|
Reasons to Change Design Disappointingly Prosaic!“Conspiracy to Change Design of Major Gold Coin Uncovered!” would be a more compelling headline.Agreed. But keep reading… Tiny and seemingly insignificant differences in early US coin designs are anything but arbitrary, and contribute to the charm and interest these pieces offer to their collectors. Coin collectors, and their more scholarly brethren, numismatists, enjoy learning the reasons behind the subtle differences in individual coins of a given type. Consider the two images of Capped Head half eagles at the top of this page. At first glance, except for their dates, the coins seem identical. But there are minute differences. The Notched StarLooking closely at the magnified portion of the two coins shown below, you will notice on the 1813 coin the lowest star on the right side of Liberty’s head appears with a tiny notch on the lower edge of the star’s lower right ray.
Who would notice such an infinitesimal detail? Perhaps a collector contemplating a bid on such a coin at auction, or a numismatist who realized that this “flaw” may have meaning, especially as it appears consistently on half eagles through 1815 designed by John Reich. In fact, it was John Reich’s way of signing his work, in an era before designer initials were allowed on US coinage. More intriguing… Why does this notch not appear on half eagles of the Reich design after 1815? There are two more features to observe: The Wrinkled Cap
At the same time the notched star disappeared, Liberty’s cap became… more wrinkled. And… What Happened To Her Hair?!
It’s different – some have said “coarser”. The Rest of the StoryThese changes – the disappearing notch, and Liberty’s cap and hair, are the work of the Chief Engraver, Robert Scot, upon John Reich’s departure from mint employment after 10 years of service without a promotion.Some have inferred a slap in the face by Scot, but, given the relatively short life of design punches at the early US Mint, it would have fallen on Scot to change design punches normally renewed by Reich to keep production humming. Another factor to consider is a fire in the mint’s rolling mill so damaging to critical equipment that no half eagles were produced after 1815 until 1818. To change design punches would not be out of line if there had been physical deterioration – rust was often a problem – in the die punches during the production gap. Scot had his critics – so did John Reich. Suffice to say that each did what they could to maintain the production of coinage in a rather primitive facility, even by contemporary standards. So… no conspiracy or scandal – just some visual evidence of the mint staff coping with change.
|
