Options
NEWP: This capped bust half dime has two reverses [full mirror brockage!]
jonathanb
Posts: 3,747 ✭✭✭✭✭
...and I suppose I should mention that one of the reverses is backwards and incuse...
0
Comments
Here are direct links: Reverse esreveR
[Edit: Ack! OK, now these direct links should be different. The originals were always different, though, and still are...]
www.brunkauctions.com
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>Um... hit refresh? They definitely show up as different pictures for me, and should show up different for everyone?
[Edit: Ack! OK, now these direct links should be different. The originals were always different, though, and still are...] >>
Tried refresh, and went to another thread and came back and still got red x's, even after I posted my comment. The internet moves in mysterious ways....
Works fine now. Wow! Great coin! Well worth the wait!
TD
<< <i>brockage? >>
Yes
Lane
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Anyway, super cool
Any way to positively determine the date, based on the reverse die?
<< <i>That is very cool!
Any way to positively determine the date, based on the reverse die? >>
It's either 1831, 1832 or 1833.
Someone with more knowledge of die states for reverse P might be able to narrow that down even further
<< <i>
<< <i>That is very cool!
Any way to positively determine the date, based on the reverse die? >>
It's either 1831, 1832 or 1833.
Someone with more knowledge of die states for reverse P might be able to narrow that down even further
Reverse P was also used in 1835
<< <i>
<< <i>That is very cool!
Any way to positively determine the date, based on the reverse die? >>
It's either 1831, 1832 or 1833.
Someone with more knowledge of die states for reverse P might be able to narrow that down even further
You are such a geek, Winston!
Lane
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
The half dime book on p. 71 says, "The clash marks weaken during the striking of the 1833 LM-10 marriage and additional die cracks develop. A crack now developed from the dentils to the top of A2. A die crack developed from the dentils and extends down to the right upper edge of S2. Another crack also formed from the top of a dentil to the tip of the lowest arrowhead; still another forms from the dentils to the top of A3. In spite of its many defects, this reverse was not to be retired until after the striking of 1835 LM-1. A small cud develops on the right side of the lower loop of S2 and extends half way to the O. A new die crack runs from the bottom of the 5 in the denomination to the dentils. The die crack from the tip of the lowest arrowhead expands up through the two other arrow shafts to the right wing. A heavy break runs from the dentils through the top of I1 to the left upper edge of the scroll, across the scroll to the left upper edge of P and then up between ED to the rim over the D...."
I see the crack to the top of A2.
I do not see the crack to the top of S2.
I see the crack to the tip of the lowest arrowhead (actually, it's a smidge behind the tip).
I see the crack to the top of A3, but it's pretty light and I'm not sure about that.
I do not see anything on the on the right side of S2 or between it and the O, the first things mentioned for 1835.
Based on that, this might be 1833 LM-10, with the crack to the top of S2 forming last (after this one was struck). However:
I do see a crack from the bottom of the 5 to the dentils.
I do see a crack from the top arrow to the right wing.
I see a very faint crack from the dentils to the top of I1, but nothing like the heavy break pictured at the bottom of the page.
Based on that, this might be 1835 LM-1, with the beginning of some of the 1835 features but not the worst cracks.
My guess is that I'm not quite looking at the right things. Either that, or the book is slightly out of order in terms of when some of the cracks formed relative to the 1833/1835 division. To confuse things a bit more, the writeup for 1833 LM-10 on p. 243 has slightly different information. That writeup says that the crack from the right wing to the arrow shaft (which I do see) happened in 1833.
So, probably late 1833 or early 1835. If someone can tell me how to narrow it down one way or the other, I'll report back on the results.
As Barndog points out, this piece has Reverse P on both sides. That was one of the things that gave me most confidence when buying this. I could identify the reverse on both sides from the position of the scroll ends, even crappy pictures. A brockage is produced when the previous coin remains in the die chamber, and the next coin gets struck with a die on one side and the previous coin on the other side. Based on that, the reverse die should match the die on the other side. In fact, the strike is clear enough on the brockage side that I can make out most of the diagnostic die cracks on both sides. Additionally, the two sides should like up head to head, which they do on this one (although I couldn't tell that from the pictures).
