Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Crushed Lettered Edge Capped Bust Half Dollars

MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
The 1833-36 Crushed Lettered Edge half dollars were produced in 1836. Here's one:

image


Here's an 1834, with excerpts from the Stacks catalog:


image
image


1834 O.122 (Rarity-7+). Crushed Lettered Edge, Restrike.

Examination of this fantastic coin will soon discover the curious edge lettering feature, which is crushed by the intense forces of multiple strikings of the coin while squeezed into a closed collar. Apparently the edge was lettered prior to striking, and in this case ''ORHALF'' run together with the ''RH'' nearly touching.

One of perhaps five known of this die pairing, all apparently struck in Proof format, although one entered circulation long enough to reach the Extremely Fine grade level. One of these is held in the Smithsonian Institution, while the other four are in private hands, each of which we have sold at some time in the past. The present coin is finer than the Starr-Brand-Lichtenfels coin and is thus the best of the four known in private hands, with the Pittman-1949 ANA coin showing more evidence of handling and the Logan-1983 ANA coin being a circulated or mishandled example. An extraordinary opportunity for the advanced specialist to obtain an extremely rare and desirable piece of numismatic American history.

According to an article by the late Russell J. Logan in The John Reich Journal in Volume 5, Number 3 of December 1990, all Crushed Lettered Edge Proof Half Dollars were apparently struck in 1836 with supporting evidence from the use of a common edge die used to coin other Capped Bust Half Dollars in 1836. Furthermore all known examples of these Crushed Lettered Edge Half Dollars from 1833 to 1835 use the same reverse die, that from the 1836 O.106 die marriage. This reverse die is unique because Engraver William Kneass employed small beads instead of denticles around the rim, with a flat edge at the extreme rim. No other reverse die in the entire series employs edge beads.

The beads were employed instead of denticles to accommodate a new style of collar, being researched by John Danreuther, Brad Karoleff and others. This new collar required dies to have a sunken lip around the edge, which allowed struck coins to have a uniform raised rim instead of denticles at the edge. The denticles were replaced with beads inside the raised rim. Coins struck using this new collar were more perfectly round, with the devices protected by the higher, solid rim around each side of the coin.

One other coin also exhibits a Crushed Lettered Edge, that being a Proof 1836 Half Dollar last offered in our Davis-Graves Collection in 1954 where it realized $60, a price multiples of a typical Uncirculated specimen of this date. No plate is known of this coin and its whereabouts remain a numismatic mystery. This reverse die went on to coin regular circulation strikes after the Crushed Lettered Edge Proofs were struck and eventually failed by cracking through the denomination, confirming that the Crushed Lettered Edge Proofs were coined first, before the circulation strikes of 1836 O.106 were struck.


I have some questions:

1. What is the diameter of these coins? (Same as the 1836 Reeded Edge? If not, why?)

2. How much do these coins weigh? (Same as the 1836 Reeded Edge? If not, why?)

3. Why was this edge device used instead a reeded edge? (Was it experimental? Were the reeded collars not yet available?)




Andy Lustig

Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.

Comments

  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
    One more question:

    4. In looking at the reverse of the CLE half dollars, they look more like half dimes or dimes than half dollars. Is there something different about the eagle compared to other CBHs, or is it just an optical illusion caused by the beaded borders and well defined rims?
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • GoldenEyeNumismaticsGoldenEyeNumismatics Posts: 13,187 ✭✭✭
    Rather visually impressive.

    Interesting stuff.

    I can't answer your questions though.
  • Marking
  • slumlord98slumlord98 Posts: 1,180
    1. More similar to a production issue 1836 lettered edge. As you stated, the reverse is well known to Overton collectors as a regular production reverse die. The RE halves used a thicker, smaller diameter planchet.

    2. I believe all 1836 halves weigh the same, only the thickness and diameter changed.

    3. To answer this question, we'd have to fire up the old time traveler and ask the coiner why these CLEs were made. My opinion is that these were the first experiments with the so called 'close(d) collar'. Regular production lettered edge planchets may have been polished or otherwise worked to enhance the proof finish.

    4.Same bird.

