• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

jgenn

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    466

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Journal Entries posted by jgenn

  1. jgenn
    First off, congratulations to all the registry participants and the winners of the 2019 registry awards.  As for me, I won a Classic Set award for my Mexico City 8 reales Pillar Dollars of Charles III (1760-1771).  This is my third major award and I had never posted about them in the past, but for this one I will make an exception.  I want to highlight the wonderfully broad approach that the NGC judges have chosen in selecting sets for their awards.  I haven't yet browsed through all of the other winning sets but I'm sure that mine is more of an outlier than most.  To start with, the advertised criteria for Classic Sets is "US or World Sets, 1792-1964" so my set has somehow slipped through the time-frame constraint.  But the point I want to emphasize is that, using my set as an example, you don't necessarily need the highest grade coins to be considered for an award.  I built much of this set from raw examples -- and most of my coins fall in the XF range!  
    Now, I know that many collectors that use the NGC journals or forums are not keen on registry participation for all of the valid reasons that you've posted but maybe some of you might reconsider your opinions.  I believe there are many magnificent collections out there that are just waiting to be recognized.
    Here is, perhaps, my least impressive coin from my set, grade-wise. VF details, but still a quite scarce variety.
    ~jack

  2. jgenn
    Establishes private mint on behalf of family
    Sorry to tease with a headline that could have come from current affairs but there's nothing new about powerful, greedy people finding ways to enrich themselves. In this case, I'm calling out Philip II of Spain, who in 1580, negotiated such a sweetheart deal with his cousin, Ferdinand II, Archduke of Austria, that he was presented with two coin rolling mills, constructed at the Hall mint, as a present. Today, we would deem such a considerable personal gift following a transaction as a "kickback" and probably illicit. It would have made sense to install Spain's first mechanized mint in Seville, the home port of New World commerce, and thus the entry point of silver and gold from its colonies. But, the new mint was built in Segovia, the jurisdiction of close friends to the King, and was not governed by the State but became private property of the Royal Family.
    With such self-serving behavior in the highest places, it's no wonder that Spain went bankrupt four times during Philip's reign (1557, 1560, 1576, 1596) despite the vast precious metal resources under its control, including the enormous silver deposits at Potosi and Zacatecas. I admit to trivializing the economic forces that resulted from the rapid expansion of the money supply, but the sheer scope of the financial mismanagement cannot be understated. It's estimated that from 1500 to 1800 Mexico and Peru produced 75% - 80% of the world's silver. Dr. John Leonard Riddell, during his appointment as melter and refiner of the New Orleans Mint, stated in 1845 that "During the days of Spanish rule, near $23,000,000 in silver were annually obtained from the mines [of Mexico]". That's a lot of capital to squander.
    The new mint in Segovia was called the "Real Ingenio", or Royal [Coin] Mill, and was built at the location of an old paper mill on the Eresma River where the mill could deploy a waterwheel to power the roller presses. The other coin mint in Segovia, previously established by Henry IV in 1455, and now called the Old Mint, continued to produce hammered coins for another century and was never mechanized. The Royal Coin Mill began regular production of silver coins in 1586 and introduced the stamping of the year of minting to Spanish coinage. The rest of the Spanish mints adopted dates on their coins by 1588, as this was seen as a useful anti-counterfeiting measure. Mintmarks and assayers initials were added later for the same reason. The roller presses of the Royal Coin Mill continued to perform their function until they were replaced by screw presses in 1770.
    Here's an example of an 8 reales from the Segovia mint, which can not only be identified as the only mint with machine struck Spanish coins at the time, 1660, but also by the aqueduct featured in its coat of arms and used as its mintmark. You may also note some characteristics of a roller press struck coin as these have a slight wrinkle in the surface and show the perfect roundness from being cut out of the silver strip with a circular stamping tool. There are three varieties of the 1660 8 reales, which may be purposeful, since the roller die consisted of three separate engravings allowing three strikes per revolution of the roller.
    There is no competitive set for older coins like these but you can see it hosted in my "Silver Dollars of '60" custom set.
    http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/WCM/CoinCustomSetView.aspx?s=19493
    ~jack

