Options
GTG: 1838 Half Dime, No Drapery, Small Stars: GRADE REVEALED
LRCTom
Posts: 857 ✭✭✭
This one really surprised me. I had it at an AU-53, maybe a 55.
LRC Numismatics eBay listings:
http://stores.ebay.com/lrcnumismatics
5
LRCTom
Posts: 857 ✭✭✭
Comments
I like it! Honest color and wear.
I'll throw 53 out there, but would buy at 55, or even 58. (I'm flexible like that).
What leads you to believe that it is an example of the so-called "Small Stars" variety? Is it so labeled on the holder?
Hmmmm, tough to tell. I can’t tell if the luster is almost gone or just hidden by the toning.
Could be anywhere from 40-55 but I’ll shoot somewhere in the middle and guess xf45?
Overall, really nice coin
55 here.
AU53
@MrHalfDime he stated it is in recent holder so we must assume that is the designation.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
AU53 Nice coin!
My YouTube Channel
Based on this from CoinFacts.....it sure looks like Small Stars to me. (Leaving opening for CoinFacts to be wrong.....)
It's definitely the small stars variety, as they are distinctively thinner (and thanks to Tommy for adding confirming evidence).
Nice attractive coin - I will guess AU55.
40/45 nice coin.
Nice coin. 50.
I'll take a flyer at MS63.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/995123/1838-stars-half-dime
That's an interesting thread, since it seems to indicate that a Small Stars half dime "requires" that it have the "Rusty Arm". This one doesn't. (Yet it sure looks like small stars).
I make no judgment....just saying this might be a Large Stars in disguise?
Sure looks like small stars, but without the rust. Is possibly another variety? I thought all the dies were accounted for. Just a thought. I would guess the grade to be AU58.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Sure looks like small stars, but without the rust. Is possibly another variety? I thought all the dies were accounted for. Just a thought. I would guess the grade to be AU58.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Your "handle" indicates you know the answer.
Grade Guess: Old XF-45 Modern Slab AU-55 However, I'd be thrilled to see it graded AU-53.
TommyType stated:
"That's an interesting thread, since it seems to indicate that a Small Stars half dime "requires" that it have the "Rusty Arm". This one doesn't. (Yet it sure looks like small stars).
I make no judgment....just saying this might be a Large Stars in disguise?"
With this observation, he is closer to the correct attribution than any others here. Don't focus so much on the so-called "Small Stars", which is a misnomer in this instance anyway, and focus more on the die rust at Miss Liberty's left arm (or in this case, the absence of the die rust), and also look closely at the other diagnostics for the "Small Stars" varieties (V1 and V2) listed by Valentine and Blythe. I will let this interesting dialog continue for a bit, and maybe later I will post what I hope will be an explanation as to why the OP's coin is not an example of either of the "Small Stars" die marriages.
ok ill go with au 53 maybe a 55 as well. jmo
While we are waiting, please address this in your answer: Were two different size star punches used for each variety (small/large stars) OR did the small stars varieties occur due to die polishing?
I'm at AU-53 on this one. The Small/Large Stars argument is interesting and I will see how it plays out.
AU 55 in a pronged holder today; XF45 in an OGH of yesteryear
Commems and Early Type
AU58+ ...and a real beauty!
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
I'll go with 58+ also.
Looks 53 to me . . . but then again I'm wrong a lot!
1947-P & D; 1948-D; 1949-P & S; 1950-D & S; and 1952-S.
Any help locating any of these OBW rolls would be gratefully appreciated!
Looks 50 to me with a nice original look! I like it!!!!
HAPPY COLLECTING
I see an old time XF coin that probably graded 50. I wouldn't really have a problem with 53 either. Nice coin.
I'll post the PCGS grade tomorrow. And yes, they did attribute it as a Small Stars. Interesting sub-thread about the rusty arm, though....
LRC Numismatics eBay listings:
http://stores.ebay.com/lrcnumismatics
That's because it is a small stars variety. Let's wait to read what the Half Dime expert can add to the thread.
I see only rub so I'll go with AU58. Wouldn't be disappointed with a 55.
I am copying below a response that I made for another collector a few years ago about this very same 1838 Small Stars half dime question, on the Liberty Seated Collectors Club Board. I have made several changes and revisions to the text, however, to make it directly apply to the specific questions asked here.
The 1838 Small Stars half dime is one of the most frequently misattributed die marriages in the entire Liberty Seated half dime series. Perhaps due to the lack of specific attribution information in the available literature, I believe the 1838 Small Stars half dime to be second only to the 1848 Large Date in frequency of missed attributions.
I don't believe that it is widely known that the 1838 Small Stars half dime actually comprises two (2) different die marriages (V1 and V2), both using the same obverse die, but each paired with a different reverse die. They were struck in that same chronological order, or emission sequence, with the V1 struck first, and then the V2, with a new (perfect) reverse die, struck later.