    Edited to add- why on earth do they call this a restrike? This is an antedated trial or experimental piece.
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
    why on earth do they call this a restrike? This is an antedated trial or experimental piece.

    Agreed!

    Regular production lettered edge planchets may have been polished or otherwise worked to enhance the proof finish.

    Don't they seem more like the planchets used for 1836 Reeded Edge halves? But that's part of why I'm looking for more details on the CLE halves...
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • BECOKABECOKA Posts: 16,961 ✭✭✭
    OK, to all your questions. I feel very ignorant and you made me realize how much I still have to learn. image

    Beautiful example.
  • slumlord98slumlord98 Posts: 1,180


    << <i>Don't they seem more like the planchets used for 1836 Reeded Edge halves? >>



    Wrong diameter, but how do they remind you of RE planchets?
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Wrong diameter, but how do they remind you of RE planchets?


    Slumlord - I haven't seen a CLE half in years, but I vaguely remember them as being smaller and slightly thicker than the 1807-36 CBHs. Anyway, you say they're the "wrong diameter", i.e., not the same as the 36 RE. Do you know the diameter of the CLE halves? Maybe we can put question #1 to bed...
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • slumlord98slumlord98 Posts: 1,180
    I haven't seen or held a raw CLE since '03 when Sheridan bought the Eliasberg 35 111 at the ANA sale. He cracked it out and showed it to me and I have no recollection that it was smaller than a '36 production issue. I need to re-read Logan's JRJ article quoted in the auction text to refresh my memory, but I recall from some source or another that the beading was at least partially formed by being crushed in the collar. However, the collar didn't totally obliterate the edge lettering, so it couldn't have been that tight.

    Edited to add- 1836 O.106, the final use of the reverse die, is of similar size to other '36s. Those being struck w/an 'open' collar, there is naturally some variance in size.
  • 1. What is the diameter of these coins? (Same as the 1836 Reeded Edge? If not, why?)

    No, the same planchet as the regular production issue half, but mechanical compression may have altered the diameter
    of the planchet used, I believe that new the collar was adjustable. As seen in the one known unlettered edge specimen.
    Reviewing Russ Logan's fine research, it show's that all the known specimens (CLE Halves) fall within the
    Lettered Edge dimensions.
    With an average diameter of 1.273 in.

    32.5 mm, 13.48 grains, composition of .8924 silver/ .1076 copper.

    Reeded edge type, 30 mm, 13.36 grains, composition of .900 silver/ .100 cooper.
    Converted, 1.205 in., 13.36 grams

    2. How much do these coins weigh? (Same as the 1836 Reeded Edge? If not, why?)
    No, same as above, With an average weigh of 13.45 grams.

    3. Why was this edge device used instead a reeded edge? (Was it experimental?)
    Were the reeded collars not yet available?)

    Possibly, or other tooling was not yet present at the Mint.
    additional Below...

    David Cohen's article in the ANS " America's Silver Coinage" Nov.1- 2 1986,
    "The Industrial Revolution Overtakes the Production of Dies"
    gives a small glimpse of the goings on in 1836-38 with future of die production and would make one think
    a possible alternative title of "The Mint's New Toys, an Engraver's Dream"

    Here are some of My thoughts on this interesting period.
    With the arrival of the Transfer Lathe and the Steam Press, William Kneass and Christian Gobrecht
    (NEW coin designs) were awaiting a turn at this new equipment, you know how people
    are with new toys.

    The Obverse/ Reverse dies may have been made on the New Portrait Lathe for a specific striking experiment for
    the Steam Press.
    Taking existing hubs, copying them and adding the new Beaded Border and no longer dishing the surface to
    create a working die, then leaving it open dated "18__".
    It would have been a demonstration of the new technology and given with assorted years and denominations,
    would prove that die production could be done faster and more efficiently and cover many years of future use,
    the reason for 1833 through 1835 & 1836 (maybe ?) dating.

    On the same note, wouldn't these then be considered Patterns or Die Trials?
    Unofficial design, edge and diameter changes.

    Anyone want to put their CLE Half up for assay, to check for composition change?

