<< <i>I do appreciate your not lashing out at me JR.
Previously, I had heard neither of the points, but now that I have heard the screw theory, what ' is ' the other notion? >>
The two main lines of thought that I am aware of are either a dropped screw theory or a dropped die theory. I like to keep it simple sometimes and remember that our dear old mint workers were working with some really wild screw presses back in this day and I bet these old machines had more parts and screws than we could imagine. And I bet that screws and probably springs popped out every now and then and Mr. Murphy would dictate (even back then) that the parts would probably fall right smack between the dies...
From the very first post of this thread......here's some closeup doubling for Lewy et al viewing!!! Any thoughts on this lady, Lewy?? I'm amazed at the striking techniques used by the USA in the early 1800's
Thanks for the consensual notions JR. I really am very surprised.
I don't know anything about beaded vs milled perimeters, but I will be learning about this very shortly.
Bully, that is some of the most impressive strike doublings I have ever seen. Almost hurts the eyes. Actually, I have a hard time believing that this was not more common that it seems to be, unless most of the doubled coins have already been scooped up by collectors of such things. I have one 1810 that may rival this one, but mine is not in as such great condition as yours.
Thanks so much for posting that 1812 AU58WALKERS. Every time I think that I have just seen the most beautiful coin ever in this thread, another one comes along to top it (in my book anyway). Your coin confirms what I felt about this pairing all along. The reverse clashing and obverse counter-clashing is amazing. The impressions in the hair in front of the ribbon and that between the stars and lips / nose are just too sweet. What a fabulous coin !
Hoho, I thought you were running out of these things Bully, but you were saving the big fireworks weren't you? I have two left, and at least four more on the way. I don't know what they are yet, but I was told that they will be something that I like.
Dave, I have a couple of newbie questions about the LDS 1812 109a.......If ' all ' of the reverse marks have been ' lapped ', how do you tell the difference between it and a 109 ? Also does lapped = ground away or ' polished ' away?
Here is the first bust half that this thread caused me to go out and buy. Be careful fellows readers this thread is dangerous.
I first eyed this coin late last year when Stman posted it for sale. Stman knows his 1807's and this coin looked great. It disapeared from the BST after about a wk. Well when this thread started I remebered how nice this coin looked. I contacted Stman and luckily he still had the coin. A deal was worked out and now I have this beauty in my set.
<< <i>Here is the first bust half that this thread caused me to go out and buy. Be careful fellows readers this thread is dangerous.
I first eyed this coin late last year when Stman posted it for sale. Stman knows his 1807's and this coin looked great. It disapeared from the BST after about a wk. Well when this thread started I remebered how nice this coin looked. I contacted Stman and luckily he still had the coin. A deal was worked out and now I have this beauty in my set.
>>
Great story fishteeth, great coin......I'm feeling a bit verklempt right now!!!!
A nice variety for the 1817 year set is the punctuated date 181.7 Note that this variety shares the reverse with the famous 1817/14 variety with the broken I's on the reverse resembling J's. Neat variety.
Here is another CBH fun variety, the 1836/1336 We often see a die from a previous year being re-used with the date not completely lapped off, thus an overdate. Well I don't think there was a CBH die in use in 1336 so this is an example of a pure blunder. Someone got a little ahead of themselves and grabbed the 3 punch a little prematurely resulting in the 1836/1336.
Hey Lewi, That looks like an 1831 O-116 The left base of the M is higher than the right base of the A in this variety. As you know, these were added individually...although with some type of spacer I'm sure ...so they can vary from their "normal" position. Nice looking coin by the way.
Here is an example of another uneven AM 1823 O-103
As far as the placement of the 'M' on the 1831 reverse Bully, I really shouldn't have said "placement". I am fairly certain that the punch used to put it there was out of place as well as being too big. The 'M' is over-sized (or maybe the 'A' & 'E' are undersized). So my guess would be worker error / punch inconsistancy.
Yeah JR, 116 is my guess. Although not mentioned anywhere that I can find, the 'E' in statEs appears to have been reworked as well.
Could you please answer me a question concerning the 1812 109a ? Some folks feel that there is a late state of this die in which all of the 'marks' around the eagle's right wing (or left wing, as I am still very confused about left and right when referring to coins) have been eliminated.
My primary interests do not lie in condition or variety identification; I am more interested in cause and effect. Let me ask this: Is there a foremost expert that I could contact to get answers on some of the anomalies that are incorporated in the earlier CBH? I have questions that are important to me, yet appear to be irrelevant to most folks. Not knowing the cause of features on these coins, but simply accepting an earlier and poorly conceived notion as fact, or believing that nobody really knows, does not suit my unorthodox and sometimes radical thought process. Are some questions indiscreet / are some topics taboo?
In regards to your question about a foremost expert in the CBH field, I would have to defer to Edgar Souders, the author of the popular (and in my opinion essential reading) book, Bust Half Fever, as well as several others.
He is on the boards, and goes by the name of FEVER.
Although I don't know how often he posts, I believe he is THE man to ask all your tough questions regarding how and why things were done with CBHs.
Comments
<< <i>I do appreciate your not lashing out at me JR.
Previously, I had heard neither of the points, but now that I have heard the screw theory, what ' is ' the other notion? >>
The two main lines of thought that I am aware of are either a dropped screw theory or a dropped die theory.
I like to keep it simple sometimes and remember that our dear old mint workers were working with some really wild screw presses back in this day and I bet these old machines had more parts and screws than we could imagine. And I bet that screws and probably springs popped out every now and then and Mr. Murphy would dictate (even back then) that the parts would probably fall right smack between the dies...
here is another 36, this time the beaded border. only one in the series with a beaded border
<< <i>Post your purdy ladies here!!!
