Die States, or, The Journey of a Die from First Strike to Terminal State

[physics-fan3.14]

Die States, or The Journey of a Die – from First Strike to Terminal State

 

In answer to a recent question, and sort of as a natural outflow of our discussion about Luster, I thought I would take a few moments to talk about die states. What are die states, and why are they important? How can we tell what state the die is? Die states are very important to some numismatists, especially those concerned with die varieties. Collectors of early coins love learning about die states, for reasons we shall get to shortly.

 

Every time a die strikes a coin, the metal flow of the coin wears on the die. Between two strikes, this change is imperceptible, but over time a great change occurs on the die. If you were to take every coin ever struck by a die, theoretically you would be able to line them up from the very first strike to the very last, just by examining the wear on the die.

 

Luckily, other things sometimes happen which give us a clue. Sometimes the dies come together without a planchet in the coining chamber, in which case the dies will transfer some of their design to the other die. This is known as a die clash. Sometimes, mint workers will take a bristled brush and polish the dies, leaving polish lines all over the surface of the die. Mint workers often do this when there is evidence of a clash. Sometimes, the die will begin to crack, even breaking off in places if the cracks get bad enough. Other things such as gouges and rust also occur to the dies. Each of these occurrences is unique, and just like your favorite cops on CSI use a fingerprint to identify the culprit, these die markers identify the die. Other things, such as doubled dies, repunched mintmarks, and hand placement of letters, numbers and devices on early coins also serve as unique die identifiers. As the die continues through its life, these things happen and change, and we can “watch” the progress of the life of a die through these die sates.

 

(An incredibly popular die clash known as the “Bugs Bunny Franklin”)

 

The die state is important because earlier strikes will be sharper, crisper, and have more details (sometimes, through an error in the die-making process, even the prime state of the die will have cracks). Remember, as the die wears, details become softened and eliminated. For a doubled die specialist, the early die states are very important because in later die states the doubling may be harder to see. The die can still be identified through the use of the unique die markers, however.

 

Those who study die states generally break the life of the die into three main categories – early die state (EDS), mid die state (MDS), and late die state (LDS). There are of course intermediate stages; often when a new die crack or clash appears, a new die state is labeled. Another naming scheme is to assign a small letter to subsequent die states, such that the prime state is ‘a’, the next state is ‘b’, and so on. Other collectors use Roman numerals for successive die states, particularly collectors of half cents and large cents following Breen’s books. You can see the convenience this poses for a well studied die with numerous die states described.

 

Collectors use the die state of dies to determine an emission sequence – which order the dies were used in. This is important in series which are collected by die marriage – or a pairing of obverse and reverse die. Say Obverse Die #1 is initially paired with Reverse Die A, but sometime during the striking, Reverse Die A cracks and is replaced with Reverse Die B. Later, Obverse Die #1 completely disintegrates because it was improperly heat treated, or the steel was bad. Obverse Die #2 replaces it.

 

Now, imagine its 150 years later and some numismatist has three coins struck during this run, one from each die marriage. The first pairing, call it O-101, is from both fresh, new dies. After Reverse A cracks and is replaced by B, you have a new die marriage – O-102. When Obverse #1 shatters, the new marriage is O-103. But the first obverse die was used for the first two marriages, and the reverse die overlaps the last two marriages. By examining the die state, the careful numismatist can determine this sequence, and piece together what happened. It is the die state that lets us know the order was 101, 102, 103, and not the other way around – 103, 102, 101.

 

(Bust Half Dollars are widely studied by die marriage and die state)

 

You might say so what? But to some numismatists, this sequence is very interesting. In some cases, there is quite a bit of mystery and intrigue associated with this. For example, certain varieties of the 1795 half dime were actually struck before the 1794 dated half dime! How do we know this? Through a careful examination of the die states, of course.

 

The die state is also important to some error collectors. As the die strikes coins, sometimes it will crack. Sometimes, these cracks will grow and progress, until pieces of the die break off. Some collectors like to get multiple examples of these cracks, and watch how the crack grew until the terminal die state. Some terminal die state coins can be magnificent – numerous cracks spider web the die, with pieces of the die missing (known as die breaks, or if it is at the edge it is called a cud).

