Should the 1807 and 1808 halves be unique types?
Billet7
Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
I put together a set of early half dollars a while back and when I sold the set I kept a few of them for my type set. Namely the 1795, 1808, 1832 (still looking for a DBH and Reeded.) Anyway, I noticed that in the registry there is a slot for the Flowing Half, DBH, CBH and Reeded half. There is not a slot for the 1807-1808. To me they seem to be a fairly significant change in design, similar to the change from lettered edge to reeded. What do you think? (For some reason I don't think any of the other minor design changes count, like the change from 1831 to 1832, the 1807 and 1808 just seem so much more significant.)
0
Comments
I've heard people call the 1807 and 1808 CBHs "small head" varieties, but I never understood why because it's no smaller than those of 1809, 1810, 1811, etc.
It may be skinnier but I've never heard it called the "skinny head" type
<< <i>I really like the 1807-8 design Bust Half Dollars, but they simply do not qualify as a separate type. With all the Bust Half Dollar collectors out there, I am confident the 1807-8s will never be considered a separate type. People don't much like to change what works. >>
I agree.
Look at the changes Lincoln has undergone in the cent series.
He started out with hair and a beard and ended up with spaghetti and Ragu .... but aside from the major reverse change we do not separate different types.
Add these coins if you like, for the sake finances, I would keep the out of the standard, required types.
<< <i>You can certainly add an early John Reich half dollar if you want to, I did to my set. The trouble is if you consider that to be a type then there are a bunch of early type coins that could added as well. For example there could as many as three 1794 half cent types as well as multiple types of 1794 cents. In the quarter eagles the placement of the "LIBERTY" and stars changed after 1798. No one recognizes that, and thank goodness they don't. Buying the 1796 No Stars and 1808 quarter eagles was more than enough to break the bank, thank you.
Add these coins if you like, for the sake finances, I would keep the out of the standard, required types. >>
A valid point.
I've just always thought that the early halves are SO different it's obvious to everyone, even without a side by side comparison. 1794's take comparison to see what you're looking at in most cases.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
<< <i>I consider them sub-types, in the sense that 1925-1930 quarters are a subtype distinct from 1917 (II)-1924, or 1998 quarters are a sub-type which is distinct from 1965 >>
But the Type I (mound) and Type II (straight line) Buffalo nickels are considered to be separate types. Of course many collectors can fill these holes with Mint State coins at reasonable prices so they are recognized as types. In the late 18th and for all of the 19th century type coins these small differences are ignored.
buy what you like and call it what you like.
<< <i>If you are filling holes in a coin album, might as well go with their requirements. Otherwise,
buy what you like and call it what you like. >>
I'm keeping my 1808 for sure, but I am starting to rethink the 1832 I've been keeping around for type purposes.
They are my favorite sub-type in the series.
Now, should the various portrait changes that came about in the 30's be called separate types also ? Nah.