In my opinion, one of the more significant contributions to the understanding of the Liberty Seated half dimes can be found in Al Blythe's die state descriptions for the 1838 V1 and V2 Small Stars half dimes. He describes the various progressive die states in minute detail, prompting the reader to ask "Why not continue with this degree of detail for the entire series?". Of course, that would have made his book a huge tome, and would have taken years to research, but it teases us, nonetheless.
1838 was the first year that the beautiful original Christian Gobrecht Liberty Seated design was 'messed with', with the addition of thirteen stars around the periphery of the obverse. In the opinion of many, this unnecessarily cluttered the otherwise beautiful obverse, but that is a subject for another day. From 1838 until November of 1840, the thirteen stars were punched into all of the working dies by hand, providing minute differences in the relative placement of the stars sufficient for identification of individual dies.
The term "Small Stars" is actually somewhat of a misnomer, since, unlike on the 1838 Small Stars dimes, which apparently used a small half dime star punch, the 1838 Small Stars half dime obverse die used the proper star punch. But the V1 Small Stars obverse die suffered from either die rust, or spalling, early in its life (before it was used to strike any coins), resulting in a somewhat hideous, pitted and distorted die, producing very early die state coins with pitting and rust pits evident at Miss Liberty's left arm (holding pole) and body (see the CoinFacts Small Stars photo posted above. And why, pray tell, did CoinFacts crop the all-important bottom of the picture, which would have revealed the placement of the date numerals relative to the dentils and devices?!!). Futile attempts were made by the die shop to efface the rust pits in the die through heavy lapping (abrasion) of the die, resulting in the near removal of the stars, particularly on the left side (stars 1-7). If you picture in your mind the depression left in the die by a star punch, the very deepest impression would have just the high points of the stars, and the shallowest impression in the die would be the wide base of the stars. A six pointed star is actually made up of six elongated diamonds, arranged with one point of each diamond converging at a center point. On a fully struck coin, one can easily see these six diamonds, with dividing lines between them. However, when a die is heavily lapped, the shallowest details, where a device such as a star intersects with the field, are the first to be removed. Therefore, for the so-called "Small Stars" half dimes, with the excessively lapped obverse, only the highest points of the stars remain. These would be intersecting ‘ribs’ along the high points of the stars, looking more like asteriscs (*) than stars.
As Al Blythe correctly outlines, the very earliest die state of the V1 (the first-struck examples of the so-called "Small Stars" half dime) exhibit severe die rust, or spalling, with full stars. There is not yet any die clashing visible, nor any die cracks (not even on the reverse at A2). This is his Die State 1.
[It is frustrating for me, and perhaps for many of you, that I have several beautiful high grade examples of each of the die states of these coins, but I do not have, at least at present, any means to photograph them or post images of them. Please .... no slings and arrows; I am working on that.]
Very shortly in its life, a die crack developed on the reverse die, from the rim to the top of A2 (first A in AMERICA). Also, noticeable die clashing developed, most evident on the obverse die at Miss Liberty's arm holding the pole and above the date. This is still Die State 1.
Because of the horrible appearance of the obverse die, with its die rust and severe clashing, the die shop underwent a process of heavy lapping of the obverse die, to remove the defects. Unfortunately, they also removed much of the details (depth) of the stars on the left (stars 1-7). (The stars are consecutively numbered from *1 to *13, in clockwise order, with *1 - *7 to the left of Miss Liberty, and *8 - *13 to the right). This is what is commonly referred to as the V1 "Small Stars" half dime, and is Al Blythe's Die State 2. Late in Die State 2 a small die crack develops on the reverse die, from the rim through C1 (C of AMERICA).
Al Blythe's Die State 3 is somewhat ambiguous, and he asks more of a question than he provides answers. He seems more preoccupied with evidence of doubling or 'recutting' of the date numerals, and less with any progression of deterioration of the dies.
Ironically, with such a badly deteriorated obverse die, the die shop elected to replace the reverse die, and not the obverse die, for the subsequent production of more 1838 half dimes. This may make significantly more sense to the student of the series when one considers that all of the dies were routinely removed from the coin presses at the end of each work day, and were secured in a vault for protection overnight. Then, at the resumption of half dime production, either the next work day or at any subsequent time, a pair of dies were placed in the coin press and production was resumed. Apparently, the old, worn and heavily lapped V1 obverse die was paired with a new, perfect reverse die, producing the V2 die marriage, and production of 1838 half dimes resumed. This new V2 die marriage is still considered an example of the “Small Stars” variety since it utilized the same obverse die as the V1, with the heavily lapped stars. During this V2 die pairing, the dies clashed, producing an inverse image of Miss Liberty's knee through ME of the denomination on the reverse. This is Blythe's Die State 4, his only listed die state of the V2 marriage.
