Tagged: 1865 "plain 5" RPD
- DVCollectorModeratorMarch 7, 2016 at 1:47 pmPost count: 103
An overlay analysis of the 1865 “Plain 5” RPD-002 (S-3)
The 1865 “plain 5” MPD-002/S-2 is an interesting variety using a rather unique date punch for this series. The punch is steeply beveled from the base, which translates to smaller, more widely spaced digits on the tops. And because RPDs typically involve the top edges of the punch, where the most pressure was applied, I made my overlay using these edges.
Now let’s review the details present on this variety. There is a bold 1865/1865 just south of the final date, as well as other marks which are best understood using overlays. First, let’s review the marks present on the coin in figure a. Note: the red arrows point to details which I suspect are die chips. On the right side of the “1”, there is a raised arc of extra metal bending towards the 8. Then, between the 865 digits, there are marks which have been described as “MPD: The base of two 8’s are seen between the 8 & 6”. However, if one looks closely at the mark between the 86, there is a distinctive sharp angle that is clearly different than the mark between the 65 (which may only be a crack). I’ll discuss what I see in detail below using overlays.
First, an overlay to explain the 1865/1865 south—an easily understood RPD.
How well do two 8 MPDs explain these marks?
Now, in figure c., I explore whether two 8 MPDs are responsible for the marks between 865. Note: I have offset these overlays slightly so we can better compare details. While the mark between 86 roughly matches an 8, note how the angle bends more sharply than the overlay—red arrow? I consider this is an important detail when proposing an alternate explanation–below. Finally, looking at the mark between the 65, offset to be obvious, we see this doesn’t plausibly match the shape of an 8 overlay —and this may only be a crack. In this scenario, the mark on the 1 remains unexplained–dark arrow.
I propose an overlay which better explains these marks.
First, note how that raised arc of metal on the 1, so far unexplained, follows the arc of the 8 so well? And while an “8 MPD” roughly fits the curved mark between “86”, note how the lower inner loop of the 6 fits this precisely? Although it may just be a crack, the mark between 65 more closely follows the base of a 5 here than an 8 MPD. Given the position, I think it’s also possible the 5 punch contributed to this crack. And what I find most convincing of all: all these marks correlate perfectly to the positions of a single, wide 1865 mis-punch. There is also a raised area which may also be a remnant of the base of the 1. Based on the visual evidence compared to these overlays, which explanation is more plausible?
- This topic was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by DVCollector.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.