Question on S195 and S205
I have a question about the reverse die on S195 and S205. I was hoping someone with numistudy could do an overlay of these two reverse dies to see if they are the same. I spent some time looking at the Holmes coins and it appears all the design elements line up, along with the crack from the denominator through the ribbon and into ICA. I know the berry right of NT is smaller on one than the other, and there are some clash marks which differ, but all those elements can be affected by polishing the die, but the crack would not be fixed by polishing.
Well, let's see, it rejected me once and I won't give it a 3rd try.
Good eye, I think you are correct, though it will take additional phone calls and pictures to convince Bill Noyes. After trying several overlays, I find that everything seems to line up. Let me just say a bit about overlays. I usually select two points that are either part of the bust (obverse) or wreath (reverse), two points in the lettering, etc. I lay those two points on one another with NumiStudy, and look at the overall picture, the lettering if I lined up on the wreath, or vice-versa. The denticles have no reason to line up with either, unless we have the same die.
I did find a rather late state S205. It had an inner berry at T weaker than the outer one, the same funny shape to the top of the R in AMERICA, and the crack thru C extended thru A, seen between the feet, a little off the base. I tried several overlays; on the one attached, I overlaid the upper right and lower left berries, and see that everything else lines up very well, even the denticles. Neither variety commonly shows all the denticles, but I used two with denticles at the upper right.
The overlay shows good alignment, as I said, and thus confirms the relationship. S 195 appears to be struck with the same reverse die after S205, which was after S204. This gives lie to a long-held assumption that the overdates were struck first, leftover dies, before they used the new, clean 180_ dies, at least as far as S195 is concerned. I say that because S195 appears to be the later state, weaker denticles, longer crack, weak berry, possibly from repolishing the die, etc.
The attached overlays were done in NumiStudy, using photos from the listings. Yes, they are overlays, not just single pictures.
As I said, good eye, and after looking at these, I'm surprised no one has suggested it before.
Dan - thanks for taking the time to do this. The attached pictures are not showing up for me, but your description is very interesting. Honestly, I am not following all of your logic regarding the striking sequence between the overdates and the normal dies but I will do a little more research. One last thing, but someone on another forum brought up the similarity, I posted it here to see if anyone has any ideas.
Last edited by beef1020; 03-25-2013 at 07:33 PM.