 

It is important for collectors of modern coins to be aware of certain marketing schemes by the TPGs. They will label new issues, under certain circumstances, as “Early Release” (NGC) or “First Strike” (PCGS). These are incredibly deceptive, especially the PCGS designation, because they seem to imply that the coins so labeled are actually struck from an Early Die State. Remember, an early die state is not worn, and will produce crisper, sharper coins. True first strikes will thus often be nicer coins. However, these labels are issued for any coin submitted within the cutoff period – which means that the coins could actually be from LDS dies. This is why the premium for “First Strike” coins is ridiculous – it means absolutely nothing.

 

So, how do you determine what die state your coin is, if you feel so inclined? Take a good look at the coin. Notice how sharp and crisp the elements are. Notice if there are die clashes, or cracks, or breaks, or cuds. Notice if there are polish lines, or if the elements look worn out and distorted. Let’s look at a few coins together to try and distinguish their die states. First up is a very early die state on this 1954 FBL Franklin. Notice how sharp and crisp all the design elements are, and how there is a complete lack of clashes or polish lines.

 

 

For the average MDS coin, there isn’t really much distinguishing it. It doesn’t have the sharp, crisp look of the EDS, and it doesn’t have the worn, distorted look of an LDS coin. MDS coins show a little of the wear of life, some things may have happened to them, but they still have a ways to go. Many of the coins in your collection will be MDS coins, such as this 1958 showing a good bit of die polish lines.

 

 

Contrast this now with a late die state 1953S. Notice how distorted all the elements seem – how they look tired, for lack of a better word. Also look at the rough texture of the fields. This is what we call an “orange peel” effect, for the characteristic look. Numismatists use the term orange peel in two very different ways to refer to two very different effects (the other one is most commonly seen on 19th century proof gold).

 

 

A couple other late die state coins can help show the difference. This is a very late die state Jefferson nickel, a coin we are all familiar with. On this one, look how all the elements are distorted and enlarged. This is an effect called Die Deterioration Doubling, and occurs when coins are struck from very worn dies – dies near the end of their life.

 

 

The final coin I will use to illustrate a late die state will be this 1812 Capped Bust Half. This coin was struck from very well worn dies, and shows the worn and enlarged elements. Note how the stars are all drawn out to the edge, looking like caricatures of themselves. As on the Jefferson nickel above, note how many of the details appear soft and worn out, especially the date. This coin was struck from a die late in its life.

 

 

In many ways, the extremely late die state coins are more fun than earlier die states. There are some very dedicated collectors who specialize in terminal die state coins – finding the very last coins that a die struck. These coins will often have severe die breaks, cuds, and all manner of interesting defects before the die finally disintegrated or was retired from service.

 

Well, I hope that helps you understand die states and why they are important to numismatics. For another example, take a look at this write-up on the Harry Bass Foundation webpage. Harry Bass was one of the most famous collectors of gold coinage, and he studied die states extensively. Harry Bass webpage

 

[Schatzy]

Jason WOW you are on a roll!! Great Post!!

[bsshog40]

Jason WOW you are on a role!! Great Post!!

I agree! Very very good info Jason!

[tenacious]

 

 

 

Thank you!

[Bugmann1974]

Another great thread Jason. (thumbs u

[Catbert]

Thank you for such an informative and well considered post.

[WoodenJefferson]

Physics....cause & effect

 

Lots to digest.

[ldhair]

Very well done. Nice job.

[SlumLord98-migration]

Interesting post!

 

Another point to remember, at least for some of the early denominations, is that lettered edges also can reveal much information. The devices were imparted to the planchets with hubbed dies and these dies also wore and broke apart, leaving another tool to trace emission sequence. How important are these? In a word, very. Without following the edge dies, you cannot tell for certain in which order the various die pairings were struck; you can only follow a sequence by die linkage and this doesn't tell the complete tale. Take, for instance, 1805 half dollars.

 

A die linkage chart is a good place to start and with this, we can change the order based on die state.