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  3. jgenn
    The Mexico City "klippe" issues of 1732-1734
    With the royal decree of 18 September 1728, Philip V initiated a radical change in the production of silver coins in Spain's colonies. By 1732, the Mexico City mint would issue the Americas' first milled coins that would become the world's preeminent trade dollar for the next century.
    Such a change from the earlier hammered "cobs" did not come with out some difficulties in reaching normal quotas. The new processes instituted machinery for rolling ingots into flat sheets, stamping into rounds, upsetting and imparting an edge design and impressing the obverse and reverse design. To make up the difference in production volume, hammered cobs were continued until 1733, but in addition, a unique method was employed from 1732-1734. These are known as "klippe" issues, named after the emergency siege coinage, when production was hurried and snipping squared shapes replaced stamping of round planchets. In Spanish, these are called "recortadas" for the multiple cuts that are apparent from the edges. They are an interesting hybrid of cob and milled techniques.
    First, lets review how cobs were made. Dan Sedwick presents a better explanation than the oft repeated idea that these were hacked off the end of a bar of silver.* Instead, these were likely cut from a stream of molten silver alloy poured onto a flat surface. To produce cobs, the silver was cut into equal pieces and struck between trussel and anvil die. For the klippe issue, I surmise that the strip of silver was flattened in the mechanical roller to provide a uniform thickness, manually cut into equal sized pieces and then struck in a screw press. This would have skipped the stamping into rounds and edging steps, yielding a significantly faster production output. These are further distinguished by their design, employing a somewhat more ornamental variation of the cob design with the obverse showing the crowned Spanish coat of arms, mint mark and denomination to the right, assayers initials left, and monarch's legend with date circling the rim; the abbreviated coat of arms and national legend on the reverse. A type called the "klippe die on cob planchet" is also recognized for this period and presumably skipped the process of flattening the strip in the roller.
    Why would the engravers of Mexico City produce a new design for these klippe issues? I should note that the appearance of the milled coinage was described in the royal decree and that the obverse and reverse design was executed in Spain by Francisco Hernandez Escudero leaving little room for the local engravers to exercise their talents. Perhaps we can assume that stamping the new design on a coin that did not go through the proscribed production process would be a violation of the ordnance. With the evidence that regular cobs were still produced, my theory is that the engravers were proud of their skills and their local design and produced a short run of issues that would commemorate these using the superior production techniques of their new equipment.
    Here's my "klippe" from a recent Barcelona auction.
    ~jack
     
    *http://www.sedwickcoins.com/articles/strap.htm

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  4. jgenn

    Two goals in one!

    By jgenn,

    An overdue report on my January world coin activities.
    I'm not sure if it's the same with US coins but I think the January Heritage, Stack's Bowers, Triton and Goldberg auctions have the best selection of rare and premium quality world coins of the year. Unlike last year, when I was completely shut out of January's world coin auctions, I scored a few goals this time around. One coin was literally two goals in one. I wanted to add a Swiss Thaler to my collection of world crowns and I've also been on the hunt for a city view type coin. My new coin is a Basel Thaler Dav-1746, KM# 126, undated but circa 1676 according to Heritage or 1737 according to Numismaster, with a lovely city-view reverse.
    Basel joined the Swiss Confederacy as its eleventh canton in 1501, shortly after the conclusion of the Swabian War in which the Swiss armies outfought the armies of the House of Habsburg and the Swabian League. It remained a Prince-Bishopric in the Holy Roman Empire until joining the Swiss Reformation in 1528. The Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 offically separated the Swiss Confederacy from the Holy Roman Empire. Basel was one of the first areas to be conquered by Napoleon in 1793 leading to the collapse of the Swiss Confederacy and reorganization into the short-lived Helvetic Republic of 1798-1803. Today, Basel is a popular destination for cruises on the Rhine river.
    The obverse of this nicely toned coin features the bishop's crosier, or staff of office, as enshrined on the Basel coat of arms, within an adorned circle. The reverse is the city view, showing the city and the bridge over the Rhine with lesser Basel in the foreground, founded to guard the bridgehead. This variety is unique in the complete lack of lettering on the city view side as well as absence of Basel's heraldic animal, the winged worm known as the basilisk, unless you consider the curvilinear ornamentation surrounding the coat of arms as a very abstract representation of the creature.
    ~jack

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  5. jgenn
    I don't collect many US coins but they fit nicely into a mint type set.
    In a rare case of planning ahead with my coin acquisition strategy, I picked my US silver dollar types so that they each came from a separate mint. The set is now complete and I've created a custom set in the Thematic & Topical Coins section to show them off.
    coins.www.collectors-society.com/wcm/CoinCustomSetView.aspx?s=19490
    Here's a photo teaser.
    ~jack

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  6. jgenn

    Vietnam Dragon Dollar -- Cast or Milled?