I did some poking around on the Internet (thanks, Google!) and found a little bit of information about brockages on Capped Bust Half Dimes. There was an 1832 brockage showing two obverse sides in VG-8 that was in the Russ Logan collection, and also pictured here. That page says that it was the only known Capped Bust Half Dime brockage. Also, in this thread, board member cmerlo1 talks about having sold a VG-10 half dime, but doesn't say if it was Capped Bust or Seated Liberty. Does anyone know of any other Capped Bust Half Dime brockages?
In other denominations... Coin Rarities Online recently had a Capped Bust Dime (not half dime) brockage with two reverses, slabbed as MS-64. It's not on their web site inventory any more, but you can still see it in the ad archive. Heritage has sold several other obsolete type brockages, including a Capped Bust Dime in AG, plus high-grade examples of a 3-cent nickel, two different 3-cent silvers, and a Mercury dime (search for "brockage" in the Errors section, then sort by price descending). Kagin's is listing the famous pair of 1806 Draped Bust Quarters, one of them an obverse brockage and the other a reverse brockage. Mike Byers had an amazing Barber Half brockage with two reverses a while ago, and also mentions an 1825 dime, an 1827 dime, and an 1874 gold $1 (!) on various places on his web site. I'm sure there are others out there.
jonathan
Any chance you can take higher resolution images? They would be really cool to see. If Henry Hilgard hasn't seen this coin, he should. He is "the man" IMO on bust coinage errors.
Don't see a unique piece like this too often.
<< <i>the 1833 LM-10 and 1835 LM-1 both have a reed count of 97, that might be useful (or at least "tediously fun") to determine. >>
Ugh. Whoever came up with the idea of counting reeds... Anyway, I think I count 96. I suppose I could have missed one. See what number you come up with?
<< <i>Any chance you can take higher resolution images? They would be really cool to see. >>
You want even bigger than that? You're pushing the limits of my photo skills with a mediocre camera, but ok, I've got images that are 1660 pixels square (the ones posted at the top of this thread are 600 pixels). You still can't make out many of the diagnostic die cracks even in those images, although you can see some of them. You can also see some some scrapes, a few green blobs, some stray lint... My math says that the picture at that size on most monitors is almost equivalent to a 30x microscope. They're way too big to post here. Send me a PM with your email address and I'll mail them to you.
<< <i>If Henry Hilgard hasn't seen this coin, he should. He is "the man" IMO on bust coinage errors. >>
I don't know Henry, as I don't normally collect bust coinage. If you have a contact for him, please forward him a link to this thread?
thanks!
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
<< <i>
<< <i>the 1833 LM-10 and 1835 LM-1 both have a reed count of 97, that might be useful (or at least "tediously fun") to determine. >>
Ugh. Whoever came up with the idea of counting reeds... Anyway, I think I count 96. I suppose I could have missed one. See what number you come up with?
<< <i>Any chance you can take higher resolution images? They would be really cool to see. >>
You want even bigger than that? You're pushing the limits of my photo skills with a mediocre camera, but ok, I've got images that are 1660 pixels square (the ones posted at the top of this thread are 600 pixels). You still can't make out many of the diagnostic die cracks even in those images, although you can see some of them. You can also see some some scrapes, a few green blobs, some stray lint... My math says that the picture at that size on most monitors is almost equivalent to a 30x microscope. They're way too big to post here. Send me a PM with your email address and I'll mail them to you.
<< <i>If Henry Hilgard hasn't seen this coin, he should. He is "the man" IMO on bust coinage errors. >>
I don't know Henry, as I don't normally collect bust coinage. If you have a contact for him, please forward him a link to this thread?
thanks! >>
If you had access to other examples of the usages of this reverse, you might be able to use this mirror to see if there is any consistent relationship between, say, the tips of the A's and the reeds perpendicular to them. It may well be that the dies wobbled a little bit and there is no consistency, but it might possibly work.
TD
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Now that is cool!
<< <i>How does this error come about during minting? Is it jsut a half planchet? >>
A brockage occurs when two planchets meet in the coinage chamber. First a single planchet is fed into the press and struck as normal, however, the struck coin fails to be ejected or removed from a press. When another planchet is fed on top of the first, the obverse of the previously struck coin (or very rarely the reverse) serves as the new die. Since these details are raised on the coin, rather than incused as with a die, the second planchet is struck with a normal obverse and incuse impression of the obverse in place of the normal reverse. (source)
<< <i>I have nothing useful to add, but will state that this coin is so frickin' cool that it is nigh hard to describe. >>
I feel the same way... Super cool coin!