(If the reader has any interest in Coins at all and isn't a member already, we
strongly suggest your considering joining the best and most informative FREE
Coin-Club on-line going, where one can mingle with the Cream of the Hobby:)
COINMASTERS
NOTE: The following text has been slightly altered to fit this page, with no
change to the origional research conclusions. We apologize for imbalance of
picuture sizes and text, as we are still learning. Anyone wishing to obtain
a hard copy of the origional article as issued, feel free to contact us at
Danutt's Errors, and we will EMail-reply or snail-mail a copy of same to you.
Thank You for taking the time to read this and learn more about the Morgan
Silver Dollar's development.
SOCIETY OF SILVER DOLLAR COLLECTORS SPECIAL REPORT
Vol 1 Fall 1997 S.S.D.C. Research Topics Single Issue: $5.00
LET THE FEATHERS FALL WHERE THEY MAY #2
(Or, there ain't no such animal as an 8-TF Reverse either!!)
by Pete R. Bishal (Copyright 1980, 1990, 1997)
George T. Morgan was truly an exceptional engraver! Not only did he
convert Patterns into working designs in just four months, but he also found
ways of reducing their relief in less than two weeks. While the 'why' has been
known for years (to extend die-life), the 'how' has always remained a mystery.
That is, up to now.
Back in the Summer of 1995, a series of articles appeared in print
concerning the number of Tailfeathers on the so-called 1878-P "7/8-TF" Morgan
Dollar. In-effect, the uppermost design was `unpeeled' from its under lying
counterpart, revealing the remains to be that of a 7-Tailfeather Pattern
design, based on both visual and historical evidence.
This same approach can also be applied to the 8-Tailfeather Reverse,
which is listed as singular, but is actually multiple in makeup.
Long before he'd even thought about using any other number, Morgan made
and submitted a group of 7-TF Pattern designs late in 1877. It has never been
reported to this day that each and every one of their Reverse eagles were
definatly dual in nature.
Evidence of this last statement can be found on the `R' of Dollar. With
but minimal imagination, one can easily spot what appears to be a faint line
running up its left leg, caused by a pair of overlapping designs. This overlap
of designs left one of the primary confirmations of a dual-impression: a notch
on the lower left serif corner of same. Readers will see that this becomes
important as the story of the "8-TF" unfolds.
Early in 1878, Morgan began seeking advice from former Director of the
Mint, Col. A. Loundon Snowdon (then the PostMaster in the City of Philidelphia)
on how best to improve the look of these newly created Pattern designs, and,
even more important, how to make them `workable'. Die-relief, it seems, was a
major problem. Patterns were struck in the 'back room' on the large Arts &
Medals press which had the capability of handling increased pressure at slower
speeds. But Workroom presses were another story. They wouldn't stand-up to
the strain of pounding-out coin after coin minute by minute if press-pressure
had to be overly adjusted to compensate for the high points of the design.
Thus, relief (or raised portions) of the dies were very crutial.
Going at it from the other direction, if there was too much incuse area
on a die, the pressure of the coining press would have to be increased to force
the blank's metal into each and every crevice of the die. But this in turn
would then shorten die life, which would be most unacceptable. So just how
might an Engraver correct the problem? Two ways come to mind.
Simply put, one way would be to retool high points on the face of the
hub from which the particular die was made, thereby removing some of the 'taller'
metal. But, doing it this way would more than likely leave some unwanted tool-
markings and/or evidence of polishing to remove same. Therefore, a skilled
Engraver might opt for the second method: Lessening depth of the incused
designs on a die by either basining (i.e.: polishing-down) surrounding fields
or, much easier (At least for someone who knows what they're doing!!), by
`pushing' the fields downward! How you ask? Simply by re-hubbing the die with
a similar yet completely different design... which is exactly what Morgan did
to the 7-TF Patterns when he made the "7/8"'s. But what about the "8-TF"
designs?.
When one looks closely at the Reverse on any of the earliest "8-TF"
varietys (Listed in VanAllen-Mallis as Type A-1), one thing quickly becomes
clear: There sure is a lot of what's been excused to date as `ejection' or
`machine-doubling' all over the place. Funny thing about it tho is that it
all seems to be in the same specific areas on each and every variety.