Al Blythe and Dr. Valentine differ as to specifically when the obverse die crack from the rim through star 13 occurs. Dr. Valentine indicates that it occurs late in the V1 die marriage, while Al Blythe indicates that it occurs only in the V2 die marriage (Die State 4). I have examples of the V1, in Blythe's Die State 2, with the die crack at star 13, so I concur with Valentine on this detail.
It should be remembered that 'die states' are an attempt to describe, in discrete, incremental steps, what is actually a continuum, or continuous progression of die deterioration. No matter how detailed one chooses to get in their die state descriptions, someone will always find a coin in between two published die states. It is often better to simply describe the range of die deterioration for a given die marriage than it is to attempt to describe in minute detail each discrete 'die state'.
From the above, we can see that the OP’s coin is not an example of either the V1 or V2 die marriage, and as such is not an example of the “Small Stars” variety. It lacks any evidence of the die rust at Miss Liberty’s left arm, the stars, particularly at the left side, are not significantly worn down in relief due to lapping, there is no obverse die crack from the rim through *13, and there is no reverse die chip in the wreath beneath ER of AMERICA, all diagnostic of the “Small Stars” die marriages. There is, however, a significant obverse rim cud from K3 to K7, and there appear to be reverse die cracks from the rim to M, and from the rim to I2 of AMERICA. Accordingly, although I hate to attribute (or grade) three-dimensional coins from a two-dimensional computer image, the OP’s coin looks like an example of the Valentine 1838 V8, based upon the brief Valentine description plus significant additional information from my own reference collection. I believe that I also detect a slight rotation of the dies, determined from the positions of the slab prongs relative to the obverse and reverse devices, also consistent with the V8 attribution.
In response to Insider 2’s specific question, unlike on the Liberty Seated dime denomination, where we have somewhat similar “Small Star” and “Large Star” varieties where the stars were actually punched into the working dies using different sized star punches ( a ‘normal’ dime star punch for the “Large Star” variety, and a half dime star punch for the “Small Star” variety), for the V1 and V2 “Small Stars” half dimes, the star punches were all the same punches, intended for half dimes. For the so-called “Small Stars” varieties, however, the apparent difference in size is due to lapping, or abrasion of the dies.
I am inclined to grade the OP’s coin as have JesBroken, oih82w8, and Mannie Gray and others as AU, perhaps AU-55, although I might drop the + designation. Of course, this might change after an in-hand inspection. Very nice coin, nonetheless.
@MrHalfDime already answered this just above, but I'll reiterate.
The latter (die lapping).
1838 "small stars" half dime: same star punch, die was rusted and then lapped.
1838 "small stars" dime: 2 different star punches used (half dime and dime star punches).
Since this example appears to have the die rust, and perhaps the start of the die break on the reverse to the first A, I guess it would be an example of the small stars variety ?
This example hasn’t been out of my 7070 since ~1987 (!), but I got caught up in the discussion and felt I could contribute this:
Yes, your coin is a V-1, small stars:
@MrHalfDime , what about the 1837 “large date” vs “small date” half dimes?
Yep, can of worms
As @MrHalfDime already detailed (and I agree with him), your (nice) coin is a V-8, not a small stars (V-1 or V-2).
V-8 has the wavy obverse rim cud from K3 to K6 (under date),
reverse cracks at M and I2,
and long dentils under the bow.
And no rust on the arm.
As I detailed in the other thread, PCGS has frequently misattributed the small stars 1838 half dime.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/995123/1838-stars-half-dime
Seems to me....(And, of course, my opinion means so much
).....that if the "Small Star" coin is ONLY V-1 and V-2, and if a non-V1/V2 coins can APPEAR to have the same star size as a "Small Size" coin....
Then they(we?) should probably stop using that nomenclature. It's just not descriptive of what the casual observers are seeing in the coin population. (Do a Collectors.net search, and see what you find advertised as Small Stars....It ain't pretty!)
But I feel a little smarter....until I forget.
Looks like a strong 55
MS-62/3 nice coin.
Hoard the keys.
Note: the PCGS percent correct for high grade coins on CoinFacts 7 out of 9 (78%) is actually pretty good,
if you compare it with what people claim are "small stars" on ebay and other sites selling coins.
It just should be better, since PCGS is a "3rd party" and is not trying to sell the coin.
Like other varieties, the variety attribution service affects PCGS Registry Sets, so we'd like it to be 100%.
Die Variety Names
One factor which affects PCGS Variety attributions is that they do try to look for the feature on the coin in the variety name.
So they really look for die states with "small" stars.
I believe for accurate attribution they should be looking for the V-1 or V-2 die marriage.
