In honor of TDN, I'll post a trivia question about SD's

[EVillageProwler]

Which 3 dates use reverse die(s) that was previously used to strike MS specimens? (Yes, this obviates the issue of the alleged "restrike" proofs from the 1840's to 1850.)

 

Also, which date is suspected of having BMP strikings?

 

Ok, this was two questions. So, shoot me!

 

EVP

[EVillageProwler]

How the heck can this thread have 5 stars w/ no responses?!?

 

Perhaps TDN isn't all that after all!

 

EVP

[Hoot]

How the heck can this thread have 5 stars w/ no responses?!?

 

Perhaps TDN isn't all that after all!

 

EVP

 

It's so damn brainy that we feel informed, even without knowing...

 

I'll guess: 1804, 1856, and 1945.

 

How'd I do?

 

Hoot

[BOILER78]

1845 struck with 1840 reverse die

1851 struck with 1850 die

1871-cc/1872-cc/1873-cc struck with 1870-cc reverse die

 

As far as BMPs are concerned- Stacks cataloged the Garrett 1860-o as a possible BMP in their 1976 sale of a portion of the Garrett collection and Breen called the Amon Carter 1859-o a BMP in his Encyclopedia of United States and Colonial Proof Coins.

[EVillageProwler]

How'd I do?

 

Uhhh, Hoot, might I suggest that you stick with Buffs and Jeffs?

 

1845 struck with 1840 reverse die

1851 struck with 1850 die

1871-cc/1872-cc/1873-cc struck with 1870-cc reverse die

 

I was thinking of the three latter CC dates, as they undisputably used reverse dies that are found dated 1870. I know that some of the 1845 proofs shared a reverse die with 1840 proofs, but I think that is one of those alleged "restrikes" by the midnight entrepreneurs at the Mint. The 1851 case is one with which I have no great familiarity. I was talking to John Pack in the recent past about these alleged "restrikes" and he asked to examine an 1851 PF restrike for any key reverse die diagnostics.

 

As far as BMPs are concerned- Stacks cataloged the Garrett 1860-o as a possible BMP in their 1976 sale of a portion of the Garrett collection and Breen called the Amon Carter 1859-o a BMP in his Encyclopedia of United States and Colonial Proof Coins.

 

I was actually thinking of the 1870-CC, as that currently has the most prominent claim to BMP status for the series. As many know, the series is replete with entire dates that are very PL and/or cameo in aspect. I dispute the claims by Stack's and Breen because I know of no independent assertion of support. Moreover, 1859 was hardly a monumental year for the New Orleans Mint.

 

The claim of the 1870-CC, however, has developed some minor bit of numismatic urban legend. A couple of folks have attested to its possibility, including Weimar White who happens to own a PL ChMS specimen.

 

I personally need more "proof" -- pardon the pun -- before I will pass on the assertion as fact.

 

Nice response, Boiler. Hoot -- better luck next time!

 

EVP

[BOILER78]

EVP- I seriously doubt the proof status of both the 1859-o and the 1860-o as well. I had never heard the of the LEGEND ----- pardon the pun ----- of the 70cc proof.

 

Mark

[Hoot]

How'd I do?

 

Uhhh, Hoot, might I suggest that you stick with Buffs and Jeffs?

 

.....

 

Hoot -- better luck next time!

 

EVP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Great thread EVP! Thanks to you and Boiler for the fabulous info. Know of any recent auction catalogs where we can look up said pieces?

 

Hoot

[Tradedollarnut]

I've seen a fully DMPL 1860-O ... it definitely was not a BMP, so they do exist as fully prooflike fresh strikes. The Amon Carter 1859-O is definitely not a BMP - I've seen it as well. It's not even near as prooflike as the circ strike 60-O I saw.