Coincidence? Not hardly! Let's take the eagle's lower right (to viewer's
left) wing for example. On variety after variety, each and every feathertip
has what appears to be a shallow matching in contour 'shelf' abutting it. That
is, all but 2: The 3rd feathertip up from the leg "ejection" is differently
shaped, and the lowermost one has no higher in relief feather to have "ejected"
from!! But that's not all.
Shift focus over to that endmost leaf on the branch held in the eagle's
Right claw. Depending on the variety, readers will find they have one of three
distinct stages of development in their hand: In the earliest die-state, the
leaf appears bi-level, with `ejection' on its Leftmost edge.. just like and in
the same relief as on the wing.
The last stage of leaf evoloution shows just that: a full unbroken leaf
that evolved from the mid-state, which itself is found in 3 stages. Depending
on the variety, each has very visable light to heavy tool `drag-marks', caused
by one of the Engraver's retooling of a Master design to blend the two leaves
together. (The illustrated leaf is of the last stage. And yet, under high-
power magnification, remains of tool markings are still visable.)
One final observation about the `9-leaf' branch: Take a closer look at
the lowermost pair of leaves (the two that jut straight-out from the branch)
and note that their relief is the same height as is the wing and earliest state
of end-leaf `doubling'. Conclusion?? A 7-leaf branch atop a 9-leaf; a direct
result of Morgan's rehubbing one eagle's design with but 17 feathertips on its
Right wing into/onto that of another with 18!!
Say you're still not convinced? Okay: Shift attention to the surrounding
wreath. The current line of thinking would have one believe that there are only
nine berries visable on the right sprig and eight berries on the left one. Not so,
once the aforementioned `ejection' is taken into account. As a matter of fact,
there are a grand total of 22 berries IN, AROUND, ON, and UNDER same. Just for
history's sake, the actual count (from top down,) is 2, 3, 3, & 4 on the left,
and 2, 3, 3, & 3 on the right-- once one adds-in those that appear as `bumps'
on the branches, and the ones heretofore dismissed as 'ejection doubling'!!
The best example of berry multiplicity and overlapping can be seen in the
1st cluster to the Left of the bow on the wreath. Using the arrows as a guide,
the leftmost pair in the group of 4 arrows (Light on dark background) point to
berrys 'stemming' (So to speak) from the origional, punched deepest into the
design, wreath: 1 above and 1 below the branch stem. As such, they were/are
the highest in relief on the Hub and/or struck coin, and thus appear darker in
the photo than their counterparts.
Moving over to the lighter berry pointed to by the Top Right arrow in
photo, it was formed with the next wreath(s) were 'pressed' into the design to
lower overall relief. Simply due to the fact that the 2 penetrations into the
die were unequal, this berry appears on the design as being lighter than the
aforementioned pair, and is not cleanly seperated from it's neighboring images.
Additionaly, it has a stem that's full and lower in relief than that of the
lower Left berry-- both leading to the branch. Once again, from 2 different
impressions.
And now for that 'fourth' berry: Follow the outlines of the 2 stems to
the point where they meet the branch, and one will discover the 'mound' created
by one of the Origional Pattern's wreaths (as indicated in photo by the upper-
rightmost arrow) when it was added to the design. Using overlays, this berry
(as well as the 'bumps'/berrys in the 2nd and 4th cluster on the Right branch)
has been traced back to one of Morgan's origional Patterns submitted to the
Director for approval in December of 1877.
Due to the manner in which the Master Dies were assembled, all of the
above can be seen on any higher-grade "8-TF" variety. Clearly, the results of
overlapping of designs, as can be further confirmed by the area indicated by
the Upper-Leftmost pointer in the photo. Easily seen is a partial leaf resting
atop a solid leaf which anyone with a knowledge of multiple-design impressions
(Like those of Doubled-dies, Repunched-MM's, etc.) can clearly identify as
being dual in makeup. Therefore, that "1" leaf is actually 3.