    By jgenn,


    Vietnam 7 Tien
    By the end of the 19th Century, so many countries had issued silver world crowns that I generally need to focus on selecting just one example per country for my custom set, that I have playfully named "My World Crown Affair".  Chief among my criteria is that the coin was minted in the country.  If not locally minted, then a design element should be strongly representative of the country.  Quite a few examples of coins issued for colonies lack any flavor of the local culture and thus fail to interest me.  An additional selection preference is that when issued, the country was independent.  This last criteria can be a serious constraint for countries that issued silver crowns during brief periods of independence.   The country that we commonly refer to as Vietnam has had many official and unofficial names.  In the early 19th Century the independent empire of the Nguyen dynasty was called "Nam Viet", "Viet Nam" and "Dai Nam". Increasing French influence undermined the empire's independence and after 1845 the name "Annam" was used for the French protectorate followed by "French Indochina" when the French consolidated their rule in 1887.  I have seen catalog descriptions of coins issued during the period of independence listed as coins of Annam.  While it may be convenient for a catalog to broadly group issues together under one name I consider this, at best, misinformed; at worst, downright disrespectful.    Dragon Dollars or Silver Dragons are names for the Asian silver dollar sized coins issued in China and Japan at the end of the 19th Century in emulation of the Spanish Colonial and Mexican 8 reales that were the dominant trade coin. But the first of these silver coins with a prominent dragon design was actually issued by Emperor Minh Mang of Viet Nam.  The earliest of these are undated and the first dated coins show the number 13 indicating the regnal year, 1832.  The specific denomination that corresponds to the 8 reales trade standard is the 7 tien, weighing almost 27 grams.  The casting of coins in East and Southeast Asia had been established since ancient times and some opinions that you may find on the internet claim that the silver issues of Minh Mang and subsequent rulers were also cast.  Fortunately, there are more informed resources to consult.  The Standard Catalog of World Coins lists these as milled as do many of the top auction house catalogs.  And a few of the finest examples are encapsulated in mint state grades by TPGs indicating that the coin surfaces still exhibit the luster that occurs from the metal flow when a planchet is struck.  If you examine enough good photos of these you can notice some instances where the planchet was not perfectly centered -- a feature of a coin struck in a open collar press.   My example is from the 14 regnal year, 1833, shown in Chinese characters beneath the dragon, the obverse shows the characters for Minh Mang and Thong Bao (general currency). It exhibits circulation wear and environmental damage in addition to the holes where it was likely used as a garment adornment.  Having examined many 8 reales of the contemporary time I am comfortable with the assessment that this is a milled/struck coin just from the appearance of the surfaces.  Devices are sharply defined, there could be a die crack and there may be a bit of toning shadow that is sometimes seen next to a device but always toward the rim where the stress from metal flow alters the way the surface forms its patina.  Ultimately, the examination of the edge provides the necessary proof.  My photos of the edge clearly show that the coin was run through a single die edging mill (a parallel edging mill would show a second gap opposite the one gap in the oblique reeding) and you can see from the uneven profile that the coin was probably edged after it was struck (otherwise the flat surfaces of the coin press would have provided a more even profile). Both the dentils on the rims and edge designs were features added to milled coins to make them harder to counterfeit and to clearly show if any slivers had been shaved off. Of course, my example may be atypical or even a counterfeit.  However, it was purchased through the Stephen Album auction house and came with a provenance.  It's just unfortunate that you never get to see the edge of coins unless you can examine an unencapsulated example in-hand.  I should add that the Standard Catalog of World Coins notes that there is a variety of presentation pieces without milled edges.   *I apologize for omitting diacritics but you just can't be sure everyone's browser can display them properly.   ~jack

  7. jgenn
    And why does Heritage Auctions put them in their own category?

    Before they became a US territory in 1900, the islands of Hawaii had been unified into a kingdom that existed for nearly a century. The Kingdom of Hawaii issued their own coinage, cents in 1847 and a series of silver coins in 1883. The cents were struck by a private firm in Massachusetts and the silver dimes, quarters, halves and dollars were designed by Charles Barber and were produced at the San Francisco Mint. These issues are what I consider to be the coins of Hawaii. 

