<< <i>Reverse die C. A left over "small 5C" die originally used in 1834. Centering dot apparent between crossbars 4 &5. >>
Actually, Reverse die C was FIRST used late in 1836. It started out with the 1836 OBV 2 (1836 O-104), but then was paired with an 1834 OBV 9 (1834 O-110). Here is an image of an 1836 O-104, BEFORE the circular die crack appeared.
There were actually quite a few 1834 coins that were made in late 1835 or 1836. I suspect that the die makers were reluctant to make new 1836 dies at first - because they thought the steam press would be ready early in the year. As usual, there were probably "issues", and the new press didn't get fired up until November - with the Reeded edge half.
And, since I haven't seen one yet, here is an 1836 O-116. 50 over 00 :
Nice post, and nice pictures. I see you have been a CU forum member since February 2002, but you just made only your second post. Happy to have stirred your interest with this Capped Bust Half Dollar series.
If you turn on your private message icon in your "profile", members could contact you privately through CU instead of your regular email.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Thanks to GAB, we added another missing marriage. GAB, your PM "lock" icon IS now appearing.
We are still missing these 1836 Overton marriages: 107, 114, 118, 119, and 120. We want to see more and more 1836 CBH pictures here as time goes on. Duplicates of marriages are wanted, along with those listed as still missing. It is interesting to see which diagnostic points each poster notes. We don't all notice the same things. Even if all you post is a picture of your coin, we want to see it.
We need more people to start future Capped Bust Half Dollar threads.
OK - you talked me into ONE more for tonite: O-119
Note the position of the C (in 50 C) with respect to the olive branch. Line 1 of stripe 6 to the 5th crossbar. (Hard to detect from the angle of this photo) thx, GAB
We are missing these 1836 CBH Overton marriages: 107 114 118 120. I do not have these marriages, so it is up to you folks to come up with these last four.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Obverse: Star 7 prominently recut, 3 tipped more left than other figures. Reverse: Line 3 of stripe 3 extends below shield, center line of stripe 1 extends to second crossbar.
O-120 R4- Sorry for the lousy image, but most the attributes can be readily seen:
Obverse: (from Overton) 1) Star 8 recut 2) Stars are mostly sharp and close to milling 3) Remains of a bar and dot show weakly to right of 6. (requires better photo!) Reverse: 1) A in STATES is higher than adjacent T's. 2) All 3 lines of stripe 3 extend below shield. 3) The area between the olive leaves and berries is noticeably filled. (tough to see in these photos, but obvious with coin in hand)
Here is the nicest 1836 50/00 O-116 R2 I ever owned.
Obverse: Star 1 points to the upper half of a dentil. Star 12 is recut on the outer side, with three extra points. The “1” is high and distant from the “8”.
Reverse: “5” is recut over a “0”. Line 1 of stripe 2 extends upwards. Right border of shield extends left below the shield. Left side of “I” is under the right side of “T”.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Just found this series of threads. Here's my 1836 Bust half: PCGS XF45 (I believe it's overall an AU50, but downgraded due to the weakness on the reverse). If anyone has an Overton number for me, I'd appreciate it!
Cartwheel
Edited to add: I purchased this as an AU50, and ANACS graded it as an AU50. The dealer had mis-attributed the raw coin as an O-117, and I made the mistake of asking ANACS to verify this Overton number. Unfortunately, since the number was wrong, they just said it was wrong. I had written on the submission sheet that if the number was wrong I would gladly pay the fee to have it attributed correctly. This is something I did one time when I submitted directly at a show, but they wouldn't do this time; in fact, their customer service rep claimed that they never had done that. Bull; another reason I haven't been back to ANACS. I did admit to myself, too late, that I should have just paid for the attribution fee (I'm cheap).
Compare your Bustie with mine above, 1836 Bar Dot O-112.
You could be right on PCGS dropping the grade a notch because of the weak reverse areas, assuming the luster is sufficient for the AU grade. The picture in the Overton book shows some of the weakness normal for the marriage, mostly in the scroll. You have a nice start on a date set.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Awesome O-116 and O-112 to get this (my favorite) link back up to towards the top! Since its here, I'll show my latest addition. After a year of hunting, I finally found one!!! (It may be ugly, but at least I got it!)
O-107 R4 OBV 4-S2 (same as O-106) REV F (same as O-108) Interesting in that the O-106 is the only variety of 1836 with a raised and beaded REVERSE, while the O-108 is the only variety with a raised and beaded OBVERSE Emmision sequence is O-108, O-106, O-107. Why did they abandon the beaded edge ?????
I believe the beaded border reverse on the 1836 O-106 was simply a trial piece, a trial getting ready for the Reeded Edge Capped Bust Half Dollars. Found no information leading me to believe there were any other beaded border marriages, obverse or reverse.
<< <i>Found no information leading me to believe there were any other beaded border marriages, obverse or reverse. >>
If I didn't know better, I might think there was a little coercion in this statement?
compare the milling styles on the obverse and reverse of this O-108. (It can also be seen in MileKings photos earlier in this thread)
I know it's not mentioned in MOST places, probably because the overstrike is the most prominent and obvious (in most examples), but the O-108 OBV has the same type of beaded edge as the O-106 REV. Speculation is that perhaps SOMEWHERE, there exists a proof with beaded edges on BOTH sides, since proofs exist in both O-106 and O-108.
GAB got me interested in this beaded border business, so I made a trip to the bank. Took me 20 minutes waiting, and one minute to grab my three coins.
I took my 1836 O-106, and both my O-108s, to look at the beaded borders. My O-108s are in PCGS holders, and the gasket material covers too much of the rim for me to see what I need to see. 30X microscope was of no use, neither is the scanner.
