Here's a 1832 half dime up in an eBay auction. It's the R-3 LM-8.4 die remarriage, only moderately scarce. What intrigues me about this coin is the blobby nature of Stars 1 and 2. The outline of the stars is there but there is no interior detail. Nothing else about the coin suggests any reason for this: no soft strike; no die bulging in this area on obverse or reverse although there is a die bulge on the reverse banner. I haven't seen these filled stars on any other LM-8.4 examples. I can only surmise that the die had some grease leftover in the stars' recesses that prevented metal flow into the deeper recesses of the star. Yet, I don't find this explanation especially satisfying. I noted that Stars 10 and 12 are a little weak so if grease is a likely explanation, then there could have been a little left in these devices as well. Anyone care to take a stab at it?
I did a little research and could not find anything. Your thought, as well as mine, are as good as any at this point. Good luck.
@Publius2 after we corresponded about this I did a little noodling on it. I've got all five of the remarriages LM-8.1 thru LM-8.5 and was thinking this business with the stars was a problem with obverse 4 (and thus, progressively, would be seen on the later remarriages). But in looking at my coins, it didn't pan out that way. I've changed my mind - I think it's an effect of reverse T, which shows a die bulge that at various times obscures various combinations of the RIBU letters in PLURIBUS. Reverse T has a long glorious life, which spans an amazing 13 pairings (marriages / remarriages) in 1832 and 1833 dated coins. In the LM-8.x remarriages, that bulge is prominent - and I found a similar marker in Star 1 of my own 1832 LM-8.2. Here's my AU55 in TrueView. Star 1 is definitely "globbed" like this example coin you picture here! My other LM-8.x remarriages don't exhibit that. I link the Coinfacts for LM-8.2 below the image, if anyone wants to poke around. All in all, an interesting observation! https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1832-h10c-lm-8-2/38671
And in the finest tradition of "feast or famine," this coin showed up on eBay today (but was promptly grabbed up by someone). This one has some pretty slick stars 8-10 to boot.
@bikergeek, Die bulge is as good an explanation as any at this point, but as with grease I am not entirely satisfied with that either. I just don't see how the reverse die bulge in the scroll can result in the "blobbed" stars 1 & 2 much less stars on the other side of the periphery. Given the frequent die changes made during the striking of the series, I can see how repeated application and removal of preservative grease could be hastily and incompletely accomplished by a harried staff. I surely appreciate your thoughts on this, though.
OK, I've tested this empirically and suggest that you peer-review my test. I made a tight fist. Then, to simulate the die bulge, I extended the middle finger knuckle out of the fist, while still keeping it tight. Then, I hit myself repeatedly in the side of my face. The contact area impressed by the extended middle knuckle was sharply defined, while the contact areas made by my adjacent knuckles was much less defined (approximating the soft strike on stars 1-2). I'll await peer review feedback. EVERYONE is welcome to try it! heheh
@bikergeek, I bow to your superior test methodology. Like the ancient philosophers, I am willing to accept your conclusions without proof of concept.