From the very first post of this thread......here's some closeup doubling for Lewy et al viewing!!!
Any thoughts on this lady, Lewy??
I'm amazed at the striking techniques used by the USA in the early 1800's
<< <i>thanks for the link goldbully
here is another 36, this time the beaded border. only one in the series with a beaded border
Love that 'beaded border' JR...............good luck with the SpaceMonkey template!!
Please post your first one on this thread!!!
<< <i>thanks for the link goldbully
here is another 36, this time the beaded border. only one in the series with a beaded border
Here's a tip: when resizing photos adjust the height, not width, and photos will look nicer, side by side.
Nice 1836, Fishteeth!
Lance.
I don't know anything about beaded vs milled perimeters, but I will be learning about this very shortly.
Bully, that is some of the most impressive strike doublings I have ever seen. Almost hurts the eyes. Actually, I have a hard time believing that this was not more common that it seems to be, unless most of the doubled coins have already been scooped up by collectors of such things. I have one 1810 that may rival this one, but mine is not in as such great condition as yours.
Thanks so much for posting that 1812 AU58WALKERS. Every time I think that I have just seen the most beautiful coin ever in this thread, another one comes along to top it (in my book anyway). Your coin confirms what I felt about this pairing all along.
The reverse clashing and obverse counter-clashing is amazing. The impressions in the hair in front of the ribbon and that between the stars and lips / nose are just too sweet. What a fabulous coin !
Keeping the thread alive, here is a 12/1
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
The amateur image actually shows the 'thick mint frost' very nicely.
Thanks for your kind words about the doubling on the 1824, Lewy!!
I first eyed this coin late last year when Stman posted it for sale. Stman knows his 1807's and this coin looked great. It disapeared
from the BST after about a wk. Well when this thread started I remebered how nice this coin looked. I contacted Stman and luckily
he still had the coin. A deal was worked out and now I have this beauty in my set.
<< <i>Here is the first bust half that this thread caused me to go out and buy. Be careful fellows readers this thread is dangerous.
I first eyed this coin late last year when Stman posted it for sale. Stman knows his 1807's and this coin looked great. It disapeared
from the BST after about a wk. Well when this thread started I remebered how nice this coin looked. I contacted Stman and luckily
he still had the coin. A deal was worked out and now I have this beauty in my set.
Great story fishteeth, great coin......I'm feeling a bit verklempt right now!!!!
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BTW: The last three coins are all now in PCGS holders, successfully crossed (with a crack out) from their former ANACS tombs at grade.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
Here's my 1826...
and 1827...
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
Note that this variety shares the reverse with the famous 1817/14 variety
with the broken I's on the reverse resembling J's. Neat variety.
Very neat coin.
without
with
This is a much better image of this coin...
Here's another 'PS reflection' coin of my 1818 CBH.....keep up the great posts, guys!!!!
We often see a die from a previous year being re-used
with the date not completely lapped off, thus an overdate. Well I don't think there was
a CBH die in use in 1336 so this is an example of a pure blunder. Someone got a little
ahead of themselves and grabbed the 3 punch a little prematurely resulting in the 1836/1336.
Check out this 1825--
Strange 'M' placement.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
<< <i>Strange 'M' placement.
Nice original '31, Lewy.
What do you think made 'M' not align???
<< <i>chd, that is a stunning half! nice job on the photos, too. >>
Thanks, It's my one and only Capped Bust...
That looks like an 1831 O-116
The left base of the M is higher than the right base of the A in this variety.
As you know, these were added individually...although with some type of spacer I'm sure
they can vary from their "normal" position.
Nice looking coin by the way.
Here is an example of another uneven AM
1823 O-103
I am fairly certain that the punch used to put it there was out of place as well as being too big.
The 'M' is over-sized (or maybe the 'A' & 'E' are undersized). So my guess would be worker error / punch inconsistancy.
Could you please answer me a question concerning the 1812 109a ? Some folks feel that there is a late state of this die in which all of the 'marks' around the eagle's right wing (or left wing, as I am still very confused about left and right when referring to coins) have been eliminated.
What distinguishes this 'late state' from a 109 ?
1813 107a. I have seen a couple other coins of this variety that exhibit the same abnormality. The eagle's head is missing, but why?
I have seen many other 107a (even in very worn states) in which the head is normal. Surrounding devices are present.
It's a struggle to remember what I posted and what I haven't. This thread has staying power.
Lance.
My primary interests do not lie in condition or variety identification; I am more interested in cause and effect.
Let me ask this: Is there a foremost expert that I could contact to get answers on some of the anomalies that are incorporated in the earlier CBH? I have questions that are important to me, yet appear to be irrelevant to most folks.
Not knowing the cause of features on these coins, but simply accepting an earlier and poorly conceived notion as fact, or believing that nobody really knows, does not suit my unorthodox and sometimes radical thought process.
Are some questions indiscreet / are some topics taboo?
In regards to your question about a foremost expert in the CBH field, I would have to defer to Edgar Souders, the author of the popular (and in my opinion essential reading) book, Bust Half Fever, as well as several others.
He is on the boards, and goes by the name of FEVER.
Although I don't know how often he posts, I believe he is THE man to ask all your tough questions regarding how and why things were done with CBHs.
<< <i>Thanks 'very' much Dave. I will attempt to find him. >>
I will reply later Lewy as I am running off to get some work done.
You have asked some great questions and I look forward to the discussion.
PS -Edgar is a walking reference book on these coins, but there are a few others
also....they will be along.