The NGC holdered O-106 is a little better for viewing the rim, buy not by much. On the O-106 beaded reverse, under 30X, it looks like indentations between dentils, rather than flat areas between dentils. Can't see this on the obverses on O-108s.
Maybe someone can shoot camera shots to better illustrate the difference between beaded borders and ordinary borders? Someone must have some raw coins which would allow closer pictures. So far, I don't feel I understand beaded borders at all.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Hmmm, I have an 1836 half somewhere, I think it's in my tool box. I am going to have to go find it and look at it a bit better. I remember it has a big scatch mark on it and that's all I remember about it.
"If I had a nickel for every nickel I ever had, I'd have all my nickels back".
Here is the O-118: (Sorry, but I don't have it handy for some closeups)
Overton attributes: OBV - 1) Stars on left and star 8 are mostly flat, the remaining 5 show some detail. 2) The 1 and the 8 show signs of recutting. 3) A weak line ending in a distinct dot extends to the right from loop of 6. Some also show a dot inside the loop of 6. This would seem to be the best candidate for 1836 over 4. 4) The lips on this variety are more like knobs than lips.
REV - 1) A small C that is very weakly struck on all specimens seen. 2) The well formed 5 is higher than 0 and tipped to the left. 3) Olive stem and right claw are usually weakly struck.
Mozin, you're killin me !!
<< <i>Our discussion of the Beaded Border is not at all complete. I will add more soon. >>
Thanks for posting the only missing 1836 CBH marriage. Miss Liberty looks like she had a Botox job on her lips.
======================================
Don't forget, this thread is not ending. We want any 1836 Lettered Edge Capped Bust Half Dollars CU members own to be posted here. We want lots of duplicates, P01 on up.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
FWIW, the beaded border found on the reverse die of O.106 was formed when this die was paired with the obverses to coin the Crushed Letter Edge halves of 1833-36. The dies were struck in a closed collar for the first time, and the closed collar both crushed the edge lettering and formed the beaded border. Most Nuts will swear that CLEs were only struck from dies dated 1833-35, but there is reliable evidence (but not absolute proof) that an 1836 was made at the same time and one was sold by Stacks in the Graves-Davis sale of 1954 and not seen since.
These were unofficially assigned Overton #s by the BHNC, but we don't recognize them as belonging to the Overton series. They have more in common with 1804 dollars, being mere novodels or antedated fantasy pieces.
Speety may just have found a winner R5+. From his pictures, I cannot disagree on his attribution. Would need coin in hand to give positive confirmation.
Anyone else believe it is the O-121?
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
<< <i>Speety may just have found a winner R5+. From his pictures, I cannot disagree on his attribution. Would need coin in hand to give positive confirmation.
Edgar Souders, author of BUST HALF FEVER, gave his permission for me to post this on CU. I thank him for his generous contribution to our Capped Bust Half Dollar series.
Edgar wrote,
RE: 1836 Obv. Beaded Border.
A short story is in order. Back in 1995 I traveled out to New Jersey to meet with Lenny Schramm. Lenny and I had been corresponding for a number of years and of course 99% of the time this centered around our favorite half dollars. In that correspondence, one of our discussions was about the possibility of the 1836, O-108 having what appeared to be a beaded boarder. I took along with me the pieces that I had, images from other pieces that I had examined, Lenny had a couple and we made arrangements to drive to Delaware to meet with Jules Reiver for the day at his home. The three of us discussed this subject further and compared our gathered examples.
This is what we found: The 1836 O-108 "appeared" to have a beaded boarder on two pieces (on a total of 11 pieces). Most all pieces examined were high grade AU50, AU55, AU58 and two MS pieces. Those two pieces, even though high grade "looked like it" but did not have the raised rim directly outside the so-called beads. Instead the rim was flat and even with the "flattened so-called beads". Also, we noted that the beadlike dentilation was inconsistent in size. (You will note in your thread that the images supplied show dentilation that is different in size from "bead" to "bead" - more on the line of dentils and not beading closer to the CLE's). (I've enclosed that image from the thread for your perusal - Image 6.).
At any rate, we, as a collective group decided that more work needed to be done on this, and more comparisons made. Now, if the pieces that we had gathered had shown a consistent or partially consistent raised rim outside the so-called beads (one was MS and one was AU55 - both Early Die States), this would have made it somewhat easier but neither of the two examples mentioned above showed a rim that went above the supposed beads.
This very meeting was the reason that the possibility of the 1836, O-108 obverse was not reported. And further not reported in the JRCS Journal or in Bust Half Fever - Second Edition. Of course, Lenny passed away and then more recently Jules. I still have my notes, and of course compare every 1836, O-108 that I can get my hands on.
For your perusal I have enclosed some examples of the obverse's and also an example of a CLE edge - AND reverse of 1836, O-106 beaded reverse (same reverse as the CLE's).
So, does it exist and is your friend correct? Perhaps. I'm still not convinced but am open to the consideration. I will continue to look into it further as time permits. One of the things I would like to do (but haven't as of yet), is do overlays of the CLE beaded boarders with the O-108 and see how the spacing lines up. By the way, the 1835 CLE has a dentil count of 148, the 1834 CLE has a dentil count of 149 and the 1833 CLE dentil count is 110. The 1836, O-108 shows a dentil count of 149 and the O-106 shows a dentil count of 148. Nearly ALL 1836 halves, however, show dentil counts of 148 and 149 with the exception of O-116 with a 147 count. (All counts are from the excellent work by David Finkelstein "Obverse Die Dentil Analysis, Part 2 - Capped Bust Halves, 1820 to 1836 - April 1994, Vol. 8/Issue 3 of the JRCS Journal).
