Reverse Comparison Analysis
Because dies were only replaced when they were worn out, reverse and obverse dies were not necessarily replaced at the same time, and not all coins stamped with one obverse die were stamped with the same reverse die. The process of replacing dies in this manner allows numismatists to track the chronological progression of coins. Coins stamped with the same dies were minted within a certain span of time, and one can connect these spans because the dies of only one side changed at a time. This creates a bridge between the coins, so one can see the order of their minting.
While, as noted, the obverse die-type was easy enough to find, finding coins reflecting the reverse die was another matter. In nearly all cases, the pomegranate on USC's coin is longer and thinner than that of most of the other Year Three coins.
Pomegranates on USC's coin Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
A more typical Year 3 pomegranate branch http://www.menorahcoinproject.org/h662.htm |
In addition, the lettering was much more finely made in our Year Three coin: each stroke is very straight and unwavering. Basing comparisons first on the positioning of the letter he' in respect to the top of the pomegranate, then comparing the positioning of the letter mem to the right of the he', and finally comparing the telltale final he' at the bottom of the coin, no matches can be made with the coins stamped with dies 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, and 18, 21 as listed on the Menorah Coin Project website. In all these instances the he’ at the top of the pomegranates is in a different position and/or has too erect a stance.
|
The top of the reverse of USC's coin, consisting of a he', a mem, and a yod Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
|
||||
http://www.menorahcoinproject.org/h662.htm |
In our coin, the uppermost he' seems to be in line with the leftmost calyx protrusion of the middle pomegranate. In dies 3 and 21, the letter is situated too far below this protrusion, and in dies 8, 9, and 16, it is too high above the protrusion. In other instances, such as with die 10, the he' is too large and too close to the top pomegranate.
Comparing the mem on our coin to most examples on other Year Three coins, one may immediately recognize differences. The mems of the different coins prove to be quite variable. Some have curved bottoms, some have long tails, and some are positioned in the center, to the left, and to the right. On this basis, one can eliminate more of the dies.
Die 1: Mem has a longer bottom stroke |
Die 4: Corners of the mem are duller |
http://www.menorahcoinproject.org/h662.htm
Finally, one may observe the positioning of the last he'. On our coin, this he' has a somewhat shriveled appearance. In comparison, some dies position this letter too close to the bottom of the pomegranate while in others it is simply too uniform to resemble the he' on our coin. Of particular interest is the bottom horizontal stroke on our coin which slightly curves upward toward the vertical stroke. This proved a significant connection to die 24, which is the closest to USC's coin.
Die 24 |
 |
http://www.menorahcoinproject.org/h662.htm |
Photo Courtesy
of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
The final he' on die 24 resembles the one on the USC coin, and the all the letters are positioned correctly relative to the pomegranates. However, the top stroke of the last he', when viewed upright, is not as thin on the coin struck by die 24 as it is in our coin. Furthermore, the bottom of the pomegranate stem bends a little to the right in die 24, while it remains completely erect in our coin, and the bottom horizontal stroke in the mem of our coin seems slightly shorter.
Then again, one could argue that these points are too critical, and that the coins would look more similar if we were able to obtain a better picture of the coin representative of die 24. It should be further noted that, depending on the lighting effect and angle, fine points of a stamp impression may take on different looks. A strong point in favor of a match is that the obverse of the coin displayed for die 24 has the same imperfections imparted by the obverse die used to strike our coin.
In order to make a final decision on this point, one would need to find the coin used as an example of die 24 and take better pictures of it in order to fairly compare the two coins. If one then determined that they are, indeed, different dies, USC's shekel could be deemed unique. Of course, there is always the possibility of the coin being a forgery based on the model of die 24 (or vice versa) but this is highly doubtful. It would prove very difficult to replicate such a coin so exactly.
RETURN TO OBVERSE COMPARISON ANALYSYS