1828 Cohen-1 Classic Head Half-Cent

I suppose most overdate dies were modified after sinking / hardened / put into production. One way to prove it would be to look for identical die variety characteristics on the prior year specimen's obverse.

There are cases where a die was created, never put into production, and the overdate created from the unused die.

One classic case is the 1802/1 $5. There are no 1801 specimens, so all 1801 dies were virgin when overdated to make coins for 1802.

Was the 1801 $5 die was hardened before repunching ? Dunno. I'm not sure there are any records, but perhaps some clues for those clever attribution types !

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nice, I have one in MS63+ RB, same date.

 

The 1802 Half-Cent was also similar (pointed out earlier). They used an unused obverse die from 1800 and punched over the last zero with a two, creating the 1802/0 overdate (technically a 1800/2). However, the article I read said nothing about whether or not the die had been hardened yet and someone else has stated they don't repunch a hardened die.

I would love to know which it is because to me a true "virgin" die would not be hardened and to repunch a hardened die, would undoubtedly damage the punches.

This conversation is getting kewl!

Ribbit

Ps: I can't remember if I've posted the results of the 1825 Half-Cent but the extra long line beneath CENT was corrosion. It sure looked like an extended line but somehow nature pulled one over on me. Now I can't wait for my 1802 Half-Cent to arrive so I can examin the reverse better to determine which one it's got. :kewl:

 

That's just the point. Other than the 1806/5 quarter and half NONE of the other US overdates are on a die that was previously used in a non-overdated fashion.

Dies were not made up individually as they were needed, they were made in batches. We're running low on obv dies, make up another batch of five to ten of them. The thing is you don't want to have a bunch of leftover dies at the end of the year with the wrong date on them. Well the way to handle that is to not punch the last digit into all of them. Then when it gets close to when your going to need it, you punch in the last digit, harden the die, and you're ready to go. In most cases the first three digits of the date are the same so if you roll over from one year to the next it's no problem.

A good example of this is (and the problems that can happen) can be found in 1798 with the large cents. Production was going well they still had dies on hand but were getting a little low and a new batch of obv dies was created. One of them had the full date punched into it and the others were just punched with 179_. But then a severe yellow fever outbreak forced the mint to close down (This was pretty much an annual occurrence in the 1790's) When the mint reopened late in 1798 they now found themselves coming up on the end of the year with several perfectly good and hardened 1798 cent dies, at least two fully dated but unhardened dies, and at least five partially dated unhardened dies. Rather than discard the hardened 1798 dies they just continued using them through the end of the year and right into 1799. At some point in 1799 they took one of the 1798 dated unhardened dies and punched a 9 over the last 8, hardened it and started using it. (They were still striking 1798 cents as well. We know this because the 99/8 obv was paired with two different reverse dies that were later used to strike 1798 cents. The reverse dies were in a later die state when used to make the 1798 cents.)

One of the 179_ dies was also used after having the final 9 punched into it. But there was another yellow fever outbreak that year and as the year ended there were no more hardened 1798 dies, one fully dated unhardened 1798 die, and four 179_ dies on hand.

But the next year was 1800, so the 1798 die became 1800/798 (S-190,191,NC-5, NC-6) and the other four 1800/79_ (S-192 - 196, NC-1, NC-2)

 

I just acquired a copy of Walter Breen's Complete Encyclopedia of U.S. and Colonial Coins. Got it at my local coin shop for $75.00. Considering used copies are going for well over $200.00 on Ebay and elsewhere's, I said SOLD faster than I've ever said yes to a date with a pretty girl.

Now I'm a Toad with a book! Watch out coins, here I come. :kewl:

Ribbit

Ps: Now all I need is the Early Cents & Half-Cents encyclopedias and I'll be dangerous.

 

Do they have any more copies?

By the way, be gentle with it. Pages will be falling out of it eventually (very poorly bound) but you can delay it with careful handling.

 

He had one more copy but that was his copy. I told him I'd take any he gets in for that price, so he's on the outlook for me plus there's a coin thingy going down this weekend so I will be checking there to see what I can find. :thumb:

As to the binding, my copy seems to be very strong on the binding, but that doesn't mean it will hold up. Do you know how many printings there were? My copy is the original printing of 1988 and the cover has a price of $125.00 US and $175.00 Canada. I know these are currently selling at close to twice that so I know this is an old copy but it looks new.

Ribbit