PREV ARTICLE
NEXT ARTICLE
FULL ISSUE
PREV FULL ISSUE
V10 2007 INDEX
E-SYLUM ARCHIVE
The E-Sylum: Volume 10, Number 38, September 23, 2007, Article 19 FURTHER OBSERVATIONS ON HIGH RELIEF COINAGE Regarding the responses to his observations on high relief coinage, Carl Honore writes: "If, as I correctly stated, technical difficulties prevent high relief coinage being struck by our presses, then how did the Brits do it? The 1799 pieces with the cambered fields are absolutely perfect in production strikes. I still maintain that this is a possible technology if the dies are correctly manufactured in the first place. I would still maintain that, since so many type I buffalo nickels were struck, that cambered dies were in fact feasible. As long as the designs were built around the center of the model, the process should work fine. "I know that undercut sculptured features are of course impossible. I was using the term "high relief" as others in the hobby had been using the term for years. What we really mean is bas relief with scooped fields. The scooped fields or cambered convex die surfaces are to keep the designs below the rim of the coin. "The 1913 type I buffalo nickel has such fields. There was no reason to switch to flat fields and to sink the lettering below the mound on the reverse as long as the convex fields were in place. That is my whole point. If you observe Kuchlers 1799 penny and farthing pieces you will see how much detail remains even in circulated condition. "The double eagles should have been manufactured in so-called high relief. Anything less would have resulted in much wear of the valuable metal, thus decreasing the value by weight of the denomination. Since gold, with the addition of copper is a softer metal by comparison to cupro-nickel or even bronze, the die wear would have been less extensive. "Read back what I said about excuses in abandonment of high relief having to do with design complication. Again, that was a lame excuse. If the Brits could do high relief coinage in mass production, we could too. The type I buffalo nickel is my own case in point. Too many pieces exist with detail even in the rock to convince me that the design wouldn't strike up right. I owned six at one time in grades VF-XF with legends completely readable, even on the rock. "Here is what I think concerning Kuchler and Boulton and Watt. To get both the detail in the coin designs and to get the cambered fields at that time, the coins were most likely hot struck; the blanks were heated and then fed into the press. The coining operation would have work-hardened the final products. The draw back would of course be that excessive heat transferred to the dies would make them brittle over time. I believe this is why hot striking the coins in circulation would not work. It would be too labor intensive to heat the blanks. Any thoughts on this one?" Roger Burdette writes: "Per the discussion on high relief and polished specimens, etc. readers will find considerable information on this in "Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921" including letters from Weinman and MacNeil about the problem. The National Numismatic Collection dimes and quarters are from polished dies and the curvature of field was obviously a problem for the Philadelphia Mint. Half dollar pattern dies were also polished but the NNC halves do not seem to show signs of mirrored fields. Weinman's second version of the half and dime both had higher relief than their predecessors or the versions used for circulation." Wayne Homren, Editor The Numismatic Bibliomania Society is a non-profit organization promoting numismatic literature. See our web site at coinbooks.org. To submit items for publication in The E-Sylum, write to the Editor at this address: whomren@coinlibrary.com To subscribe go to: https://my.binhost.com/lists/listinfo/esylum | |
PREV ARTICLE
NEXT ARTICLE
FULL ISSUE
PREV FULL ISSUE
V10 2007 INDEX
E-SYLUM ARCHIVE