Options
Theoretical question on 1807 bust half - 50/Inv 5
JRocco
Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭✭
If anyone has a copy of Souders book on bust halfs, he goes into a discussion in depth of how the term 50/2 is incorrect. He (as have the BHNC members) has shown that this is really a 50 over an inverted 5.
In his book he shows an overlay that positions the underlying 5 with the top flag lying pretty much on top of the lower loop or the 5---follow me here???
Now look closely at this 50/Inv 5---really close---- now can't you make out the flag of the underlying 5 to the south/east of the 5.
I think I can.
Now does this really make a difference---no and YES...
Any thoughts or am I just a variety nut (be nice now--
) gone overboard?

In his book he shows an overlay that positions the underlying 5 with the top flag lying pretty much on top of the lower loop or the 5---follow me here???
Now look closely at this 50/Inv 5---really close---- now can't you make out the flag of the underlying 5 to the south/east of the 5.
I think I can.
Now does this really make a difference---no and YES...
Any thoughts or am I just a variety nut (be nice now--
Some coins are just plain "Interesting"
0
Comments
That's a cool one I had not heard of before! It makes far more sense for it to be a five/inverted five rather than a five/two.
Thanks for sharing!
-Amanda
I'm a YN working on a type set!
My Buffalo Nickel Website Home of the Quirky Buffaloes Collection!
Proud member of the CUFYNA
Just gotta get her right to show her in all her nice crusty glory
42/92
Was the coin an 1807 ?
I don't see it...I even inverted your pic and I'm looking. There is something going on there though..cool.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen