Recently @Eduard posted pictures of a very nice group of early U.S. dimes. I mentioned that the 1797, 16 star dime had hash marks under the stars. The die maker etched these small marks into the die face so that he could position the stars on the coin properly. In the early days of the U.S. mint, an additional star was added to the obverse of the silver and gold coins each time a new state was added to the Union. When Tennessee joined the Union on June 1, 1796, the number of states reached 16. At that point, Chief Mint Engraver, Robert Scot, came to the conclusion that there was not enough room on the coin to add more. He cut back the number to 13 in honor of the 13 original states on the last half dime die he made in 1797. The 1797 half dime is the only coin that had 15, 16 and 13 star varieties on the obverse in a single year. Here are examples of the three coins in the order in which they were issued: The 15 star coin was issued first Then came the 16 star coin And the 13 star coin was last If Tennessee was admitted to the Union in 1796, why didn't any of the 1796 coins have 16 stars? The answer had to do with mint procedures. Robert Scot produced dies ahead of time. He made them with the first three digits of the date punched in with the final number to be added when the die was placed in service. The 16 star dies were not used until 1797. Evidence of this can been seen from the three coins shown above. Note that the second "7" in the date is different from the first one on the 15 and 16 star coins: Sorry about the quality of this photo on the 15 star piece, but I don't have access to my coins to take a better photo. The second "7" on this piece is slightly smaller and does not have a serif. It is much clearer on this photo of the 16 star coin. The second "7" is larger. On the 13 star variety, the "7s" were appearantly entered with the same punch in one operation. They are too large for the coin (probably intended for dimes) and the same size. Getting all 16 stars on the die had to have been a challenge for Scot. Although it's much more obvious on the 1797, 16 star dime, hash marks are visible on the 1797, 16 star half dime as well. Note the undertype on the star next to the "Y." I once owned a 1797, 16 star dime, but I sold it when I upgraded the coin in my type set. Unfortunately, you can't afford to keep everything. Small details like this don't mean very much to most collectors, but if you collect a series in detail, it provides you with some insights as to how the early U.S. coins were made.
johnmilton, posted: "...I mentioned that the 1797, 16 star dime had hash marks under the stars. The die maker etched these small marks into the die face so that he could position the stars on the coin properly." Interesting theory but for now, I don't buy it.
Okay, what's your theory. I wish I had super close-up photes of the 1797, 16 star dime. Maybe I can get some from "Coin Facts."
Here is a 1797, 16 star dime from "Coin Facts." Note the undertype below the stars especially on the right side.
Nice example of some recut stars. Now, I will give your theory some support but not in the case of these coins. I have seen marks on coins that resulted from marks on the die used to line up parts of the design.
It has taken me over 45 years to form this collection. I started this collection with an 1800 "LIKERTY" half dime in the mid 1970s. When I was young, I felt the same way you did when I saw what the older collectors had.
When I owned the 1797, 16 star dime, years ago, I could marks with thin lines under the stars that were definitely not repunched stars with a 10X glass. The coin is gone, and I don't access to one, but I know what I saw.
@johnmilton another nice writeup. Thanks for the post and information. Scot did an amazing job getting the 16 stars on the coin, IMO.
I see the marks are the remains of previously lightly punched stars as well. On SOME coins (as Insider says not this one) you will see "lay out lines" where a compass was used to lightly scribe arcs on the die face to aid in the placement of stars or letters. (This is also where the center dots came from. The dot is the anchor point for the compass.)
John, you are a “Numismatist Extraordinaire” ! For those reading this post and don’t know a lot about Robert Scot, a quick scan of his Wiki page will enlighten you. He designed most every American Icon we know today of that error. Think bank notes, currency, paintings and coinage. The very first renditions of lady Liberty and our American Eagle. He did some amazing war scenes of the revolution. He was a Scotsman trained in Edinburgh as a line Engraver (Hint about alignment marks). Immigrated to America and became arguably the best coinage/ Plate engraver in the World at the time as nothing out of Europe came close to his work. "INSIDER_Interesting theory but for now, I don't buy it." - OK-Now look at your pinky finger, the round pad of that fingertip is the size of a half dime. Imagine trying to get that amazing engraving onto a dye. There is an argument for hubs of the time but it is still believed the first dyes were by Scot’s own hand. Of course marks were used for centering and star alignment but the trick was to erase them during before the coining process. I am 100% sure Scott’s assistants missed a few marks on the few dyes used in those times. The exact reason John had seen what he had seen of a few of the examples. Needless to say Half Dimes from that era were incredibly expensive and hard to find even in the seventies. They were the first of the circulating coins. Jefferson himself collected and spent the very first ones. They are coveted by collectors and Museums. To have a single one is rarity; to study and assemble a variety collection says a lot about the collector!
Nick Zynko, replied: "INSIDER_Interesting theory but for now, I don't buy it." OK-Now look at your pinky finger, the round pad of that fingertip is the size of a half dime. Imagine trying to get that amazing engraving onto a dye. There is an argument for hubs of the time but it is still believed the first dyes were by Scot’s own hand. Of course marks were used for centering and star alignment but the trick was to erase them during before the coining process. [ I am 100% sure that Scott did not need to place "gouges" into a die (that look like repunched stars) to line up his design.] I am 100% sure Scott’s assistants missed a few marks on the few dyes used in those times. The exact reason John had seen what he had seen of a few of the examples." PS Just because I disagree with johnmilton's theory does not take away from his accomplishments.
I don't know as much about the half dimes, but I do know there are several die varieties of bust halves where engravers marks and templates are still visible. This 1829 half is one of the most obvious - note the circle arcing across most of the top, showing where the dentils were supposed to be (and no, this is definitely not a die crack):
I agree. The stars look like they were originally punched unevenly and crooked, partially removed, and then repunched. They do not have the appearance of score marks.