Carefully examine the dentilation WIDTH on the three 1836, O108 obverses and note the varying thickness of each one, with the CLE beaded boarder. Also the raised rim on the CLE and compare it with the much more flat O-108's.
Image 1. Note raised rim ABOVE beads on 1836 O-106 beaded reverse - same as all CLE's.
Image 2. 1836-108, No beads. Note dentils of varying width and length. Also note the edge is not raised above beads.
Image 3. Another 1836-108, obv example. Again no rim above beads on this high grade piece.
Image 4. CLE Obv beading
Image 5. CLE Rev beading
Image 6. Thread dentil width/lengths.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Very interesting observation on the star positions for the O-107 not matching the O-106, an earlier use of the same obverse die. If DK wanted the coin, he must consider it truly something special, because he prefers higher grade Busties. He is one of the top Bust Half Dollar die state collectors.
I wonder if the beaded reverse on the O-106 somehow caused the poor metal flow into the stars. Different reverse die characteristics could make for some obverse strike differences. Misaligned dies certainly could contribute to the poorly defined stars.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Photos of the 1836 50/00 O-116a, R6 Lapped die. ex Charles DeOlden collection
Reuse of rusty dies brought out of storage.
The obverse was struck using obverse die 12-s2. The die was lapped prior to being brought into service. High grade examples may still show the mirror like finish from the lapping. A few rust lumps remain on the bust just below the neck. Milling weak. The rust lumps may not be visible in my scan.
The reverse was struck using reverse die N-s2. The die was lapped and the recutting of the 0 under the 5 was entirely removed. Extensive lapping also removed some arrow feathers, parts of berry stems, etc. Rust pitting is visible below the ITE in UNITED and the IC in AMERICA. The rust pitting may not be visible in my scan.
Only 12 to 16 specimens are known to exist.
This die state is often misattributed. Rule of thumb: If you can see any trace of the 0 under the 5, then you have the O-116 and NOT the O-116a.
The accuracy of the attributing of this coin's die state has been confirmed. The coin was purchased from Sheridan Downey. After my purchase I sent scans to Edgar Souders for confirmation.
So Ed, where does this 1836 O-116 fit into the die state sequence?
Some diagnostics for 1836 50/00 O-116 R2:
Obverse: Star 1 points to the upper half of a dentil. Star 12 is recut on the outer side, with three extra points. The “1” is high and distant from the “8”.
Reverse: “5” is recut over a “0”. Line 1 of stripe 2 extends upwards. Right border of shield extends left below the shield. Left side of “I” is under the right side of “T”.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
...at first glance I would say that you have the O-116 and not the O-116a.
The 5 and 0 of 50 appear to be weakly struck and not weak (their upper parts) due to lapping. (I always pass the hot potato to Souders for his second opinion, when in doubt.)
The diagnostics---taken literally---from the O/P book states that "...the lapping has removed arrow feathers, berry stems, etc."
Compare the reverse of your coin to the reverse of my coin. I am not about to (only because my eyes are not what they are used to be) try to count and compare arrow feathers. ...but you can see on my coin where parts of the olive leaf stems are lapped away. On your coin they are quite clear present.
You state in your posting that this is the 5 over 0. Do you state this because this is part of the description of the O-116 die marriage? Or do you state this because you can ACTUALLY see part of the 0 under the 5 (usually the left side of the 0 shows just to the left of the top left side of the 5)?
I have been told that if you can see the 0, even under high power, then you have an O-116.
I cannot tell from your photos if the rust pitting on the reverse is there or the rust lumps on the bust are there. I don't know if these are a primary diagnostic for the O-116a, but there is no mention of these in the O-116's diagnostics.
Now I am really confused ?? Compare both Ed's and Mozins stars to this: (Both of theirs are virtually all flat, but only star 6 is flat on mine)
But, if you look at my reverse, it appears to be more lapped than either of the other two ?? The 0 is clearly visible under the 5, but the arrow feathers are barely (if at all) visible.
From what I have been taught you appear to have the O-116.
More specifically I would call yours and perhaps Mozin's the Intermediate Die State of the O-116. Intermediate die states---when the rarity rating for the EDS and LDS are different always take the name and rarity rating of the "more common" die state. (If the rarity rating of the EDS and LDS are the same, then you---the owner of the coin---is free to call it whatever you wish.)
Again, I suffer from the disease of taking what is written literally.
First from "Bust Half Fever II":
Speaking of the O-116 first: "In the EDS, the curve of the '0' shows just to the left of the upright of the '5.' The die was lapped heavily, one or more times and the curve of the '0' eventually fades."
Speaking of the O-116a next: "On the LDS (O-116a) the entire area in the upper left of the denomination was also overzealously lapped and the berries and olive leaves appear suspended or 'floating' in the field."
To me, this clearly implies that on the LDS there is no sign of the '0.'
BUT BECAUSE WE CANNOT imply (or assume), let us refer to the Overton/Parsley Book:
Speaking of the O-116a, it reads: "...the reverse die has been lapped and the recutting of the 0 under the 5 has been entirely removed."
I see your coin as an Intermediate Die State because the lapping is obvious on the reverse, but the 0 is clearly visible
Remember the quote above: "...lapped heavily, one or more times..." At some stage in the repeated lapping of the reverse die the 0 disappeared from sight---it is at this stage, and only at this stage does the O-116 turn into the O-116a. Any stage prior to the 0 disappearing, no matter what the extent of the lapping, makes the coin an IDS---or by the Overton Number an O-116.
