1817 Over 3 Half Dollar
thecoinjunkie
Posts: 39 ✭✭✭
I'm a fan of overdates and couldn't resist the chance to pick this one up this weekend, even with the rim ding and uneven strike on the reverse. Would love to know what possessed the mint employee to put the 3 there in the first place.
9
Comments
Because the die was made in 1813 by John Reich.
That is a fun overdate. I have this one too that was in my wife’s family since the early 1800s
Mr_Spud
The "3" was correctly put in it's proper place. The overdate occurred when it was only partly removed (or not at all) before punching the "7" in the die to reuse it for 1817 dated halves.
Overdates can be from a leftover unused die (one exception on .50 1806/5 O.104 was a used 1805 die), or they can be from a mistake - accidentally punching the previous year and then overdating to correct it. The 1817/3 is from a leftover die because that obverse die was sunk from the hub that was used in 1812-1815. However, it could have been from a die made in 1814 and mistakenly punched 1813 and then temporarily discarded, because the obverse dentil count place it more consistently with dies made in 1814.
More explanation is given in an article available on the NNP, John Reich Journal October 1993 "Obverse Dentil Analysis, Part I - Capped Bust Halves, 1807-1819."
These used to be fairly easy to find and I bought and sold quite a few from the late 1990s through say 2010s. Now, I suspect they're being hoarded. I own only two myself and have just one more in inventory .
On the web: http://www.earlyus.com
Highly desirable type, and the most clear overdate observed for this series. Easily discernable even on lower grade examples!
Just picked this one up for myself recently. These are the best photos I have.
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you" Matthew 6:33. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.
BHNC #AN-10
JRCS #1606
Nice one @jacrispies Chase!
As far as your example @thecoinjunkie , it appears it may be slightly bent, resulting in the uneven wear. 17/3's are typically struck well (and evenly).
As many have said, the conventional wisdom is these coins are struck from a die made in 1813 (and possibly near the end of 1813 or even 1814 as hypothesized in the @Nysoto post) and then apparently never used in 1813. Again, conventional wisdom is that a 7 was punched over the 3 in 1817 and at that point the die was used as a current die.
Here's my current example
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
One of my favorite overdates for the whole series here is mine,
1817/3 AU50 CAC
One of my favorite overdates as well. Very happy to have one in my set!
Dave
I’ve never owned one 😭
BHNC #248 … 130 and counting.