5th Variety of 1931 Penny discovered

[Basil]

Hi Fred

What you say is right.
However the "unicorn" penny would be the product of one die only, if it were real.
And the date numerals should line up.
I can imagine the last two digits moving around if there were multiple dies.

Yep,if genuine,with only a handful minted,they all should be identical,my Neville Nobody opinion.

[nealeffendi]

Hi Fred

What you say is right.
However the "unicorn" penny would be the product of one die only, if it were real.
And the date numerals should line up.
I can imagine the last two digits moving around if there were multiple dies.

Yep,if genuine,with only a handful minted,they all should be identical,my Neville Nobody opinion.

Basil and Echidna, you are both correct about there needing to be 2 (or more) unicorn dies if the digit moved around. Not an impossibility are there are other scarce die pairings with multiple digit positions (such as the '52 penny left, right, pointed etc). But then that would require the workshop to have prepared such dies and is there any evidence of that many dies made in 1930-31? The answer is probably in Mullett and if the records account for X number of dies and there are already X number of dies already known by their die markers then that rules out the existence of multiple Unicorns (to be otherwise would require the mint not to record the dies manufacture, not to record the dies use and then only strike several small batches in test runs etc etc).
Perhaps a closer examination of the obverses of the different unicorns might identify die markers consistent with 1930-31 Indians (unless the unicorns had not only specially prepared reverses but specially prepared obverses as well).
Or we might find die markers matching 1929 Indians in which case do the records show a used die being kept to 1931?

Everything I just typed/pondered above is EXACTLY what the proof readers and others who approved the article for inclusion in the journal SHOULD HAVE BLOODY WELL DONE. That is not a criticism of Yuri (I take it that he is  just a  passionate enthusiast coin collector) but of the journals editorial committee. If the journal doesn't have knowledgeable expert numismatists (numismatologists) in their committee or get articles vetted by those of us who are then they are publishing a journal that will attract puff pieces. End rant :@ .

[echidna]

Yurist says:

"There have been 7 coins discovered so far.  Some of them have irrefutable provenance - one Unicorn Penny was owned by an 80 y.o. collector for many decades and another was discovered belonging to a woman born in 1931.  Her father (a collector) gave her the coin when she was young.  "

So what makes this irrefutable ?
In other words it is evidence that cannot be proved wrong.
And we must therefore accept this statement as fact ?
Please explain.

[Basil]

That wouldn't get past a good Editor,means nothing and just raises suspicions on the whole article.

[Yurist]

Yurist says:

"There have been 7 coins discovered so far.  Some of them have irrefutable provenance - one Unicorn Penny was owned by an 80 y.o. collector for many decades and another was discovered belonging to a woman born in 1931.  Her father (a collector) gave her the coin when she was young.  "

So what makes this irrefutable ?
In other words it is evidence that cannot be proved wrong.
And we must therefore accept this statement as fact ?
Please explain.

Just a clarification... this quote is not from the article, but from an earlier post of mine; and a total of 8 Unicorn pennies have since been identified.  

I was merely sharing my experience of the discoveries.  They was completely serendipitous, non-contrived and nobody gave up any information too easily.  In some cases, I made an effort to identify these coins myself within the owner's collections.   It commonly started by me spotting an image of suspected Unicorn online that was incorrectly classified as a benchmark 1931 dropped 1 Indian penny.  This was followed by a series of exchanges with the owners to establish a line of communication, which enabled me to gather further details.       

In most cases, I was the one who instigated a broader review of the owners' collections, effectively digging around through their trove of 1931 pennies to see if they had any more dropped 1 Indians with CBL.  I only informed them of the significance after any Unicorns were identified.  In exchange, I was subsequently told of any interesting stories behind these coins.  

Whilst I appreciate that the story of a gift to a girl from her father some 70+ years ago cannot be supported by documentary evidence, the story likewise has no ostensible way of being disproven.  That's what 'irrefutable' actually means 'impossible to disprove'.  

In any event, I kept a log of emails with each owner that demonstrate my conduct was in good faith, and that the owners were not trying to convince me of anything.  In fact, in most cases they were merely unsure of the significance of the CBL and simply wanted more information about it. Nothing remarkable or sinister.  I'm sure that other interesting varieties were also discovered under similar circumstances.  

However, with the avalanche of scepticism that I experienced over the possibility of a 5th variety existing, I felt that providing details about the declared provenance of some coins was necessary.   In particular, with skeptics immediately referring to modern technological advancements that enable virtually any coin to be created/duplicated, it was both relevant and important to state that some of the Unicorns had been held by collectors for many many decades - preceding laser 3D scans etc. etc.

