Home U.S. Coin Forum

The Best Early Half Dime I Have Ever Seen for the Grade ... It's a 1797 16 star variety ..

BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,075 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here is the best early half dime that I have ever seen for the grade. It is a 1797 16 star obverse. It is listed in Logan and McCloskey as LM-2, and in Valentine as V-4.

imageimage

The “old time” grade for this piece is Fine-15. Today it is in a VF-20 holder. The remarkable thing about this piece is that it has no damage whatsoever. Many of these tiny, early have been bent, scratched or nicked up. This just has honest wear, and it’s not been dipped or scrubbed.

The 1797 half dimes are the only early U.S. coins that had 13, 15 and 16 star varieties all in the same year. At the beginning of 1796 there were 15 states in the Union. When Tennessee was admitted a star was added to the obverse making a total of 16. Finally at the end of the year, the powers at be at the mint finally determined that there was no room for additional stars and went back to 13 stars in honor of the original states.

imageimage

There are two varieties of the 16 star half dime. They share a common obverse, but different reverses. While the varieties books point out differences in the berries on the wreath, I look at the eagle. LM-2 has what I call the “short eagle” (at the left) while LM-3 has the “tall eagle.” (to the right) The short eagle is almost never well struck. He almost always has the sharpness of a coin in VG, even on a Mint State piece. The tall eagle fared much better and can be sharp on a high grade example.

This coin has an R-4 rating (75 to 200), and I have no doubt that no more than that estimate do exist. I'd say that the number is between 125 and 150 examples in all grades. You seldom see these coins offered in today’s market.


Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?

Comments

  • JrGMan2004JrGMan2004 Posts: 7,557
    image
    -George
    42/92
  • LongacreLongacre Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
    Bill:

    Great coins. I always wanted to own something from the 1700's. I just think it is cool to have a coin with a "17" as the first part of the date. Really historic piece! Thanks for sharing!
    Always took candy from strangers
    Didn't wanna get me no trade
    Never want to be like papa
    Working for the boss every night and day
    --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
  • K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295
    Nice coin Bill. I'm curious about the last 7 in the date. What happened, did they use a punch for a larger denomination?
  • wam98wam98 Posts: 2,685
    I was going to ask about the 16 stars as I noticed some were touching, looked crowded. You explained that thoroughly. A nice looking piece of history. image
    Wayne
    ******
  • airplanenutairplanenut Posts: 22,172 ✭✭✭✭✭
    This one's not bad image

    image
    JK Coin Photography - eBay Consignments | High Quality Photos | LOW Prices | 20% of Consignment Proceeds Go to Pancreatic Cancer Research
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,075 ✭✭✭✭✭
    One thing about early 18th century die making, you will note that the "7" on this coin is larger than the other three digits. That indicates that the die was made with the date 179_. The 1797 15 star coin, which was the first variety to be produced had a small "7" that almost matched the for "7." The 1797 13 star coins, which were made at the end of the year, have to large matching "7"s that are much larger than the two other digits in the date.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • LongacreLongacre Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
    Any thoughts why so close to the turn of the century, they made dies with "179" already included? One would think that the date would be left off and then added by hand for each year. Any thoughts?
    Always took candy from strangers
    Didn't wanna get me no trade
    Never want to be like papa
    Working for the boss every night and day
    --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
  • tmot99tmot99 Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭
    Very interesting. Thanks for the info. Very sweet coin.
  • JrGMan2004JrGMan2004 Posts: 7,557


    << <i>One thing about early 18th century die making, you will note that the "7" on this coin is larger than the other three digits. That indicates that the die was made with the date 179_. The 1797 15 star coin, which was the first variety to be produced had a small "7" that almost matched the for "7." The 1797 13 star coins, which were made at the end of the year, have to large matching "7"s that are much larger than the two other digits in the date. >>

    It's very possible that the 16 star Obverses were ordered made, and had the "179" punched in, but may not have had the other 7 punched in until later in it's life (Most likely because of unsurities if it would be used for that year or the next), when it was time to be used... in the interim, it's possible the Small-7 punch broke or was replaced, and was replaced with a large 7. Then that large 7 was used to punch the 13-star dies later in the year... image
    -George
    42/92
  • K6AZK6AZ Posts: 9,295
    Interesting info Bill and George. In those days I would assume they were more interested in production. That second 7 sure looks out of place though.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,075 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Dies usually did not last long in those days, and there was probably no much concern that they would hit 1800 and have some dies left over. That did happen with the 1800 large cents, but those were high volume coins that ate more dies than any other denomination.

