U.S. MINT HUBBING DIES IN 1793

Hubbing Dies in the Earliest days of the United States Mint

By manipulating photographs of a 1792 disme pattern and a 1793 half cent, a collector makes an exciting discovery.

Hubbing is the process of creating multiple dies that bear the same elements. A hub is a raised punch used to impress a design into a die. Though the terms “punch” and “hub” often are used interchangeably, for the purpose of this article the difference between them is a matter of size. A punch is small and features a single letter, numeral, leaf or other ornament; a hub carries a larger device, such as a head, wreath or eagle, or even all the images that appear on one side of a coin.

Hubbing is thought to have begun in the United States with the creation of obverse and reverse dies for some Connecticut state coppers. The first time the U.S. Mint used a hub for the main device was believed to have been in 1793 for the Liberty Cap cents.

Since at least the late 19th century, numismatists have remarked on the artistic similar ities between the 1792 disme pattern and the 1793 half cent, suggesting that they were executed by the same hand, namely Voigt’s. Recently, I delved into this mystery. Could the resemblance be more than coincidental?

By overlaying the designs in Adobe Photoshop®, I determined that the disme and halfcent obverses were, in fact, created from the same hub. Figure 1 shows the obverses side-by-side. The similarities between the faces are obvious, but the treatment of the hair differs greatly. Figure 2 shows an overlay of the two coins. (The disme is rendered in yellow, and the half cent is reproduced in blue.) It is obvious that the two faces match perfectly, including the eyes, noses, lips, cheeks, foreheads, chins, necks and shapes of the bust lines.

The main variance between the dies (and probably the reason nobody has noticed their exact match) is the hair. My findings show conclusively that a single hub was used for both the 1792 disme pattern and 1793 half cent obverses. Figure 3 shows how that hub probably looked. Although the hair was not defined, the approximate shape of Liberty’s head can be determined.

My findings show conclusively that a single hub was used for both the 1792 disme pattern and 1793 half cent obverses. Figure 3 shows how that hub probably looked. Although the hair was not defined, the approximate shape of Liberty’s head can be determined.

The question remains: Why would Voigt have prepared a hub for the disme pattern in 1792? We can’t know for sure, but the simplest explanation is that he was experimenting. Voigt must have known that the hubbing process could produce a number of nearly identical dies and simply gave it a try. Since he had successfully made and used a hub, I wonder why he reverted to hand- engraving the Chain cent obverses. Of course, I can only speculate, but perhaps he was concerned that a larger hub might not be effectual. How ever, Voigt obviously didn’t hesitate for long, as he developed a hub for the Wreath cent obverse within days of the Chain cent minting and re-used the leftover hub from the previous year’s disme pattern for the half cents.

In retrospect, Henry Voigt deserves immense credit. Accepting a temporary position as the U.S. Mint’s chief coiner, he experimented with hubbing as early as 1792. He truly was a remarkable and talented man, without whom the mint might not have succeeded.

For more information about the American Numismatic Association, see:
https://www.money.org/

	NBS (coinbooks.org) Web