I see Mozin's coin also as an IDS only based on the appearance of the strong strike in the olive stems. Unfortunately the 5 was so poorly struck, I cannot tell if the 0 still shows or not.
My wife will tell you that I am not always 100% correct. I know I had a written conversation about this die state with Souders about a year ago, but I cannot find the darn e-mail.
Please, please contact Edgar for a second opinion.
Ed, Does your O-116 have a die rotation? I ask because 5 and 0 of Mozins and mine are weak at the top, but the C is solid. On yours, all 3 characters show weakness. I am wondering if the bust from the obverse is rotated more/less on yours than ours ?
I have no problem with my recently posted 1836 O-116 being called an intermediate die state. This is what I thought before I posted the coin. The coin is not in hand, but I seem to recall some part of the 0 showing, or else, I would have been all excited thinking I had the LDS.
When Edgar said the die was polished more than once, I figured my coin was probably minted after the first polish, still showing a weak 0. Fever has not posted since Friday afternoon, so he may well be busy elsewhere. I hope Edgar will respond to this thread on Monday.
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Ed, That's a neat little tool you got there. I'm gonna have to get me one!
I'd say that compared to the other 2, mine is EDS - at least the Obverse. It looks like they started the Reverse lapping early on in the process to get so much weakness on the bottom??
Maybe the difference in the 50 C appearance is the key ? When they brought the old rusty dies back out for use, they had a different metal flow after all the lapping and/ or a slightly different die alignment ??
Just recently arrived back home (East Coast trip) and noticed Ed's email and CU link.
RE: 1836, O-116 and O-116a.
I think Ed was pretty much correct with his explanation on the O-116b. I too believe that GAB and MOZIN’S pieces are intermediate die states. I especially found interesting GAB’S comments concerning whether or not there was a rotation between obverse and reverse die – GREAT line of thinking!
Anytime there is a weakness in the denomination area the first thing I do is place the half in a Rota*Die and check that out. (Great little tool to have on hand by the way – but somewhat tough to find). Determining the lapping process, or degree of lapping is a bit more difficult and tedious in this specific area due to the cap depth of the obverse die pulling the metal away from the tops of the denomination. One thing I have found, that helps considerably, is using Photoshop CS2 to do see thru overlays of the talons, feathers and arrowshafts (while comparing this with my set piece and/or other images from my image database files – such as Ed’s piece) as these areas all become measurably thinner (not just disappear all at once). That said, it is likewise logical to think that if the specific area to the left and above the five is gone or lacking much of the detail it is due to lack of metal flow and not the lapping process. For example, on MOZIN’S nice example, I just pulled the image into Photoshop and enlarged his image by 500% and, at least based on his image, I see traces of the underlying 0. Also, the actual left claw (your left) of the Eagle’s talon of MOZIN’S specimen is wider than Ed’s example when I do the overlay and grid the image which tells me that the lapping on Ed’s – even if at first looking noticeably alike – is a later lapped state. Metal flow in this area might make a claw lighter in visual strike appearance, but not thinner. In fact, the lapping often makes this area strike up better because not as much metal is necessary to fill the now lapped but minutely shallower void in the die.
Concerning lapping and the stars (as GAB mentioned) this is a really tough call. I would tend to favor lack of metal flow and planchet hardness as the primary reasons for stars not striking up. There is an excellent article by W. David Perkins in the latest issue of the JRCS Journal (Vol. 18, Issue 1), titled “New Variety 1798 Dollar – “12 Star 1798 Dollar” which makes reference to many years ago when Jules Reiver was searching for the then, so-called 12 star “variety” and finding one with only 11 stars, then one with 9 stars then 10 stars and finally 12 stars! Of course, as I stated above, I believe this was due to nothing more than lack of metal flow (also see Bust Half Fever – II, page 94, for the missing A in STATES with a STRONG “PLURIBUS” in the scroll). The only way that I know to determine if stars were lapped would be to first check two supposed different examples under 50 or 100X magnification where the field meets the star, checking for the elimination of the star punch marks and any “recutting” having been eliminated. Then doing an overlay and placing a grid over the individual stars, one at a time, and determining if the star size shrunk due to the lapping process.
Agree..and the best part is that these threads keep getting better and better. With your input Edgar and the tremendous addition that Ed has made (not to mention the great job done by Mozin), these threads are the most interesting, and most informative threads I have viewed on these boards. Maybe the lovey dovey ubber goober DCAM coin threads get more #'s of responses, but they couldn't hold a candle to these threads in terms of numismatics. Great job guys
Here's a question. Do you think the 'docmented' mintage of 1200 for the 1836 RE half is accurate? From what I have heard, that number was a Breen estimate, based on how many were around when he was doing his research. Considering this pattern circulated a lot, the surviving percentage would be quite high for that era's standards. They are rare and valuable, but not that hard to find. I have heard someone suggest a possible corrected mintage of 5000-7500 pieces. Any thoughts on that?
**********
The mintage of 1,200 pieces is not documented but an estimate made by Walter Breen some years ago. There were 738,000 halves delivered in November 1836 and 1,034,200 the following month. From the latter number Breen thought that 1,200 might be the right amount for the 1836 reeded edge. It could just as easily be 4,200 or some larger or smaller number.
Obverse: Star 1 points to lower half of dentil. Stars 7, 8, 11, and 13 are recut. The upright of 1 is extended downward below base. Small 3 is lower and tipped more to the left than adjacent figures, and it is nearly closed at its top. 6 is larger and higher than other digits. (Obverse shared with O-104.)
