CaptHenway

Got the pictures today of the possible Specimen #3. It is NOT the doubled die. Just machine doubling.

That takes the population back down to one confirmed by Fivaz and one on the way to Fivaz. He should have it Tuesday. This one I am very sure of because the guy had it in his hand while I asked him "Does it have this" and "does it have that" and everything matches Strikeout's pictures.

Tune in tomorrow!

TD

So, did anybody cherrypick one today?

A third specimen has been reported by a different dealer on my old dealer-to-dealer network. Also high grade. He is sending me pictures on Monday.

TD

ATS somebody has posted pictures of a 1919 dime from a different die that may have very close die doubling on parts of IN GOD WE TRUST on a north-south axis. Keep an eye out for it as well.

@Coindude...of course, but you always want a second speciment of a die variety for confirmation of the variety.

A second specimen, in higher grade, has been reliably reported by someone I know personally. It is on its way to Bill Fivaz for confirmation.

TD

I have wondered what that mark is to the right of the D of GOD.

Don't think it is a dual hub. My explanation of a partially hubbed first impression fits the bill.

TD

Definitely a doubled die. The first impression was only partially formed and fades out equidistant from the rim, which is why only the top part of the N of IN shows, while more of the R and most of the U of TRUST show. The same phenomenon can be seen on the classic 1916/1916 nickel.

Great find!

TD

Dropping the coin held flat 2 or 3 inches onto a hard surface shouldn't harm it.

Do it with earlier and later dates for comparison.

Your scale may not be precise enough to get an accurate weight. 2.8 grams doesn't really fit for either composition.

Weigh some current cents that you know are copper plated zinc, and if you get around 2.8 grams you know your scale is off.

Would probably be a good idea to weigh a few common 1981 or earlier cents that you know are mostly copper and see what they show as well.

I want to go back to one of the coins Goldbergs sold last month, the "PF64" one. Am I right in thinking it's a 1922 high relief, reverse of 1921. But rather than proof, it's a business strike, but with post-striking "antiquing" processing? Which of course brings up what its designation should be. Again, I don't think it should be called a proof, but calling it just a vanilla business strike would not give the coin justice either. I also rather despise the term "specimen" for describing any US coin which is not a proof but also something different than a business strike, so I'd rather not call it that.

 

Also, for those who saw the coin in person, do you think it got sandblasted or not? The online photos have be uncertain either way, but I know from medals of that era that the sandblasted surfaces often had rather fine facets. (Plus, the "64" coin doesn't look like the "67" coin in the same sale, which was obviously a sandblast proof.)

 

How did it happen that two coins ended up with the Goldbergs and the other five with Stack's-Bowers?

Found the thread ATS. It was never poofed, I just never used the right search word.

"D'OH!"

Here is a diagram I prepared that should help folks understand the relationships of early Peace dollar production and experimental pieces. None of the 1922 high relief trial pieces were put into circulation, but some were purchased for $1 by mint officers and used as samples for Sec of the Treasury and others. Jim Fraser had several of each for approval purposes. Others were purchased by Mint HQ staff as souvenirs.

 

The diagram is large so readers can see the differences in lettering. Also medal press proofs and production press strike will look a little different even when from the same dies. This is due to incomplete metal flow.

 

 

Photo sources are Heritage Auctions, ANR (Stack's-Bowers), Goldberg's Auctions, NGC and the author.

Thanks for doing this.

TD

The good thread over there went poof.

ttt

As I said ATS, the only archaelogical loss was to the student of late 19th century metal cans.

Known cast replica. Sorry.

VA sent in a design that if approved would provide them with seven years of free national advertising for their quadricentennial celebrations. In my opinion it should have been rejected out of hand for that reason. Naturally it was approved.

Did they have any ceremony in 2007? I must have missed it.

In 2007, Jamestown, the first permanent settlement in the United States, will celebrate its 400th anniversary. To commemorate this event, the new quarter design includes the word, “QUADRICENTENNIAL.”

Could have been worse. They could have put "QUADROTRITICALE" on the coin.....

They had a really big celebration back in 1907. I guess they were just promoting the next one coming up in 2007.

The states had a lot of leeway in picking designs.