    Is there something different about the eagle compared to other CBHs, or is it just an optical illusion caused by the
    beaded borders and well defined rims?

    I did an overlay of the Beaded Border die with the reverse from 1834 O-101, it's the same Eagle or Master die.
    But it uses smaller letters along with the beaded edge border and raised rim area.

    There still looks to be striking issues, as the hubbing of the dies were still too deep.
    With the fine details still passed over even with their multiple strikes.

    1833 with Obverse forecurl hair weakness.
    1834 and 1835 specimens with weakness in the Talons.
    These areas correspond to each other, with the fore curl/ cap area the highest point of both dies.

    Interesting fact here was the use of different Master dies in producing these New Beaded Edge working dies.
    They represent a subject that most collectors may have not seen, but read about and not really understand.
    The 1833 used the 4th portrait master die, the 1834 the 3rd and the 1835 the 6th.
    Represented with a picture showing them side by side, one can visually understand
    the statement of ".. various Master Dies", because without them, one just forms a conclusion.

    1833 , Obv. 110 Large beads with Large Date.
    Using the 4th Master Portrait Hub.

    1834 , Obv. 148 Small beads with Small Date.
    Using the 3rd Master Portrait Hub.

    1835 , Obv. 148 Small beads with Small Date.
    Using the 6th Master Portrait Hub.

    I don't know why they would be considered Restrikes!
    CLE Halves are Proofs with multiple strikes (blows)
    and are the BEST of the era.

    If the existence of the 1836 CLE half is true, there may be a possibility that the fifth Master Portrait Hub saw use.
    Incorporating all the four final hub types.

    The comparison picture shows 1834 O-122 CLE, 1833 O-116 CLE and 1836 O-101 (regular production strike) to show the Hub styles.
    Looking at the New Reeded edge halves, you notice the features are of lower relief, this may be the end result of this experiment!

    image

    From the B-M Logan Sale description.

    1833 Crushed Lettered Edge
    This variety has long been considered a restrike, however, if so, it could not have been struck any later than 1836.
    The edge is plain and the overall appearance is entirely unlike any other Capped Bust half dollar.
    There is no doubt this was struck with a closed collar although on a planchet with lettered edge originally intended
    as a regular circulation strike half dollar. When subjected to the high pressure required for coinage,
    the closed collar flattened the edge and literally crushed or obliterated the edge, thus today's popular name for these coins.
    It is interesting to compare this example with the 1832 O-123 Proof offered several lots earlier.
    There are many differences that suggest two completely different methods of manufacture.
    Edge has no lettering, only known specimen without edge letting.
    4 reported known.

    Possibly, the first struck Proof U.S. coin?

    1834 Crushed Lettered Edge
    This is the second Crushed Lettered Edge variety in the Logan Collection.
    Although very lightly circulated, much of the original edge lettering is still readable although flat.
    As noted above for the 1833 example, the reader is referred to the article that Russ Logan prepared in Volume 5, issue 3,
    12/ 90 of the JRCS Journal.
    5 reported known

    1835 Crushed Lettered Edge
    4 reported known

    1836 Crushed Lettered Edge
    One reported, but unseen.


  • This reminds me of the 1834 Half Dollar I have. It reads "ORLF" instead of "OR HALF". The coin of interest is the top one. The bottom one is used to illustrate a normal one how the edge lettering should be. Does this ORLF error bring any premium?

    image
    A lie told often enough becomes the truth. ~Vladimir Lenin
  • mozinmozin Posts: 8,755 ✭✭✭
    SomeGuyFromMichigan,