[Unicorn]

It sounds like you've gone to a considerable amount of effort there Yurist! Top work! :good:

[Basil]

Just a clarification... this quote is not from the article, but from an earlier post of mine; and a total of 8 Unicorn pennies have since been identified.  

Ok,but,as you stated yourself, you can't include anecdotal evidence or observations in any serious journalistic piece,i know Murdoch Journo's do it all the time these days but for the most part Editors will slash it out.
Without evidence and facts its just Chinese Whispers and Hearsay,not permissible in Court or most Pro. Journals.

As Echinda says throw up some high Res. Pics.,there are some very experienced Numismatists hovering in the background of this Forum and i know a couple that will offer an opinion with decent Pics.

Anyway keep posting ,interesting subject.

[Yurist]

Basil, I'm trying to source some SUPER high res images, and will post them as soon as possible.  

As for journalistic pieces, I have come across the phrase 'according to a reliable source' far to often not to know that in most cases it simply means a first hand account.  A collector directly claiming to have owned the coin for decades, therefore, must by definition be a reliable source.  It is certainly not 'hearsay' or 'Chinese whispers', which would be the case if the collector's account was indirect (i.e. they heard someone say something and assumed it was true).  

The information is anecdotal simply because it's based on personal accounts rather than verifiable facts.  But certain facts are as impossible to verify as it is impossible to disprove them.  Thus, until shown otherwise, they amount to reliable and irrefutable witness statements that support a line of solid research.  In my view, perfectly legitimate grounds for the JNAA to have published such information.  

However, one is of course at liberty to be sceptical, and to rely instead, on even less tangible faculties like intuition, 'street smarts', ESP, clairvoyance etc.

[Basil]

Basil, I'm trying to source some SUPER high res images, and will post them as soon as possible.  

Ok,no high level of anxiety required,we are dealing with a possible Die variety of a 1931 dropped Indian,like the 1930 Penny 99% of Collectors have never seem a genuine eg.
I don't see what all the fuss is about from your angle,its no big deal,if genuine it causes a ripple like the 1933 Half overdate then Numismatists move on,if its a contrived or Fake Coin its joins the dust bin of thousands of similar attempts over the years..
We are not talking about a article in The Lancet where someone has found a cure for Cancer,its a Die variety of a known Coin.
Look forward to the Pics.,i have someone in the background keen to have a good look as will Echinda,Neale,Fred etc on here.

[serenitystan]

Basil, I'm trying to source some SUPER high res images, and will post them as soon as possible.  

As for journalistic pieces, I have come across the phrase 'according to a reliable source' far to often not to know that in most cases it simply means a first hand account.  A collector directly claiming to have owned the coin for decades, therefore, must by definition be a reliable source.  It is certainly not 'hearsay' or 'Chinese whispers', which would be the case if the collector's account was indirect (i.e. they heard someone say something and assumed it was true).  

The information is anecdotal simply because it's based on personal accounts rather than verifiable facts.  But certain facts are as impossible to verify as it is impossible to disprove them.  Thus, until shown otherwise, they amount to reliable and irrefutable witness statements that support a line of solid research.  In my view, perfectly legitimate grounds for the JNAA to have published such information.  

However, one is of course at liberty to be sceptical, and to rely instead, on even less tangible faculties like intuition, 'street smarts', ESP, clairvoyance etc.    ''YEAH"' Good luck for the outcome..But i would not want to be you if it comes back as a non genuine (fake)..

[Basil]

Hi Stan,i think you are posting in the wrong section of the quoted reply,you have to post under the line to stop it getting merged with the quote.

Still confused with why Yuri is so passionate with this Coin Variety even if it is genuine,time will tell.

[nealeffendi]

Still confused with why Yuri is so passionate with this Coin Variety even if it is genuine,time will tell.

I think it is the nature of collecting that makes many collectors passionate (bonkers :tease: ) about what they collect. Trout with the Canberra, me with the 1920 penny, Klaus Ford with the Centenary florin etc. It takes the passionate collector to advance the knowledge and without us nutters spending a ridiculous amount of time/money on the hunt for coins and information the hobby would have never advanced further than the crappy coin charts of 60 years ago.

[echidna]

Yurist why don't you provide us the images you already have ?
The super high res versions could take quite a while and can be posted at a later point.
I'm guessing that you have never seen a "Unicorn" in the hand so the pics you have now must be good enough to form an opinion.

[echidna]

Seems to be taking a while for Yurist to provide decent images as promised.
For what its worth these are the rubbish images from the "Unicorn Website" which has been off line for some time.
These images represent all the "evidence" Yurist has provided, basically.
Plus the "irrefutable evidence" about a little old lady...

And I note that at least three of the above images (#1 #2 & #6) have been edited - heavily re-coloured.

[Unicorn]

Bloody Unicorns! :laugh2: