Double Die, both sides

[mhonzell]

This didn't occur as often in the older coins since there were so many fewer made and seldom did they strike the coin multiple times. (It was more of a squeezing machine then.) But, thought this was an interesting find.

Theories on what actually happened here?

[Paul]

were these a 'hand hammered' coin?......
where the blank was set on a big anvil with the reverse design in it, then a hammer with the 'obverse design' in the 'hammer-head face', was then swung, hitting the coin?

[mhonzell]

After about 1650 and up until 1786, coins were produced by hand operated processes, which basically meant that blanks were placed into a press by workers who then had to screw down the machinery by hand to produce coinage. (Instead of the hammering process you are referring to.) This was a laborious and time consuming process, made worse by the fact that the blanks were roughly cut out in the first place and often had to be hammered flat first to fit in the machine.

While humans could operate the machinery, it was often relegated to animals or external sources of power, such as wind or water wheels passed on through the use of wooden gears.

In 1786, a man named Boulton found a way to add a steam engine to the process. This greatly improved the speed and quality of the work.

[PetesPockets55]

Wonder if die failure contributed? (Die crack through NIA and 1 of date )
This would be considered mechanical doubling, correct?
Is there any chance the blank would have been placed in a sliding "tray" and then slid into position between the dies. This might require less effort raising the hammer die high enough to get a blank into position. Then it just requires the human element whistling2: getting distracted and stamping twice for some reason (back from potty break?). :l

[Daniel]

It's a double strike (or squeeze) and isn't a doubled die since the die would need to be doubled before it struck the coin. I would say the coin was struck off center and weakly then struck normally.