Lafayette commeorative dollar question

[RWB]

Should the Lafayette commemorative dollar be correctly dated "1899" the year struck, or "1900" the year of the celebration in Paris?

[BillJones]

The "1900" date is probably correct. They were struck in December of 1899 for the celebration.

 

The Delaware commemorative half dollars were struck in 1937, but two modern dates, 1936 and 1938 appear on the coin. "1936" refers to the year the legislation was passed to authorize them, and 1938 was the year of celebration. The dates 1638 - 1938 appear on the piece.

[disme]

I vote for 1899. The coins were all struck on a single day, Thursday, December

14, 1899. It was the exact 100th anniversary of Washington’s death in 1799.

[leeg]

I agree with the U.S. Mint on the 1900 date.

 

 

While the designs were in progress, some difficulty arose over the date. The Commissioners desired the delivery of these pieces as early as possible in the year 1899, although the coins were to bear the date 1900. The coinage took place on December 14th, 1899, the one-hundredth anniversary of the death of Washington. The entire issue was struck in one day on an old coining-press which made eighty coins per minute. The first coin struck was forwarded to President McKinley who sent it to the President of the French Republic.

 

It was contrary to the practice of the Mint to anticipate the dating of a coin. The difficulty was happily avoided by wording the inscription ‘Erected by the youth of the United States. . . 1900.’ This date, therefore, was independent of the year in which the coin was struck.

 

 

[RWB]

...or maybe it is simply "undated?"

[leeg]

Good point Roger.

 

[messydesk]

The correct date should be the one that is on the approved design. If the design specified 1900 and the coin said 1899, it would be incorrect.

[RWB]

However, "1900" refers specifically to an event, not the coin....?

[brg5658]

Roger, why does it matter?

 

Not sure why it matters what you year you call it -- they were all struck on a known single day, and were all dated 1900. It is what it is.

 

All Washington quarters struck in 1975 were dated "1776-1976"....I'm not losing any sleep over what people call them.

[messydesk]

However, "1900" refers specifically to an event, not the coin....?

So the coin is undated, and the year "1900" appears simply as a design element, sort of like 4 of the 5 dates on the Norfolk commemorative.

[CaptHenway]

Roger, why does it matter?

 

Not sure why it matters what you year you call it -- they were all struck on a known single day, and were all dated 1900. It is what it is.

 

All Washington quarters struck in 1975 were dated "1776-1976"....I'm not losing any sleep over what people call them.

 

No, in basically the first half of 1975 the Mints struck quarters, halves and dollars dated 1974. In basically the second half of 1975 they struck quarters, halves and dollars dated 1776-1976.

 

An exception was the 40% silver coins dated 1776-1976, which were struck as early as 1974.

 

Nowadays, the Mints routinely strike American Eagle bullion coins late in the year with the next year's date so that the new coins can be released on the first business day of the new year.

 

TD

[brg5658]

Roger, why does it matter?

 

Not sure why it matters what you year you call it -- they were all struck on a known single day, and were all dated 1900. It is what it is.

 

All Washington quarters struck in 1975 were dated "1776-1976"....I'm not losing any sleep over what people call them.

 

No, in basically the first half of 1975 the Mints struck quarters, halves and dollars dated 1974. In basically the second half of 1975 they struck quarters, halves and dollars dated 1776-1976.

 

An exception was the 40% silver coins dated 1776-1976, which were struck as early as 1974.

 

Nowadays, the Mints routinely strike American Eagle bullion coins late in the year with the next year's date so that the new coins can be released on the first business day of the new year.

 

TD

 

My point still stands -- and is maybe even strengthened by your gory amounts of detail -- no one tries to call the 1974-struck coins dated 1976 as something else. They are what they are.

 

I don't see what substantive difference it makes whether the Lafayette commemorative is called an 1899 or 1900 coin.

[RWB]

Well, not sure that it matters at all....but the question comes up now and then, and I was curious about how other perceived the coin.

[leeg]

For researchers the date matters when telling the history of the coin. 100% accuracy is the goal.

 

 

[brg5658]

For researchers the date matters when telling the history of the coin. 100% accuracy is the goal.

 

 

Yes, and there is no one arguing with you about when these were struck. The day on which they were struck is well documented. Similarly, the coin is also clearly struck with a date of 1900. Should we start calling it the "1900-dated" Lafayette commemorative dollar? Seems we are creating an issue where one doesn't exist.

 

In a similar vein, maybe we should start calling them the "1804-dated" Silver Dollars -- since none of the 1804-dated fantasy dollars were actually struck in 1804.

 

[mommam17]

It is what it is and the Lafayette will always be 1900 to me.

[CaptHenway]

All 1794 half dimes were struck in 1795. Regardless, they are still "1794 half dimes."

[lehigh96]

In my research, the 1900 was considered part of the legend and the Lafayette Dollar is technically undated. That said, I don't remember the source of that information.