    Even though Hawaii is now a US state, I think of the coins of Hawaii as "world" coins and would expect to see them in world coin auctions just as I expect to see the coins of Puerto Rico and the coins of the Philippines (although I admit the argument for including the US produced coins of the Philippines in US coin auctions is compelling). However, if you browse a Heritage world coin auction you will typically see the top categories as Ancient coins, World coins and Coins of Hawaii. I don't have an answer for why they have their own category but I imagine it has to do with bidding action.

    I have gotten used to seeing the coins of Hawaii in their own Heritage category but lately I have observed a trend that I personally do not care for. Within the Coins of Hawaii category, Heritage has started to include bullion "medals", with Hawaiian themes issued by a company calling themselves the Royal Hawaiian Mint. Some of these may have a connection to a State of Hawaii government office but I believe the majority are strictly private issues. Now there's nothing wrong with collecting exonumia; I just find their placement in the same category to be potentially confusing. 

    Now that you know a bit of the history of the official coins of the Kingdom of Hawaii, please understand the difference when you come across a Hawaiian themed medal, regardless how "royal" it seems.

    Here's my example of the silver dollar (akahi dala).

    ~jack 
  8. jgenn
    And why does Heritage Auctions put them in their own category?
    Before they became a US territory in 1900, the islands of Hawaii had been unified into a kingdom that existed for nearly a century. The Kingdom of Hawaii issued their own coinage, cents in 1847 and a series of silver coins in 1883. The cents were struck by a private firm in Massachusetts and the silver dimes, quarters, halves and dollars were designed by Charles Barber and were produced at the San Francisco Mint. These issues are what I consider to be the coins of Hawaii.
     
    Even though Hawaii is now a US state, I think of the coins of Hawaii as "world" coins and would expect to see them in world coin auctions just as I expect to see the coins of Puerto Rico and the coins of the Philippines (although I admit the argument for including the US produced coins of the Philippines in US coin auctions is compelling). However, if you browse a Heritage world coin auction you will typically see the top categories as Ancient coins, World coins and Coins of Hawaii. I don't have an answer for why they have their own category but I imagine it has to do with bidding action.
     
    I have gotten used to seeing the coins of Hawaii in their own Heritage category but lately I have observed a trend that I personally do not care for. Within the Coins of Hawaii category, Heritage has started to include bullion "medals", with Hawaiian themes issued by a company calling themselves the Royal Hawaiian Mint. Some of these may have a connection to a State of Hawaii government office but I believe the majority are strictly private issues. Now there's nothing wrong with collecting exonumia; I just find their placement in the same category to be potentially confusing.
    Now that you know a bit of the history of the official coins of the Kingdom of Hawaii, please understand the difference when you come across a Hawaiian themed medal, regardless how "royal" it seems.
    Here's my example of the silver dollar (akahi dala).
    ~jack

  9. jgenn
    Floor bidders have the advantage at Sedwick's Treasure Auction 14
    I had an unfortunate experience on Wednesday night during Daniel Frank Sedwick's live auction of world coins. My maximum absentee bid was the starting price for a scarce 8 reales overdate, and I watched it go live through my internet connection from home (I had turned off the live audio/video feed). Although I was prepared to counter-bid, no additional bids came in and the item closed at my high bid. Great! Another slot filled in my Charles III pillar dollar set. I saw the next item come up, and since it was not of interest to me, I went back to doing something else on my computer.
    About 15 minutes later, I checked my list of items won and was shocked to see that the coin, that I saw close at my high bid, was sold to another bidder at the next higher increment. I fired off an indignant comment via the "ask auctioneer a question" form and was surprised to get a fairly prompt response. In the ensuing email exchange I received an apology for the confusion and the explanation. Apparently, the auctioneer missed a bid from the floor and so the item reopened again, later in the order, for bidding. I don't know what was announced on the live feed but I can't imagine that anyone but the floor bidder was prepared for a rebid -- I certainly wasn't.
    According to the posted terms, bids can be reopened at the discretion of the auction house, so all I can do is complain. Oh well, lesson learned. From now on, I will remember to keep an eye on the next several bids, just in case any I think I have won come up for rebid.
    There was a bright side to my night, however. I won a rare 1733 Mo F 8 reales, NGC XF details, at the starting bid of $1000. In problem-free condition, they list at $9K -- well outside my collecting budget. For a probable, sea-salvage coin, it has little to no visible corrosion. The main drawback is dark staining from encrustation that otherwise protected the surfaces.
    ~jack

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  10. jgenn
    My vicarious trip to Brazil
    In 1807, Napoleon forced the Portuguese court into exile. Relocating to Rio de Janeiro, Portugal became the colony -- its kingdom ruled from Brazil. This transfer of power was formalized in 1815 when the Reino Unido de Portugal, Brasil e Algarves was established and Rio de Janeiro became its capital. This is the only example of a European nation ruled from one of its colonies. The Portuguese court returned to Lisbon in 1821 with Brazil gaining its independence the following year.
    Perhaps it was a subconscious impulse from watching the Rio Olympics but when I saw these 8 reales, re-purposed for use in Brazil, in the recent ANA auction listings, I eagerly added them to my collection. Both examples are from the early years of the Portugese court's time abroad.
     