Reverse: Crossbars 2 & 3 extend right into feathers. 5 in 50 C is lower than 0. A die lump shows between stripes 2 and 3, just above the middle height. Right side of I is under left side of T. (Reverse is LDS of O-102.)
I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
Comments
<< <i>Reverse die C. A left over "small 5C" die originally used in 1834. Centering dot apparent between crossbars 4 &5. >>
Actually, Reverse die C was FIRST used late in 1836. It started out with the 1836 OBV 2 (1836 O-104), but then was paired with an 1834 OBV 9
(1834 O-110). Here is an image of an 1836 O-104, BEFORE the circular die crack appeared.
There were actually quite a few 1834 coins that were made in late 1835 or 1836. I suspect that the die makers were reluctant to make
new 1836 dies at first - because they thought the steam press would be ready early in the year. As usual, there were probably "issues",
and the new press didn't get fired up until November - with the Reeded edge half.
And, since I haven't seen one yet, here is an 1836 O-116. 50 over 00 :
thx, GAB
Nice post, and nice pictures. I see you have been a CU forum member since February 2002, but you just made only your second post. Happy to have stirred your interest with this Capped Bust Half Dollar series.
If you turn on your private message icon in your "profile", members could contact you privately through CU instead of your regular email.
Here is another (crusty!) one: O-117
OBV 13: 1 unusually low, star 8 recut
REV O: Line 1 of stripe 2 solid to crossbar 2
thx, GAB
We are still missing these 1836 Overton marriages: 107, 114, 118, 119, and 120. We want to see more and more 1836 CBH pictures here as time goes on. Duplicates of marriages are wanted, along with those listed as still missing. It is interesting to see which diagnostic points each poster notes. We don't all notice the same things. Even if all you post is a picture of your coin, we want to see it.
We need more people to start future Capped Bust Half Dollar threads.
Volunteer thread
O-119
Note the position of the C (in 50 C) with respect to the olive branch.
Line 1 of stripe 6 to the 5th crossbar. (Hard to detect from the angle of this photo)
thx, GAB
Obverse: Star 7 prominently recut, 3 tipped more left than other figures.
Reverse: Line 3 of stripe 3 extends below shield, center line of stripe 1 extends to second crossbar.
thx, GAB
Sorry for the lousy image, but most the attributes can be readily seen:
Obverse: (from Overton)
1) Star 8 recut
2) Stars are mostly sharp and close to milling
3) Remains of a bar and dot show weakly to right of 6. (requires better photo!)
Reverse:
1) A in STATES is higher than adjacent T's.
2) All 3 lines of stripe 3 extend below shield.
3) The area between the olive leaves and berries is noticeably filled.
(tough to see in these photos, but obvious with coin in hand)
Obverse: Star 1 points to the upper half of a dentil. Star 12 is recut on the outer side, with three extra points. The “1” is high and distant from the “8”.
Reverse: “5” is recut over a “0”. Line 1 of stripe 2 extends upwards. Right border of shield extends left below the shield. Left side of “I” is under the right side of “T”.
If anyone has an Overton number for me, I'd appreciate it!
Cartwheel
Edited to add: I purchased this as an AU50, and ANACS graded it as an AU50. The dealer had mis-attributed the raw coin as an O-117,
and I made the mistake of asking ANACS to verify this Overton number. Unfortunately, since the number was wrong, they just said it was
wrong. I had written on the submission sheet that if the number was wrong I would gladly pay the fee to have it attributed correctly.
This is something I did one time when I submitted directly at a show, but they wouldn't do this time; in fact, their customer service
rep claimed that they never had done that. Bull; another reason I haven't been back to ANACS. I did admit to myself, too late, that I should
have just paid for the attribution fee (I'm cheap).
Cartwheel's Showcase Coins
Welcome to our Capped Bust Half Dollar series.
Compare your Bustie with mine above, 1836 Bar Dot O-112.
You could be right on PCGS dropping the grade a notch because of the weak reverse areas, assuming the luster is sufficient for the AU grade. The picture in the Overton book shows some of the weakness normal for the marriage, mostly in the scroll. You have a nice start on a date set.
Since its here, I'll show my latest addition. After a year of hunting, I finally found one!!!
(It may be ugly, but at least I got it!)
O-107 R4 OBV 4-S2 (same as O-106) REV F (same as O-108)
Interesting in that the O-106 is the only variety of 1836 with a raised and beaded REVERSE,
while the O-108 is the only variety with a raised and beaded OBVERSE
Emmision sequence is O-108, O-106, O-107. Why did they abandon the beaded edge ?????
I believe the beaded border reverse on the 1836 O-106 was simply a trial piece, a trial getting ready for the Reeded Edge Capped Bust Half Dollars. Found no information leading me to believe there were any other beaded border marriages, obverse or reverse.
=======================================================
We are down to our last 1836 marriage still missing, the O-118 R3. Anyone own one?
<< <i>Found no information leading me to believe there were any other beaded border marriages, obverse or reverse. >>
If I didn't know better, I might think there was a little coercion in this statement?
compare the milling styles on the obverse and reverse of this O-108.
(It can also be seen in MileKings photos earlier in this thread)
I know it's not mentioned in MOST places, probably because the overstrike is the most
prominent and obvious (in most examples), but the O-108 OBV has the same type of
beaded edge as the O-106 REV. Speculation is that perhaps SOMEWHERE, there exists
a proof with beaded edges on BOTH sides, since proofs exist in both O-106 and O-108.
I took my 1836 O-106, and both my O-108s, to look at the beaded borders. My O-108s are in PCGS holders, and the gasket material covers too much of the rim for me to see what I need to see. 30X microscope was of no use, neither is the scanner.
