Is this actually "damage?"

Looks to me like someone put half the coin in a rag, then put it into a vice and smashed it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The only problem with the premise is, this has been known to be a significant rarity from the day it was first issued. Nobody in their right mind would force a fake "error" onto a coin whose value in original condition is through the moon. So, if it's PMD, we have to assume that damage is contemporary and accidental.

At least, I think we "have" to.

 

I just thought I would point that the overlay has been created assuming perfect alignment; however, by looking at the coin holders, it can be seen that this is incorrect.

 

No it doesn't. If that had occurred, the stars and lettering would either be the most affected or flattened. The opposite is true.

 

I like the overlay, but look at the photos of the holder on DLRC. The reverse does not align with the obverse. When I originally realigned the images on my computer to account for the misaligned reverse, I saw that the damage was exactly aligned, not merely approximately aligned.

Although my story was a fictional account I tried to weave in every fact at my disposal. I was so convincing to myself that I almost bought the coin.

Edit: Apologies for replying before reading all replies.

 

You still haven't made any attempt to explain how a file clashed onto the bust's high points with out obliterating everything around it....

 

I'm with Dave here. Many years ago I worked on a software project with a small team. At every design meeting we were all sure we understood the problems and how to solve them. As we talked we found out how wrong that was.

I am comfortable with being wrong, if it helps reach an understanding that accounts for all known observations and explains why other theories don't fit.

I'm happy to put in some more time on my theory and story. If we really propose a detailed scenario we can support or demolish particular points. If demolishing my ideas helps illuminate another explanation that we all like, then my day will be a pretty good one.

 

Ever feel like your talking to a wall?

 

I'll give the file theory some more thought, but I'll need to get some time to work with the images.

I'd already proposed a partial theory involving high force and elastic compression of the dies (in my fanciful story) but it was easy to overlook.

So I will put my thinking cap on and see if I can support or refute that idea.

 

You aren't taking into account how Tooling works. In order for a tool to work, it must be harder than the metal being worked upon. Thus, the die will need to be a harder steel than the coin. The file would then need to be a harder material than the die. if you make a file from a softer metal it would be ineffective. When you brute force two pieces of metal together, the harder of the two will win the battle- in this case the file. I'm assuming the damage caused by this would be pretty catastrophic- eliminating features and leaving cracks.

 

That all sounds exactly sound to me. I have worked in metal-working in my 20's and still have a bunch of hardened bits, drills, and files in the basement. I also operated punch presses built around 1900, according to the patent date cast onto the housing.

So you really have me thinking that maybe I do know more than I thought...

I have definitely held work pieces between dies as the jaws of the presses slam together. If misaligned it can send quite a shock up your arms.

But, since any machinist would expect this to happen, you would never use a brittle steel for this. It would just shatter. Instead you need a steel harder than the workpiece but probably softer and more flexible than, say, drill metal or a file.

When the workpiece is a planchet the material is about as soft as it comes. That leaves a lot of latitude for the die material. It has to be durable and resilient to abuse. Ideally it would be fairly elastic for steel, given the way the dies hammer together. You want it to deform slightly and flex back, repeatedly. But it doesn't have to be anywhere near as hard as a file.

There is a lot more thinking I need to do. I appreciate your nudge to realize I actually know more than I realized.

 

I can't wait to see Dave's pictures when he has it in hand.

 

Great discussion all.
Anybody think this could be an adjustment strike?
Crazy theory but...???

 

If I had that kind of disposable income, I'd buy it after getting a few hundred off because of the damage . I heard from Mr. Weinberg. He did not see the coin as it was not sent in as an error.

 

I'm dead serious saying I'd buy it if I could, but equally serious when I say it ain't anything I can afford in this lifetime.

 

Well it's still up. Hint #1

 

Hmm, I did not pay any attention to the alignment, assuming it was correct. I re-did the animation with the prongs aligned:

 

That probably indicated that Fred looked at the image and agreed it was damage.

 

They would have no way of knowing whether or not those dies would be needed again. They wouldn't know no one else was going to order half dimes, and even at the end of the year, if the dies were still in good shape they would be held over for use the next year. (They didn't discard a perfectly good die just because it had the wrong date. If someone had ordered half dimes in Jan 1806 they would have used the 1805 dies.) In fact the reverse of this coin is a die that was created and used in 1803.

Why destroy the file? The striking of the file by the steel dies would have destroyed it as well.

Where did that planchets come from? That silver was owned by a depositor and would have to be returned to him. No one was going to just pick up a coin and walk out with it. (At that time all silver and gold at the mint came from outside depositors and each persons deposit had to be worked up and accounted for before the next deposit could be processed.) Also this variety comes in later die stages than shown on this piece, so the damage was done to the coin not the die.

You damage the coin and then circulate it so that the damage wears off the high point areas. (and I do think I see some traces of the damage pattern on the stars)

 

Excellent points.

I knew I was off base on the "taking home" part. If nothing else the coin is obviously circulated, so it reached its intended destination.

I have also been wondering if some of the damage has just worn off. If you use the coin enough to wear down the bust you have to wear the other raised elements, like the stars. Just because they are smooth now is no guarantee that they always were.

The tricky element for me is still the mark between the strand of hair and the ribbon. It's hard to get down in there after the coin is struck. But if you damage the die or strike through fabric then that's a high point and easy to mark.