History Through Coins: The Great Depression 0

[RWB]

Numismatic Scrapbook Magazine also includes a trove of research articles by Robert W. Julian - the Master of numismatic research. These are locked up for all but the few who have paper copies of Scrapbook.

[DWLange]

I have a complete unbound set that I use frequently, and here at the office is a nicely bound set. That one looks great on a shelf, but it's impossible to make good scans from bound periodicals.

And I agree with your comments about Bob Julian's articles. He was the only person doing such thorough research in the 1960s. Walter Breen did a lot of research during the 1950s, but he spent most of the '60s-'80s inventing dubious "facts" to fill in the blanks. He also saw "overdates" in every coin that had some minor repunching. We're still trying to get these clarified today, but too many persons have a vested interest in perpetuating them.

[GoldFinger1969]

1 minute ago, DWLange said:

I have a complete unbound set that I use frequently, and here at the office is a nicely bound set. That one looks great on a shelf, but it's impossible to make good scans from bound periodicals.

Smartphone camera + tripod ?

[RWB]

NSM is copyright. A page or two might be OK, but not all of it.

NNP has a complete digital set, but lacks permission from Amos Press to display it.

[Conder101]

On 5/18/2020 at 10:21 AM, DWLange said:

The letters to the editor reveal how little collectors knew about coin varieties and errors and the way they were made.

And replies often showed ignorance in the other direction as well.

 

I have most of a complete set of the Scrapbooks.  There is so really good articles and research in there besides Julian's as well.  On of these days I'll have to gather them together, take an inventory, and try to finish off the set.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Conder101

[GoldFinger1969]

Maybe people weren't that interested in die varieites and stuff like that at that time and/or at that time in their collecting years?  It can get pretty complicated for non-experts, especially young people.  It's 2nd-nature for some of you guys.  But having just read Roger's Saints book, I can tell you that even on Saints -- where die and other strike varieties are smaller than other coins -- I found the focus on die and striking varieties getting lost in my overall enthusiasm for quality coins, interesting coins, and mint marks.

Not begrduging those who follow that stuff and other minutae.  But unless you really spend time and effort -- and many collectors (like me) are more part-timers  -- it can be a bit out of most people's leagues. 

Both time-wise and $$$-wise.

Edited May 20, 2020 by GoldFinger1969

[Conder101]

I will admit that interest in varieties, except on some of the early US series was rather low except among a small number of serious specialists, and interest in errors other than some mild curiosity was pretty much non-esistant at the time.  (errors were usually viewed as defective coins and practically worthless to the extent than precious metal coins would be scrapped, and base metal coins just tossed out in the trash.  Active, though mild, interest in errors didn't really start to grow until the late 50's early 60's.

[World Colonial]

5 hours ago, Conder101 said:

I will admit that interest in varieties, except on some of the early US series was rather low except among a small number of serious specialists, and interest in errors other than some mild curiosity was pretty much non-esistant at the time.  (errors were usually viewed as defective coins and practically worthless to the extent than precious metal coins would be scrapped, and base metal coins just tossed out in the trash.  Active, though mild, interest in errors didn't really start to grow until the late 50's early 60's.

I can give you a very good reason why interest in die varieties was very low then.  When a coin is hard to buy as a generic date, it's enough of a challenge completing sets without it.  This is equally true with many non-US coins now.  Most pre-1933 US coins weren't scarce then anymore than they are now (presumably more common due to less  attrition) but would have been (much) harder to buy due to communication limitations.

As for a series like Saints, the coins are too expensive to collect by die variety, even for most of the relatively few who collect the series by date.  Additionally, at this price point, there are far more interesting coins than the difference if someone has the money.

The best explanation for the more recent increased interest in all specialization including die varieties is first, the coins most US collectors collect are very easy to buy, so another challenge is necessary.  Second, the coins they would actually usually prefer (not just like) are too expensive.  Several types (such as early large cents) that used to be more affordable when I started collecting in the 70's have increased (a lot) more than the incomes of most collectors.  Third, cherry picking.  It's an option to make money from collecting and finance coins the collector otherwise cannot afford.