Here skipping over the surrounding ring of lettering for the moment and
focusing attention on the dentils, once again one will see the same phenomenon
found on the wing and branch: `ejection doubling', which by now readers should
recognize as nothing more than the results of Morgan's combining 2 similar 151
denticle designs. And yet, that's not all he did!
With little imagination and a good magnifying glass, the remains of yet
another `ring' of denticles can be seen as a very faint line that bi-sects the
area in-between a pair of denticles near to the eagle's right wing-tip. In
addition, the two adjacent spaces to those two also show remains. This time
however, each `line' isn't directly in the middle of the spacing, but is
visably shifted off-center. And so it is with the next pair outward.. and the
next.. and so on, until the lines disappear under the overlapping set of
151-denticles. So what does it indicate? A different number than 151. But
what number?
Given the fact that all 1877/1878 Morgan designs have only been found
with counts of 151 or 148 denticles, logic dictates that it has to be 148!
(Many long hours of patient, eye-straining examination and count of numerous
1878 "8"-TF's has confirmed this to be true). Big deal?? You bet your `bippy'
it is. This fact alone proves that all 1878-P `8'-TF's are in fact a direct
result of a modified 8-TF eagle being reimpressed into a complete (Don't blink
now!) 7-TF PATTERN, which itself, at some point, had ALSO been combined with
another one of the origional Pattern (Unknown if with or without yet another
eagle on it --Most likely, the former??) designs!
Further proof that there were/are 3-designs involved (At least in the
outermost `rings') can be found in the circular lettering that surrounds the
central images. To be specific, the left leg of the R in DOLLAR has a faint
line running down its length that is similar to that found on the Patterns,
once again indicating a dual-design.
However, unlike the singular notch found on THEIR lower Left serifs, all
"8"-TF Reverses clearly show a 2nd adjacent notch, once again confirming it's a
dual- dual-design. Or to put it another way, an 8-TF eagle atop a 7-TF Pattern
atop yet another 7-TF! (Further proof of this can be seen in the photo used to
examine the 4-berry cluster. Sharp-eyed readers will note the Upper-Left serif
of the 'N' in 'ONE' is also Tripled in make-up in the area directed by the
Lower-Leftmost pointer in the photo.)
Why, you might ask, MUST the `Underbirds' be 7-TF Pattern designs? Aside
from the fact that Morgan only had just 1 8-TF design to work with (the one he
handed-over to the die-sinkers after his final meeting with Snowdon on February
25th), look at the arrowheads. Better yet, recount them! On the earliest
dies, the remains of a 4th arrowhead can be seen protruding out from beneath
the newer, higher in relief, centermost one. Would it surprise anyone by now
that its placement, size, and shape is exactly that of the arrowhead on one of
the 7-TF Patterns turned in by Morgan late in 1877? Need more be said??
But there IS more. Thus far, the early "8"-TF Reverses aren't quite what
they appear to be ..and the 1878-P "7/8"-TF's (along with the more perfectly
rehubbed Type B-1's) have proven to be 7/Pattern-7's ..So which Reverse Types
are left??
Aside from the VAM Type B-2's (Images of which didn't even exist before
March 25th), the only other earlier eagle designs left are the varietys listed
in VAM as being dual-hubbed "A-2/A-1"-'s ..which they most definatly are. And
yet, at the same time, aren't. At least not per se, as they too aren't quite
what they appear to be!
Once again using photographic negatives, when one overlays an image of an
"A-2" Reverse atop that of an "A-1", one thing becomes clear: The outer devices
of both are exactly the same, save for a few minor differences; the result of
basining Hubs and/or Dies. As a matter of fact, even the mismatched dentiles
and dual-notching on the "R" can still be seen under a good microscope, still
in their origional makeups. Clearly, no evidence of a "dual-hub". And yet..
One needs but to look at the eagle's head on any one of the 6 known dies
of the VAM Type under minimal magnification. It is very obvious that each die
has/had 2 heads on it with entirely differently-shaped beaks: one blunt and
'V-shaped' (the "A-1"), and the other, pointed and curved, which could only
have come from a new design ("A-2"). Based on this, logic would dictate that a
small number of dies made from the first "8-TF"/"A-1" design WERE reimpressed
with a similar, yet slightly different second "8-TF" design. That is, were it
not for a minor problem or two ..like for one, that `ejection' on the eagle's
right-wing mentioned earlier.