The NGC holdered O-106 is a little better for viewing the rim, buy not by much. On the O-106 beaded reverse, under 30X, it looks like indentations between dentils, rather than flat areas between dentils. Can't see this on the obverses on O-108s.
Maybe someone can shoot camera shots to better illustrate the difference between beaded borders and ordinary borders? Someone must have some raw coins which would allow closer pictures. So far, I don't feel I understand beaded borders at all.
See if you can see these. Thanks to NGC's new holder, pics like this are now possible.
ps - If you have the August 06 John Reich Journal, check out the 1st article on page 4.
Our discussion of the Beaded Border is not at all complete. I will add more soon.
(Sorry, but I don't have it handy for some closeups)
Overton attributes:
OBV -
1) Stars on left and star 8 are mostly flat, the remaining 5 show some detail.
2) The 1 and the 8 show signs of recutting.
3) A weak line ending in a distinct dot extends to the right from loop of 6.
Some also show a dot inside the loop of 6. This would seem to be the best
candidate for 1836 over 4.
4) The lips on this variety are more like knobs than lips.
REV -
1) A small C that is very weakly struck on all specimens seen.
2) The well formed 5 is higher than 0 and tipped to the left.
3) Olive stem and right claw are usually weakly struck.
Mozin, you're killin me !!
<< <i>Our discussion of the Beaded Border is not at all complete. I will add more soon. >>
Thanks for posting the only missing 1836 CBH marriage. Miss Liberty looks like she had a Botox job on her lips.
======================================
Don't forget, this thread is not ending. We want any 1836 Lettered Edge Capped Bust Half Dollars CU members own to be posted here. We want lots of duplicates, P01 on up.
These were unofficially assigned Overton #s by the BHNC, but we don't recognize them as belonging to the Overton series. They have more in common with 1804 dollars, being mere novodels or antedated fantasy pieces.
Edit Updated the pics with better ones and one of the tail feather penetrating the olive branch
Anyone else believe it is the O-121?
<< <i>Speety may just have found a winner R5+. From his pictures, I cannot disagree on his attribution. Would need coin in hand to give positive confirmation.
Anyone else believe it is the O-121? >>
Sure looks like it to me from here!
Edgar wrote,
RE: 1836 Obv. Beaded Border.
A short story is in order. Back in 1995 I traveled out to New Jersey to meet with Lenny Schramm. Lenny and I had been corresponding for a number of years and of course 99% of the time this centered around our favorite half dollars. In that correspondence, one of our discussions was about the possibility of the 1836, O-108 having what appeared to be a beaded boarder. I took along with me the pieces that I had, images from other pieces that I had examined, Lenny had a couple and we made arrangements to drive to Delaware to meet with Jules Reiver for the day at his home. The three of us discussed this subject further and compared our gathered examples.
This is what we found: The 1836 O-108 "appeared" to have a beaded boarder on two pieces (on a total of 11 pieces). Most all pieces examined were high grade AU50, AU55, AU58 and two MS pieces. Those two pieces, even though high grade "looked like it" but did not have the raised rim directly outside the so-called beads. Instead the rim was flat and even with the "flattened so-called beads". Also, we noted that the beadlike dentilation was inconsistent in size. (You will note in your thread that the images supplied show dentilation that is different in size from "bead" to "bead" - more on the line of dentils and not beading closer to the CLE's). (I've enclosed that image from the thread for your perusal - Image 6.).
At any rate, we, as a collective group decided that more work needed to be done on this, and more comparisons made. Now, if the pieces that we had gathered had shown a consistent or partially consistent raised rim outside the so-called beads (one was MS and one was AU55 - both Early Die States), this would have made it somewhat easier but neither of the two examples mentioned above showed a rim that went above the supposed beads.
This very meeting was the reason that the possibility of the 1836, O-108 obverse was not reported. And further not reported in the JRCS Journal or in Bust Half Fever - Second Edition. Of course, Lenny passed away and then more recently Jules. I still have my notes, and of course compare every 1836, O-108 that I can get my hands on.
For your perusal I have enclosed some examples of the obverse's and also an example of a CLE edge - AND reverse of 1836, O-106 beaded reverse (same reverse as the CLE's).
So, does it exist and is your friend correct? Perhaps. I'm still not convinced but am open to the consideration. I will continue to look into it further as time permits. One of the things I would like to do (but haven't as of yet), is do overlays of the CLE beaded boarders with the O-108 and see how the spacing lines up. By the way, the 1835 CLE has a dentil count of 148, the 1834 CLE has a dentil count of 149 and the 1833 CLE dentil count is 110. The 1836, O-108 shows a dentil count of 149 and the O-106 shows a dentil count of 148. Nearly ALL 1836 halves, however, show dentil counts of 148 and 149 with the exception of O-116 with a 147 count. (All counts are from the excellent work by David Finkelstein "Obverse Die Dentil Analysis, Part 2 - Capped Bust Halves, 1820 to 1836 - April 1994, Vol. 8/Issue 3 of the JRCS Journal).
Carefully examine the dentilation WIDTH on the three 1836, O108 obverses and note the varying thickness of each one, with the CLE beaded boarder. Also the raised rim on the CLE and compare it with the much more flat O-108's.
Image 1. Note raised rim ABOVE beads on 1836 O-106 beaded reverse - same as all CLE's.
Image 2. 1836-108, No beads. Note dentils of varying width and length. Also note the edge is not raised above beads.
Image 3. Another 1836-108, obv example. Again no rim above beads on this high grade piece.