    The first example is a 960 reis counterstamp on a Potosi 8 reales. These were issued in 1808 for circulation in the Minas Gerais Capitania, Brazil's principal gold mining region. According to the Banco Central do Brasil website, they were issued in conjunction with the prohibition of using gold dust for financial transactions to counter embezzlement from the mines.
    My second example is an 1810 960 Reis from the Rio de Janeiro mint, overstruck on a Potosi 8 reales. The counterstriking of 8 reales was superseded by the full overstrikes starting in this year. The host coin's bullion value was only 750-800 reis, at this time; the inflation to 960 reis was done to generate revenue for the crown.
    Both coins display similar designs, the Portuguese coat of arms on the obverse and the armillary sphere on the reverse. The armillary sphere, an astronomical and navigational instrument of huge importance during the Age of Discovery, became a national emblem of the Portuguese Empire.
    ~jack

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.
  11. jgenn

    When was this coin minted?

    By jgenn,

    Yes, it is a trick question.
    My question is about an 1808 dated 8 reales with the bust of Fernando VII and the mint mark of Potosí from the Spanish Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata (modern day Bolivia). The answer lies in the tumultuous history of the period. Here's an illuminating discussion from a recent Heritage Auction catalog description:
    This apparently anachronistic issue was due to the Royal Ordinance of April 10, 1808 which was sent to the mints of the Americas before Ferdinand VII surrendered his throne to Napoleon on May 9... and reads as follows: "regarding the fact that the coinage ought to be minted with my royal name and no other alteration, I have instructed that until the (new) master dies are received the coins shall be minted as until now with the bust and name of my august father and without variation of the date and that later some coins shall be minted from the new master die and my bust and name and the date of 1808 proving that I have reigned in it (in that year)". Naturally, this royal ordinance was originally intended to be only provisional and effective for 1808 since the new master dies were expected to be sent and received in that year. However, Napoleon's invasion of Spain meant that the new master dies would not be sent until 1811. In the interval 1808-1811, the various mints gave different interpretations to the aforementioned ordinance: some (as Guatemala, Potosi, Nuevo Reino and Popayan) kept minting with the previous bust of Charles IV while others (Mexico, Lima, Santiago) engraved local renditions of Ferdinand VII, thus creating the so call "imaginary bust" issues.
    The previous text described an 1808 8 Reales of Fernando VII minted in Guatemala, but the key details apply to the issues of the Potosí mint, as well. This establishes that Fernando VII "proper bust" issues could not have been minted in 1808 due to the absence of dies with the official portrait. Calbeto includes this note in his 8 reales compendium, "1811 - Abril 7. Con oficio de esta fecha se remiten a las Casas de la Moneda de Popayan, Potosi, Lima y Santiago, los cuños para las moneda reales de a 8 y de a 2.", which confirms the date when dies were sent from Spain to the colonial mints.
    The revolutionary forces of the Provincias Unidas del Río de la Plata (from Buenos Aires -- modern day Argentina) took control of much of Upper Peru, including Potosí in 1810 but were forced out of the region after losing the Battle of Huaqui in June of 1811. The earliest point when 1808 dated examples could have been issued would have been during the second half of 1811 after the royalists returned to power and after the "proper bust" master die was received from Spain. "Proper bust" issues are also known with 1809 and 1810 dates -- these were probably minted in 1811 or possibly 1812. However, no examples are thought to have been issued with 1811 and 1812 dates. Although production could have started in 1811, it would have been interrupted in 1812 due to revolutionary armies moving through the area once again. The next confirmed issues from Potosí are for the Provincias Unidas del Río de la Plata in 1813 after the mint once again fell under control of the revolutionaries but reverted to the Fernando bust, with the 1813 date, after royalists reasserted control.
    ~jack

    To see old comments for this Journal entry, click here. New comments can be added below.