@Nysoto said:
... there are also horizontal shield lines in the 1803 BD3, below the cap, within the hair - which absolutely proves, without any doubt, they are clash marks**
Your photo is strong evidence that the 1803 BD-3 shows a shield clash on the obverse.
It does not explain the 1801 BD-2 at all, though.
The vertical shield lines from the clash on the 1803 BD-3 are in groups of 3 as they should be.
Not the case for the 1801 BD-2.
The obverse parallel lines on the 1801 BD-2 are narrow single lines, fairly uniformly spaced.
The 1801 BD-2 examples in the original post show the vertical marks in the cap, and no other signs of clashing. The most likely scenario (and unproven) is the marks are remaining clash marks after lapping - the clash would have happened early, possibly during set up, and the dies were lapped quickly without removing all marks, including the lines left by the deepest gules, in an area that would not be noticed except for coin nuts 200 years later.
Each reverse hub in the series made dies that struck a little differently, perhaps this hub sunk working dies that were more convex than optimal, leaving clash marks from the shield on the portrait when the clashes occurred.
Robert Scot: Engraving Liberty - biography of US Mint's first chief engraver
@insider2 for the coin illustrated in this thread I believe the expert conclusion is die clash. The provided article is a good right up about trails and other lines that are usually one way directional. It also gives history and other information. Example is for cent but I believe it still good information.
Because of the way they taper off, it may have had a reverse die dropped on the blank die at an angle, and damaged it quite deeply. Then when the punches were used, the didn't obliterate that part of the shield from the reverse.
Just throwing stuff out.
I have a small private mint (60-ton press I designed and built in the family room, and an engraving machine to engrave dies), so I understand how things happen, including errors. My wife is really good at clashing dies... trust me.
Looking through the Heritage archives of 1801 BD-2, many of the examples (about half?) do not have the vertical marks in the cap. So this occurred mid-die stage of this die marriage, and not with damage to a die blank or anything that may have happened during the initial die set-up in the press.
Also, I was looking for some horizontal shield lines that may have clashed on 1801 BD-2 as they did on 1803 BD-3, but did not find any.
Robert Scot: Engraving Liberty - biography of US Mint's first chief engraver
@thefinn said:
Because of the way they taper off, it may have had a reverse die dropped on the blank die at an angle, and damaged it quite deeply. Then when the punches were used, the didn't obliterate that part of the shield from the reverse.
Just throwing stuff out.
I have a small private mint (60-ton press I designed and built in the family room, and an engraving machine to engrave dies), so I understand how things happen, including errors. My wife is really good at clashing dies... trust me.
And really open-minded about what goes into her family room!
@thefinn said:
Because of the way they taper off, it may have had a reverse die dropped on the blank die at an angle, and damaged it quite deeply. Then when the punches were used, the didn't obliterate that part of the shield from the reverse.
Just throwing stuff out.
I have a small private mint (60-ton press I designed and built in the family room, and an engraving machine to engrave dies), so I understand how things happen, including errors. My wife is really good at clashing dies... trust me.
And really open-minded about what goes into her family room!
She's a keeper! She would rather have me up near the family when I am pressing, then down in the basement. And when she runs the press, she can still answer the door or make lunch for our daughter.
Comments
Your photo is strong evidence that the 1803 BD-3 shows a shield clash on the obverse.
It does not explain the 1801 BD-2 at all, though.
The vertical shield lines from the clash on the 1803 BD-3 are in groups of 3 as they should be.
Not the case for the 1801 BD-2.
The obverse parallel lines on the 1801 BD-2 are narrow single lines, fairly uniformly spaced.
The 1801 BD-2 examples in the original post show the vertical marks in the cap, and no other signs of clashing. The most likely scenario (and unproven) is the marks are remaining clash marks after lapping - the clash would have happened early, possibly during set up, and the dies were lapped quickly without removing all marks, including the lines left by the deepest gules, in an area that would not be noticed except for coin nuts 200 years later.
Each reverse hub in the series made dies that struck a little differently, perhaps this hub sunk working dies that were more convex than optimal, leaving clash marks from the shield on the portrait when the clashes occurred.
Coin world publication vol 59 issue 3042 has a write up on these that is worth a read.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Link for the lazy or overworked?
@Insider2 scan just for you
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Thanks, All we need is author and the conclusion (if one in the article) for now. Was it called a clash mark?
A Coin World subscriber can check out the digital edition for the answer. My subscription expired
@insider2 for the coin illustrated in this thread I believe the expert conclusion is die clash. The provided article is a good right up about trails and other lines that are usually one way directional. It also gives history and other information. Example is for cent but I believe it still good information.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
The "Die Trails" article is cool, but it describes "fine die scratches" which are much smaller than the lines we see on the 1801 BD-2.
Because of the way they taper off, it may have had a reverse die dropped on the blank die at an angle, and damaged it quite deeply. Then when the punches were used, the didn't obliterate that part of the shield from the reverse.
Just throwing stuff out.
I have a small private mint (60-ton press I designed and built in the family room, and an engraving machine to engrave dies), so I understand how things happen, including errors. My wife is really good at clashing dies... trust me.
Looking through the Heritage archives of 1801 BD-2, many of the examples (about half?) do not have the vertical marks in the cap. So this occurred mid-die stage of this die marriage, and not with damage to a die blank or anything that may have happened during the initial die set-up in the press.
Also, I was looking for some horizontal shield lines that may have clashed on 1801 BD-2 as they did on 1803 BD-3, but did not find any.
And really open-minded about what goes into her family room!
Smitten with DBLCs.
She's a keeper! She would rather have me up near the family when I am pressing, then down in the basement. And when she runs the press, she can still answer the door or make lunch for our daughter.