Image 4. CLE Obv beading
Image 5. CLE Rev beading
Image 6. Thread dentil width/lengths.
Capped Bust Half Series
Capped Bust Half Dime Series
THE TOP IS O-106a and the bottom O-107 - SAME OBVERSES - DIFFERENT REVERSES.
STUDY THE STARS ON THESE TWO AND YOU WILL NOTICE OVERTON DOES NOT MATCH UP ON THE O-107.
STEVE HERRMAN THOUGH PERHAPS THEY RE-ALIGNED THE DIES ON THE O-107 WHICH CAUSED THE FIRST 9 STARS TO STRIKE UP SHARP.
HOWEVER NOT SURE BUT "DK" BHNC IS NOW THE PROUD OWNER OF THE BOTTOM ONE.
Very interesting observation on the star positions for the O-107 not matching the O-106, an earlier use of the same obverse die. If DK wanted the coin, he must consider it truly something special, because he prefers higher grade Busties. He is one of the top Bust Half Dollar die state collectors.
I wonder if the beaded reverse on the O-106 somehow caused the poor metal flow into the stars. Different reverse die characteristics could make for some obverse strike differences. Misaligned dies certainly could contribute to the poorly defined stars.
Reuse of rusty dies brought out of storage.
The obverse was struck using obverse die 12-s2. The die was lapped prior to being brought into service. High grade examples may still show the mirror like finish from the lapping. A few rust lumps remain on the bust just below the neck. Milling weak. The rust lumps may not be visible in my scan.
The reverse was struck using reverse die N-s2. The die was lapped and the recutting of the 0 under the 5 was entirely removed. Extensive lapping also removed some arrow feathers, parts of berry stems, etc. Rust pitting is visible below the ITE in UNITED and the IC in AMERICA. The rust pitting may not be visible in my scan.
Only 12 to 16 specimens are known to exist.
This die state is often misattributed. Rule of thumb: If you can see any trace of the 0 under the 5, then you have the O-116 and NOT the O-116a.
The accuracy of the attributing of this coin's die state has been confirmed. The coin was purchased from Sheridan Downey. After my purchase I sent scans to Edgar Souders for confirmation.
Some diagnostics for 1836 50/00 O-116 R2:
Obverse: Star 1 points to the upper half of a dentil. Star 12 is recut on the outer side, with three extra points. The “1” is high and distant from the “8”.
Reverse: “5” is recut over a “0”. Line 1 of stripe 2 extends upwards. Right border of shield extends left below the shield. Left side of “I” is under the right side of “T”.
...at first glance I would say that you have the O-116 and not the O-116a.
The 5 and 0 of 50 appear to be weakly struck and not weak (their upper parts) due to lapping. (I always pass the hot potato to Souders for his second opinion, when in doubt.)
The diagnostics---taken literally---from the O/P book states that "...the lapping has removed arrow feathers, berry stems, etc."
Compare the reverse of your coin to the reverse of my coin. I am not about to (only because my eyes are not what they are used to be) try to count and compare arrow feathers. ...but you can see on my coin where parts of the olive leaf stems are lapped away. On your coin they are quite clear present.
You state in your posting that this is the 5 over 0. Do you state this because this is part of the description of the O-116 die marriage? Or do you state this because you can ACTUALLY see part of the 0 under the 5 (usually the left side of the 0 shows just to the left of the top left side of the 5)?
I have been told that if you can see the 0, even under high power, then you have an O-116.
I cannot tell from your photos if the rust pitting on the reverse is there or the rust lumps on the bust are there. I don't know if these are a primary diagnostic for the O-116a, but there is no mention of these in the O-116's diagnostics.
Does this help at all?
Compare both Ed's and Mozins stars to this:
(Both of theirs are virtually all flat, but only star 6 is flat on mine)
But, if you look at my reverse, it appears to be more lapped than either of the other two ??
The 0 is clearly visible under the 5, but the arrow feathers are barely (if at all) visible.
More specifically I would call yours and perhaps Mozin's the Intermediate Die State of the O-116. Intermediate die states---when the rarity rating for the EDS and LDS are different always take the name and rarity rating of the "more common" die state. (If the rarity rating of the EDS and LDS are the same, then you---the owner of the coin---is free to call it whatever you wish.)
Again, I suffer from the disease of taking what is written literally.
First from "Bust Half Fever II":
Speaking of the O-116 first: "In the EDS, the curve of the '0' shows just to the left of the upright of the '5.' The die was lapped heavily, one or more times and the curve of the '0' eventually fades."
Speaking of the O-116a next: "On the LDS (O-116a) the entire area in the upper left of the denomination was also overzealously lapped and the berries and olive leaves appear suspended or 'floating' in the field."
To me, this clearly implies that on the LDS there is no sign of the '0.'
BUT BECAUSE WE CANNOT imply (or assume), let us refer to the Overton/Parsley Book:
Speaking of the O-116a, it reads: "...the reverse die has been lapped and the recutting of the 0 under the 5 has been entirely removed."
I see your coin as an Intermediate Die State because the lapping is obvious on the reverse, but the 0 is clearly visible
Remember the quote above: "...lapped heavily, one or more times..." At some stage in the repeated lapping of the reverse die the 0 disappeared from sight---it is at this stage, and only at this stage does the O-116 turn into the O-116a. Any stage prior to the 0 disappearing, no matter what the extent of the lapping, makes the coin an IDS---or by the Overton Number an O-116.
I see Mozin's coin also as an IDS only based on the appearance of the strong strike in the olive stems. Unfortunately the 5 was so poorly struck, I cannot tell if the 0 still shows or not.