Otherwise, you get a varying outcome.
Even the experts have trouble deciding on die states, because there can be a nearly continuous scale.
I believe PCGS uses this criteria because they think collectors are looking for the features in the variety name to be plainly visible on the coin.
I think the visibility of such a named feature may figure into the value of the coin, but it should not be required for the attribution / categorization.
It's a similar story for the 1849 overdate half dimes.
For V-2 1849 / Far 6, there are a few early die state, high grade coins where the under digit is really clear.
Those are high value coins to people interested in the variety.
For many coins, only bits and pieces of the under digit are visible. This can be due to die state or grade/wear.
But the V-2 is easily attributed from the reverse die cracks, even in very low grades.
PCGS could label the highly visible under digit coins as "9 / Far 6, V-2, EDS".
But it is more accurate / reproducible if they simply attribute the die pairing, and let the collectors value the EDS in the market.
It seems that the "small stars" half dime variety name may have "jumped on the bandwagon" in the Redbook after the true "small stars" dime was listed.
I'd rather see it listed as the "rusty arm" variety....
P.S. Everything I know and posted about 1838 small stars here and on the other thread I learned from @MrHalfDime's forum posts over the past many years, which he has patiently shared.
On the LSCC Half Dime forum, there is a member who is trying to collect all 14 or 15 known 1838 half dime die pairs (I think he has all but 1 now).
So when we see that wavy rim cud on the V-8, it's quite familiar.
It's a cool variety by itself.
I would grade it as AU55.... That being said, I learned a lot in this thread.... @MrHalfDime ..Thank you for your detailed input - I read the entire post and have saved it for future reference. Cheers, RickO
My first thought was XF45 so I'll stick with that.
By all means, yet another frequently misattributed variety in the Liberty Seated half dime series. With all of these misattributed varieties (e.g., 1838 Small Stars, 1837 Large Date and Small Date, 1848 Large Date) I cannot help but wonder if the confusion lies in the ambiguous and imprecise verbal descriptions used. We would have been better served if the commonly accepted monikers were more accurate (such as yosclimber's suggested "Rusty Arm" variety), or simply drop the verbal descriptions and use only number designations for the marriages (V1, V2, etc.). Maybe one day someone will write a comprehensive reference on this series
Guessing there's a lot of "flash" in the luster that the pic didn't capture?
The grading standards are "evolving".
Actually not. Basically no luster at all. Go figure...
LRC Numismatics eBay listings:
http://stores.ebay.com/lrcnumismatics
I’ll not hold my breath!
@MrHalfDime said: "I am copying below a response that I made for another collector a few years ago about this very same 1838 Small Stars half dime question, on the Liberty Seated Collectors Club Board. I have made several changes and revisions to the text, however, to make it directly apply to the specific questions asked here." Etc,..."
"...> In response to Insider 2’s specific question, unlike on the Liberty Seated dime denomination, where we have somewhat similar “Small Star” and “Large Star” varieties where the stars were actually punched into the working dies using different sized star punches ( a ‘normal’ dime star punch for the “Large Star” variety, and a half dime star punch for the “Small Star” variety), for the V1 and V2 “Small Stars” half dimes, the star punches were all the same punches, intended for half dimes. For the so-called “Small Stars” varieties, however, the apparent difference in size is due to lapping, or abrasion of the dies.
Excellent reply and thank you. I only have this to say. Let's not complicate things as learned researchers and knowledgeable specialists tend to do. The small stars variety resulted from a heavily polished die. Therefore, IMHO, any 1838 H10C that has an overly polished obverse making the stars shrink way down in size from normal SHOULD BE CONSIDERED as a small stars variety whether V-1, V-2, or V-150!!! This coin may not fit into a LSCC "box" but it sure looked like a small stars coin to some folks who slabbed it.
PS Anyone who misattributes an 1848 Large date has either never seen a real one or is blind!!
In my view, what is remarkable about the V-1 / V-2 is the severely rusted die, not the small stars.
I believe "small stars" was an unfortunate choice in the Redbook to name the variety.
Valentine (1931) said:
so his primary description was the rusted die, not the thin stars.
The 1960 and 1974 Redbooks do not include the 1838 Small Stars half dime.
They do include the (legitimate) 1838 small stars dime.
In some later year (it's there in 1994) it was added, and named similarly to the dime, but they are 2 very different things.
The dime is unambiguous and in the die.
The half dime is a misnamed die state, with no clear line about what constitutes "small enough" stars.
I'll agree once I know how the Price guides are constructed. The specialist will no doubt go with Valentine numbers. But for everyone else, there is (apparently) a premium for the (so called) Small Stars. Is that a V-1/V-2 coin? Or is it for any apparent Small Star coin?
(I don't know....but I suspect it's tied to Valentine number(?))