    Also if they left the date off, that might have forced the mint employees to heat up (anneal) dies again to prepare them to add the four digits. Doing that ran the risk of having the die crack in processing. My guess is that that single digit was added “cold turkey” without the production of reheating the dies.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • LongacreLongacre Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
    Great info, Bill. Thanks again.
    Always took candy from strangers
    Didn't wanna get me no trade
    Never want to be like papa
    Working for the boss every night and day
    --"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting. A friend of mine just purchased a small collection with a 1797 16 star variety in it. Coin was in an older PCGS holder as Good 6. It's the weaker struck variety and it seems PCGS downgraded it a touch for that. I spent a little time reading up on Breen and various auction cats on this date. Some good info that Bill summarized perfectly. Had I seen this post 2 days ago, it would have saved me an hour. One thing I gleaned from the pop reports is that most of the coins sumbitted are F-VF. I don't know if that's because most of the lower grade pieces are damaged or that they just don't get submitted....or both. But there are far less G-VG's graded than F-VF.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,075 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Most of the low grade coins are too beat up to be graded, Roadrunner. They are usually bent, scratched and unevenly worn.

    If your friend's coin is in an old PCGS, it might be undergraded. The services did not see a lot of early coins at first, and were not prepared to adjust their grading standards for them. As a result the grades were sometimes pretty conservative. Sadly today that is usually no longer true. The services now tend to go the other way. image
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • LeeGLeeG Posts: 12,162
    image Great Coin and appreciate the History Lesson!
  • rheddenrhedden Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Bill,

    I love your 1797 16 stars. The one in my collection has a deep reverse scratch, obverse damage, possible AT, and who knows what else. However, I am happy to even have one. I will join you in posting some early H10C coins as soon as I figure out how to photograph mine clearly. Here's a blurry photo of a nice 1796 that is damage free.

    image
    image
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,075 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Your photo is really great, rhedden, and so is the coin. Given the absoulute ratity of these coins, not just condition rarity, ANY early half dime should be of interest to advanced collectors.

    The total populations of these coins number in hundreds for most varieties and quite about less than that for several of them. The most common early half dime by date is the 1795 of which there are a few thousand. That tells you something about how tough this series is.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • JrGMan2004JrGMan2004 Posts: 7,557
    image
    -George
    42/92
  • tjkilliantjkillian Posts: 5,578 ✭✭✭
    Bill, excellent post. It is because of posts like these that make this place so interesting. You are making me want those early, small coins even more. Yours looks very nice. Coins don't have to be mintstate to be really collectable.

    Please continue to show us all of your early coins.

    Tom
    Tom

  • Nice coin! I enjoyed hearing about the differing number of stars. If I ever get one I'd like one with more than 13 stars.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,075 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Nice coin! I enjoyed hearing about the differing number of stars. If I ever get one I'd like one with more than 13 stars. >>



    That's good Carl because the 1797 half dime with 13 stars is almost a rarity. Only about one or two of them a year show up in major auctions. The 15 star variety is the most 1797 half dime, and the most common variety of the Draped Bust, Small Eagle type.

    I will post picures all of the early half dimes in my collection as time permits.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • rheddenrhedden Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The 1797 13 stars half dime really is next to impossible to find. PCGS has graded a whopping 8 pieces in all grades combined. Walking around at a major coin show looking for one of these at a fair price woud be a challenging experience to say the least.

  • ShamikaShamika Posts: 18,781 ✭✭✭✭
    This is a great thread. Thanks for sharing.
    Buyer and seller of vintage coin boards!

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file