But before getting to that, there is 1 other area where portions of the
newer overlapping design can be seen: at the base of the eagle's Right wing,
where a small number of remains of added-feather design can be found appearing
as fine light verticle 'lines' (More on this later). But now for that so-called
'ejection' on the eagle's wing..
Again, just the briefest of glances at the area in question will find the
remains of one of the Mint's lesser Engraver's crude attempts at blending the
dual-design visable on the "A-1" eagles's feather-ends, in a manner similar to
the way the endmost dual branch-leaves were blended into 1 image. This time
however, instead of a graver dragging his chisel through the area being worked
on, the method used can be likened to using the point of a drill. Doing so on
a Master-Die would result in just what one sees under light magnification:
concentric circles.
So, at this point, one might ask just where IS the dual-design of an
"A-2/A-1"? Aside from the eagle's dual-head and base of wing areas, there's
STILL no further evidence of a dual-hub. And neither is there on all of the
remainder of the design. (For the record, approximatly 95% of the "A-2/A-1"
Reverse IS an "A-1".) So how did Morgan do it?? Very simple, as we shall see.
Once all of what became the '7/8-TF' dies (the "50 in number, made from
the old hub..") were rehubbed with the new 7-TF design, there was no need to
save dies made during early design evolution. Nor was there any reason to keep
the '8-TF' Master-die and/or any Working-dies made from it. So they too were
rehubbed into acceptable designs, and then sent to be used to strike coinage on
the Workroom floor. But not quite like those that became the "7/8" dies. As
one will see, the "A-2" really wasn't a 'new' design at all. At least not a
complete one.
Back in the Summer of 1877, when Morgan was first 'building' his new
Reverse design, he carved (Yes, we said Carved!) more that 1 version of various
parts of same to see which would look and/or work better than which. One of
these partial portrayals was that of the eagle's head and beak, of which he
carved a number fashioned in 2 distinctly different styles, which he was later
to bring to Col. Snowdon in the Spring of '78 for his opinion as to changes in
design.
Though Morgan didn't always interpet the 'American style' of language
correctly (He being an Englishman and all that..), he did listen to and take
the former Mint Official's advice. As a direct result, the eagle's wings were
'clipped', and then 'extra-feathers' were re-added at their bases to fill in
the blank areas that resulted from heavy- handed overpolising. And likewise,
as he worked on them, this same proceedure was also done to these partial
designs. Why? So he could be sure that latest modifications met with his
mentor's approval before using any precious die-steel to raise a new 'test'
hub or die.
Then in April of '78, when he needed a hub to reimpress the leftover
"8-TF" dies with, he chose one of those incomplete designs. Lining it up so
the images would overlap, he angled the Hub towards the eagle's head.. and made
the "A-2/A-1" design's dies. Tilting the impression (whether by accident or
on purpose is unknown at this time..) resulted in exactly what one sees on the
final product: a dual-head, blended breast-feathers, weak "extra-feathers", and
very little if any, tail-feather additions to overall design changes.
Final deduction? Because Morgan had just that one 8-TF Eagle to use,
there WAS no second "8-TF" design on hand to re-hub the dies with. Therefore,
the added head, etc. was from a "7-TF" Pattern design. So what else could the
"A-2/A-1" designs be? Would you believe the one and only REAL 1878-P "7/8-TF"
Reverse varietys?? Think about it.
One final personal comment for readers who may scoff at the above:
(Sorry about that; we just couldn't resist..)
NOTE: For further information on becoming a member of SSDC, please contact
us at Danutt's Errors, or SSDC directly at Society of Silver Dollar Collectors...
To join by mail, please address all inquirys to: Mr. Jeff Oxman, Editor-in-Chief
"S.S.D.C. Journal" / PO Box 2123 / North Hills, CA 91393
Again, Thank You!
Top of Page