    Thanks for the very informative study.image
    I collect Capped Bust series by variety in PCGS AU/MS grades.
  • MrEureka and SomeGuyFromMichigan - Thank You for an interesting subject. My questions: Mechanical compression MAY have altered the diameter of the planchet used and the collar MAY have been adjustable. How do we settle these open theories and answer the original question presented? POSSIBLY an experimental edge device was used and POSSIBLY reeded collars were not yet available. How do we conclude that this is fact? Is it at all possible that a simple human error occcured, i.e. lettered edge pieces were mistakenly used, the mistake was discovered and the human "what if" impulse took over and the individuals wanted to see what the new toy would do? How does one convincingly answer MrEurekas' questions? Respectfully, John Curlis
  • MrEureka and SomeGuyFromMichigan - Thank You for an interesting subject. My questions: Mechanical compression MAY have altered the diameter of the planchet used and the collar MAY have been adjustable. How do we settle these open theories and answer the original question presented? POSSIBLY an experimental edge device was used and POSSIBLY reeded collars were not yet available. How do we conclude that this is fact? Is it at all possible that a simple human error occurred, i.e. lettered edge pieces were mistakenly used, the mistake was discovered and the human "what if" impulse took over and the individuals wanted to see what the new toy would do? How does one convincingly answer MrEurekas' questions? Respectfully, John Curlis

    To answer your questions charley
    and this is only my opinions,

    The first one, in Russ Logan's study he observed the specimens diameter and weight.
    Finding similarities in the diameters of the CLE and the regular Lettered Edge examples.
    The CLE halves averaged 1.273 while Lettered Edge examples were 1.279 with the reeded edge coins at 1.205.
    Plus the fact that no stated standard is given for the diameters.

    In reading over auction descriptions, the 1833 with no edge lettering, this brought up that the new closed collar had further upset the edge and obliterated any edge lettering.
    This could account for one of these...
    a) An Unlettered Edge planchet, edge not upset.
    b) First use of the new Closed collar, which is set too close. (first coin struck)
    c) A smooth edged collar, as it closes around the planchet, it compressed the upset edge inward as the coin was set up to be struck. As the coin is struck the mechanical compression forces the upset area at the edge outward and collapses the present edge lettering.

    To answer your last question on human error, the collar wasn't reeded, why.
    Because these coins were possibly produced in the first quarter of 1836 (L/G Emission Squence) and the specifics of the Coinage Act of 1837 hadn't been set forth as of yet.

    Or number door # 3. When Slumlord gives to more realistic reasoning "...To answer this question, we'd have to fire up the old time traveler and ask the coiner why these CLEs were made.

    I don't know all your answers, I do try to analyze available research thoroughly, then maybe the next
    guy might pick up something new from my thoughts.

    Thank you John Curlis
    Mike
  • bidaskbidask Posts: 14,022 ✭✭✭✭✭
    you guys are numismatists
    I manage money. I earn money. I save money .
    I give away money. I collect money.
    I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.




  • Thank You, SomeGuyFrom Michigan. I didn't know that there wasn't a stated standard for the diameters. I would appreciate a source reference,when it is convenient for you.I would also appreciate any source that may clarify the reason why the experimental edge device was used. Thank You for your research and courtesy. Respectfully, John Curlis
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
    SomeGuyFromMichigan - Thanks for the info and insights!
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • firstmintfirstmint Posts: 1,171
    This is great stuff -

    As an aside from CLE's, I'd like to make note of something similar regarding the Capeed Bust Quarters. The two 1827/3/2 Essay pieces (struck over earlier issued DB quarters on cut down planchets) are CRE's - Crushed Reeded Edges. These too were struck twice.

    Based on my research, these were the first experimental "close" collar strikings done on the new press that was purchased in early December 1827 from Rush & Muhlenburg.

    It would appear that when a new technology was implemented at the US Mint on a new type press, there were different "test strikings" made to test the collars, the ejection system, and diameters of the planchets, etc.

    More the the CREs will appear in Steve Tompkins new early quarter dollar book, which is scheduled for a summer ANA release date.
    PM me if you are looking for U.S. auction catalogs
  • That is VERY interesting information.Another question: 1827/3/2? Thank You. Respectfully, John Curlis
  • firstmintfirstmint Posts: 1,171
    For those who aren't aware -

    The 1827 Capped Bust Quarters were overdated using the already overdated 1823/2 obverse die - hence the correct terminology of 1827/3/2 quarter.