My wife will tell you that I am not always 100% correct. I know I had a written conversation about this die state with Souders about a year ago, but I cannot find the darn e-mail.
Please, please contact Edgar for a second opinion.
Does your O-116 have a die rotation?
I ask because 5 and 0 of Mozins and mine are weak at the top,
but the C is solid. On yours, all 3 characters show weakness. I am wondering
if the bust from the obverse is rotated more/less on yours than ours ?
Nope, my coin is "dead on." (Plus or minus maybe 1 degree.)
When Edgar said the die was polished more than once, I figured my coin was probably minted after the first polish, still showing a weak 0. Fever has not posted since Friday afternoon, so he may well be busy elsewhere. I hope Edgar will respond to this thread on Monday.
That's a neat little tool you got there.
I'm gonna have to get me one!
I'd say that compared to the other 2, mine is EDS - at least the Obverse.
It looks like they started the Reverse lapping early on in the process to
get so much weakness on the bottom??
Maybe the difference in the 50 C appearance is the key ? When they brought the old
rusty dies back out for use, they had a different metal flow after all the lapping and/
or a slightly different die alignment ??
Just recently arrived back home (East Coast trip) and noticed Ed's email and CU link.
RE: 1836, O-116 and O-116a.
I think Ed was pretty much correct with his explanation on the O-116b. I too believe that GAB and MOZIN’S pieces are intermediate die states. I especially found interesting GAB’S comments concerning whether or not there was a rotation between obverse and reverse die – GREAT line of thinking!
Anytime there is a weakness in the denomination area the first thing I do is place the half in a Rota*Die and check that out. (Great little tool to have on hand by the way – but somewhat tough to find). Determining the lapping process, or degree of lapping is a bit more difficult and tedious in this specific area due to the cap depth of the obverse die pulling the metal away from the tops of the denomination. One thing I have found, that helps considerably, is using Photoshop CS2 to do see thru overlays of the talons, feathers and arrowshafts (while comparing this with my set piece and/or other images from my image database files – such as Ed’s piece) as these areas all become measurably thinner (not just disappear all at once). That said, it is likewise logical to think that if the specific area to the left and above the five is gone or lacking much of the detail it is due to lack of metal flow and not the lapping process. For example, on MOZIN’S nice example, I just pulled the image into Photoshop and enlarged his image by 500% and, at least based on his image, I see traces of the underlying 0. Also, the actual left claw (your left) of the Eagle’s talon of MOZIN’S specimen is wider than Ed’s example when I do the overlay and grid the image which tells me that the lapping on Ed’s – even if at first looking noticeably alike – is a later lapped state. Metal flow in this area might make a claw lighter in visual strike appearance, but not thinner. In fact, the lapping often makes this area strike up better because not as much metal is necessary to fill the now lapped but minutely shallower void in the die.
Concerning lapping and the stars (as GAB mentioned) this is a really tough call. I would tend to favor lack of metal flow and planchet hardness as the primary reasons for stars not striking up. There is an excellent article by W. David Perkins in the latest issue of the JRCS Journal (Vol. 18, Issue 1), titled “New Variety 1798 Dollar – “12 Star 1798 Dollar” which makes reference to many years ago when Jules Reiver was searching for the then, so-called 12 star “variety” and finding one with only 11 stars, then one with 9 stars then 10 stars and finally 12 stars! Of course, as I stated above, I believe this was due to nothing more than lack of metal flow (also see Bust Half Fever – II, page 94, for the missing A in STATES with a STRONG “PLURIBUS” in the scroll). The only way that I know to determine if stars were lapped would be to first check two supposed different examples under 50 or 100X magnification where the field meets the star, checking for the elimination of the star punch marks and any “recutting” having been eliminated. Then doing an overlay and placing a grid over the individual stars, one at a time, and determining if the star size shrunk due to the lapping process.
Great thread guys!
Edgar
<< <i>Great thread guys!
Edgar >>
Agree..and the best part is that these threads keep getting better and better.
With your input Edgar and the tremendous addition that Ed has made (not to mention the great job done by Mozin), these threads are the most interesting, and most informative threads I have viewed on these boards.
Maybe the lovey dovey ubber goober DCAM coin threads get more #'s of responses, but they couldn't hold a candle to these threads in terms of numismatics.
Great job guys
Here's a question. Do you think the 'docmented' mintage of 1200 for the 1836 RE half is accurate? From what I have heard,
that number was a Breen estimate, based on how many were around when he was doing his research. Considering this pattern
circulated a lot, the surviving percentage would be quite high for that era's standards. They are rare and valuable, but not that hard to find.
I have heard someone suggest a possible corrected mintage of 5000-7500 pieces. Any thoughts on that?
**********
The mintage of 1,200 pieces is not documented but an estimate made by Walter Breen some years ago. There
were 738,000 halves delivered in November 1836 and 1,034,200 the following month. From the latter number
Breen thought that 1,200 might be the right amount for the 1836 reeded edge. It could just as easily be 4,200
or some larger or smaller number.
Denga
Some diagnostics for 1836 O-103 R4-:
Obverse: Star 1 points to lower half of dentil. Stars 7, 8, 11, and 13 are recut. The upright of 1 is extended downward below base. Small 3 is lower and tipped more to the left than adjacent figures, and it is nearly closed at its top. 6 is larger and higher than other digits. (Obverse shared with O-104.)
Reverse: Crossbars 2 & 3 extend right into feathers. 5 in 50 C is lower than 0. A die lump shows between stripes 2 and 3, just above the middle height. Right side of I is under left side of T. (Reverse is LDS of O-102.)
Edgar
Edgar
Edgar