 

O.101

 

O.102 these share an obverse; 102 was clearly struck second

 

O.103

 

O.104

 

O.105 these 3 share a reverse; sequence is clearly 104, 103, 105

 

O.106 O.105,106 share an obverse but it isn't clear which was used first, also used on 1806 O.104

 

O.107 shares obverse w/114

 

O.108 shares a reverse w/102, 110, 114 and 1806 O.104

 

O.109 shares obverse w/108, not clear which was first

 

O.110 shares obv. w111, 112,113, clash marks show that sequence is 113, 112, 111, 110; shares rev as noted previously

 

O.111

 

O.112 shares rev. w/1803 O.103, 104

 

O.113

 

O.114 shared dies as noted

 

From this chart it is apparent that Overton's sequence is not the order in which they were minted; in fact, he largely copied Beistle's sequence from 1929. However, we can't tell much more about the sequence in which these die pairings were minted just by studying the die states of the obverse and reverse dies, and if the halves had plain or reeded edges, this would be the end of the story.

 

If anyone would like to hear more and if the OP doesn't consider this too much stepping on his thread, I'll go further.

 

To continue, observation will reveal that there are two distinct obverse styles from different hubs. The earlier, carried over from 1803, is evident on Overton's obverses 1 and 7, which were used to strike O.101 and 102, and O.110-113. The newer obverse of 1805 is found on O.103-109 and O.114. Now we have early and late obverses. The reverses cannot be so divided.

 

In the first group we have 6 die pairings from the old hub with 2 different obverses and 5 reverses but which came first? Tradition has been to lead with the overdates but edge die comparison shows that this isn't how it happened. We can tell from die linkage that the 1803 dated halves (only one die pairing was actually struck in 1803, the rest were coined in 1804) were produced in the order listed in Overton, so comparison of the edge die of an O.104 to each of the six pairings should show conclusively which 1805 die marriage was struck first. Without a doubt, the edges of 03 104 and 05 113 are a match. New edge dies were used for the next, O.112, and if we follow the wear of these edge dies it is apparent that the order is 111, 101, 102 and 110.

 

So far we have-

O.113

O.112

O.111

O.101

O.102

O.110

 

After O.110, we need to sort all the die pairings from the new obverse hub. I have never been able to examine an O.114 (2 known and neither available for study) so its placement is nothing more than a WAG.

 

Further observation shows that the lower right serif of the F punch broke at some point in 1805 and the die pairings that appear to have been struck with an unbroken serif are 107, 108 and 114 (the latter 2 are the 3rd and 4th use of rev. of O.102). Curiously, only one of the two edge dies was changed for the coining of the next group and it is likely that the sequence is as stated.

 

Detailed study has shown that the apparent broken serif of 103-105 simply didn't strike up so we have a sequence of 104, 103, 105. The two remaining die pairings, O.106 and O.109, both display the broken serif on F and these are the two final pairs struck for halves dated 1805. This leaves us with the following sequence-

 

O.113

O.112

O.111

O.101

O.102

O.110

O.107

O.108

O.114 (speculative)

O.104

O.103 Wait a minute!! This is an overdate and it is probably struck in the last quarter of 1805?? Actually, it is more likely a blundered date as the obverse die was made from the new hub. No way was it an unused and leftover 1804 die.

O.105

O.106

O.109

 

Common sense says that the edges of last pairing dated 1805 should match up with the first pairing dated 1806 and of course, it does. Remember that the date of an early mint product may or may not indicate the actual year in which it was coined. Studying early mint products by die pairing and by die state is a fascinating pursuit. If you choose to do this, remember the third side of the coin. This side was also imparted to the coin by dies which wore and broke.

[Bugmann1974]

Interesting post!

 

If anyone would like to hear more and if the OP doesn't consider this too much stepping on his thread, I'll go further.

 

Great information! I say post more on the subject, we can only gain from the sharing of knowledge. (thumbs u

[physics-fan3.14]

Definitely go for it, SlumLord. As you know, I love the busties, and this is exactly the sort of discussion I was hoping to get going.