    PM me if you are looking for U.S. auction catalogs
  • I wanted to make certain that was what you were referring to, and not using shorthand as dates of the event. Sincerely and With Appreciation, John Curlis
  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 32,711 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>This is great stuff -

    As an aside from CLE's, I'd like to make note of something similar regarding the Capeed Bust Quarters. The two 1827/3/2 Essay pieces (struck over earlier issued DB quarters on cut down planchets) are CRE's - Crushed Reeded Edges. These too were struck twice.

    Based on my research, these were the first experimental "close" collar strikings done on the new press that was purchased in early December 1827 from Rush & Muhlenburg.

    It would appear that when a new technology was implemented at the US Mint on a new type press, there were different "test strikings" made to test the collars, the ejection system, and diameters of the planchets, etc.

    More the the CREs will appear in Steve Tompkins new early quarter dollar book, which is scheduled for a summer ANA release date.[/q

    THAT I did not know! Thanks!
    Great thread!
    TD
    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The two 1827/3/2 Essay pieces (struck over earlier issued DB quarters on cut down planchets) are CRE's - Crushed Reeded Edges. These too were struck twice.

    Actually, they were probably only struck once. JD's recent article noted some apparent strike doubling that later proved to be a lint mark shaped something like the numeral one. Unfortunately, the lint mark was next to the "1" in the date. Oops! Of course, he would never have made that mistake if he had the coin in hand, but he made the "discovery" while looking at enlarged high resolution images. There lies a lesson for all of us!

    BTW, the Eliasberg 27/3/2 quarter is struck over an 1806/5. JD jokingly refers to it as an 1827/3/2/6/5.
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 32,711 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>The two 1827/3/2 Essay pieces (struck over earlier issued DB quarters on cut down planchets) are CRE's - Crushed Reeded Edges. These too were struck twice.

    Actually, they were probably only struck once. JD's recent article noted some apparent strike doubling that later proved to be a lint mark shaped something like the numeral one. Unfortunately, the lint mark was next to the "1" in the date. Oops! Of course, he would never have made that mistake if he had the coin in hand, but he made the "discovery" while looking at enlarged high resolution images. There lies a lesson for all of us!

    BTW, the Eliasberg 27/3/2 quarter is struck over an 1806/5. JD jokingly refers to it as an 1827/3/2/6/5. >>



    Sounds like a coin of Honduras...............
    image
    TD
    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • Great stuff! I just saved this entire thread to file for future reference.

    Thanks for the thread Mr. Eureka and thanks SomeGuyFromMichigan for the info. image
  • firstmintfirstmint Posts: 1,171
    Andy -

    There's only one way to get Crushed Reeded Edges, and that's if the coin was struck first in a reeded edge collar. The second strike would have been with a (presumably) smaller diameter smooth collar.

    The denticles on these two pieces appear to have a second strike with some light doubling.

    When these were examined by John Dannruether and Steve Tompkins at the last Long Beach and FUN shows (coins in hand), there were several pictures taken. Hopefully, these will be widely examined by all numismatists.
    PM me if you are looking for U.S. auction catalogs
  • MrEurekaMrEureka Posts: 24,412 ✭✭✭✭✭
    There's only one way to get Crushed Reeded Edges, and that's if the coin was struck first in a reeded edge collar. The second strike would have been with a (presumably) smaller diameter smooth collar.

    That's certainly likely, but not certain. For example, the reeding could have been applied with a Castaing machine, not with a collar, in which case the coin need be struck only once. But if the dentils are indeed doubled, then it's all moot.
    Andy Lustig

    Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.

    Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
  • The idea of using a Castaing machine to create the reeding is a natural first assumption.

    However, from all that I have read about the workings at the first US Mint, there were not any reeded "slide bars" made or used.

    The one thing that would validate a Castaing use would be were the two halves came to the starting point on the opposite side. The reeding would be unequal in spacing or doubled where they overlapped.

    This was not the case on the two Essay coins. There was even reeding around the entire diameter, plus, there was "extra" unreeded metal on part of the top edge. This was most likely caused by the extra squished reeding being forced up when it was ejected a second time.

    Not having read JD's article, I don't know what he mentioned about the Castaing theory, but it simply doesn't apply to these two particular pieces.
    PM me if you are looking for U.S. auction catalogs

Leave a Comment

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