Can patterns struck from different dies...

stealer

Be assigned the same Judd number? I know nothing about patterns, but I assumed coins struck from different dies would have different numbers.

However, this pattern caught my attention in the upcoming HA auction: Link

It caught my eye because the obverse die is clearly the same die used to strike the standard 1873 Proof T$ (note the die scratch from the last bale of hay extending through the dress into the ocean).

I was curious to learn more about the history of the pattern, and this is the HA description:

"From regular issue dies, but struck in white metal with a reeded edge."

Looking at the CoinFacts page, I noticed that the only other sample sold at auction listed on the website is not struck from the same obverse die, hence the initial question.

Upcoming coin, struck from proof obverse die.

Different example, not struck from proof obverse die.

yosclimber

I don't know the numbering rules used in the pattern books,
but it could be considered a die variety of the original number, or get a separate number.

In this particular case, it is possible the die scratch is a die state, rather than a different die.
The date position looks about the same, for example.

I am familiar with the seated half dime patterns for 1859 and 1860 without "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA",
and 2 different obverse dies were used for each, but separate numbers were not assigned in the Judd or Pollock books. For these, the different dies are extremely rare, so it is possible the authors were not aware of them. Or maybe they were known but were grouped into the same pattern number.

CaptHenway

It is my understanding that the use of two different obverse or reverse dies that are essentially the same (in design if not in die state) would not constitute different Judd numbers. You could collect them as "Judd-wxyz, Die Variety 1" and "Judd-wxyz, Die Variety 2" if you wished, but I do not think that the Judd catalogue would recognize them.

retirednow

I believe that die variations do not always constituent unique Judd reference numbers - maybe because he felt they were minor or maybe did not notice variations existed.

One example I can think of is the 1896 1C J-1768 (Pollock reference P1983) struck in Bronze. While Judd only has one Judd ref # there are 2 die variations, Pollock assigned (P-1985A) to the 2nd die. The more noticeable difference was the eagle pointing toward the open space to the right of the S in PLURIBUS vs. to the left. But there are several other differences on both the obv. and rev. of that J1768. Pollock acknowledges Harry Bass as discovering this variation.

The images are from Heritage and the 1st is the J-1768 (P1983 ) and the 2nd is the J-1768 (1985a)

Interesting that you pick up on those die / image differences.
Maybe Andy will offer his comments.