the 1924 or 1927 penny to make the curved-base letters more pronounced, and then combined that reverse with the obverse from the 1929 penny to create a cast of the Unicorn Penny. This explanation defies logic in light of the original hypothesis that the Unicorn Penny was intended to emulate the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny – a coin with a reverse that contains flat-base letters. Accordingly, there is no evidence that convincingly points to the Unicorn Penny being a reproduction.
Provenance
Provenance
While Dean noted six P31D coins, some fifty years later the author has independently recorded a total of eight of these pennies in various conditions ranging from ‘F’ to ‘aEF’. Unfortunately, with no available information about Dean’s recordings, it is impossible to tell if there is any cross-over in provenance between the two sets of coins.
While Dean noted six P31D coins, some fifty years later the author has independently recorded a total of eight of these pennies in various conditions ranging from ‘F’ to ‘aEF’. Unfortunately, with no available information about Dean’s recordings, it is impossible to tell if there is any cross-over in provenance between the two sets of coins.
The coins recorded by the author display convincing provenance in that two of them came from owners who are both over eighty years old and have kept these coins in their collections for many decades. Neither of the owners was aware that they possessed a Unicorn Penny, and both mistakenly assumed that they had the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny in their collections until informed otherwise by the author. Interestingly, one owner was born in 1931 and was gifted her coin by her father on one of her birthdays when she was a young girl.
The coins recorded by the author display convincing provenance in that two of them came from owners who are both over eighty years old and have kept these coins in their collections for many decades. Neither of the owners was aware that they possessed a Unicorn Penny, and both mistakenly assumed that they had the 1931 D1.Ind.Obv. penny in their collections until informed otherwise by the author. Interestingly, one owner was born in 1931 and was gifted her coin by her father on one of her birthdays when she was a young girl.
Conclusion
Conclusion
On the balance of the evidence presented in this article, it appears that Dean’s identification of the P31D variety was based on reliable physical evidence and is, therefore, highly likely to be a fifth variety of the 1931 penny – the Unicorn Penny. While the origins of the Unicorn Penny are somewhat elusive, the evidence points to it being struck with a unique reverse die, and ostensibly the same obverse die used in minting the 1930 penny. Given the above, the Unicorn Penny is likely to hold an important place in Australian numismatics and rank among some of the rarest examples of Australian pre-decimal coins.
On the balance of the evidence presented in this article, it appears that Dean’s identification of the P31D variety was based on reliable physical evidence and is, therefore, highly likely to be a fifth variety of the 1931 penny – the Unicorn Penny. While the origins of the Unicorn Penny are somewhat elusive, the evidence points to it being struck with a unique reverse die, and ostensibly the same obverse die used in minting the 1930 penny. Given the above, the Unicorn Penny is likely to hold an important place in Australian numismatics and rank among some of the rarest examples of Australian pre-decimal coins.
Footnotes
Footnotes
Lever, Fred., 1931 Penny Forgeries, Part 1. Australian Coin and Banknote Magazine, March 2019
Crellin, A. at https://www.sterlingcurrency.com.au/research/1931-indian-penny-dropped-1-reverse-less-1000-were-struck
Ibid
Annual report of the Deputy Master and Comptroller - Royal Mint, 1930, Royal Mint, London, 1931
Mullett, William John. Australian Coinage: An Account of Particular Coins, Chifley, ACT, 1991, 17- 20
Ibid
Strand Coins, Benchmark Catalogue (http://www.benchmarkcoincatalogue.com/catalogue/coin/483)
Crellin, A. op cit
Dean, John. 1965 Australian Coin Varieties Catalogue, Hawthorn Press 1964, 44
Strand Coins, benchmark Catalogue at http://www.benchmarkcoincatalogue.com
Ibid at http://www.benchmarkcoincatalogue.com/catalogue/coin/485
Ibid
Bloom W. R. The Proof (Specimen) Australia 1930 Penny, Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia, 2011, Vol. 21, 7
Holland P., Die pairings, curved-base letters and dots: why are George V pennies so complex?, Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia. 2017, Vol. 28, 40
Ibid 41
Mullett; WJ, op. cit. 10
Andrews, P., A 1930 Penny Obverse Variety, Australasian Coin and Banknote Magazine, November 2018, 10-11
Ibid 17
Lever, F., The Crown of Pearls Virus in KGV Obverses 1917 to 1921, Australasian Coin and Banknote Magazine, Feb. 2018
Strand Coins, benchmark Catalogue op. cit. 480
Ibid
Ibid 18-19
Ibid 17
Holland P. Master dies and tools from the Royal Mint for Australian pennies and halfpennies of George V Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia. 2010, Vol. 20, 56
Ibid
Lever. F., 1931 Penny Forgeries, Part 1. op cit
Google Sites
Report abuse