Where do mintage figures come from? 0

[RWB]

The source of mintage figures published in hobby books and on-line is a frequent collector question. We seem to presume that "if it's published, it's right" when some quantities are not really as accurate or reliable as once thought.

Most mintage quantities after about 1862 were copied from official US Mint reports. Proof coin mintages come from a few contemporary documents and a list of gold, silver and minor proofs prepare by the Philadelphia Mint in 1939. Earlier mintage figures often require matching coin deliveries with availability of dies for the next calendar year to separate coin date from the year of manufacture. A further problem occurs when large deliveries of coins fail assay or weight tests and have to be destroyed - this melting was not always subtracted from reported mintages.

Confusion can increase when we realize that mintage quantities are not necessarily all the pieces struck. Defective pieces were routinely subtracted, but the Coiner also had discretion in making his deliveries to the Director or Superintendent. He could hold back good coins for any reason - and not simply to make even-numbered deliveries to simplify accounting. In many years, proof coins were reported separately from circulation strikes, or were rolled up into a single number. Additionally, when coins were removed from Annual Assay or other testing, the quantities destroyed were not subtracted from published data.

Over the past 20 years, there has been a considerable increase in access to original internal mint documents and coinage journals. These can be used to refine and validate mintage quantities from other sources. Below is a sample of a proof coin table for 1913. Normally, this would be accompanied by sources for every number in the table.

Edited March 12 by RWB

[powermad5000]

Another series where the mintage numbers can no longer be used to determine rarity are Morgan Dollars which many millions were melted under the Pittman Act and the dates and mintmarks of the melted coins were not processed so it is unknown exactly which and how many of each date and mintmark were melted. While the original mintage numbers may be listed as a "reference" for how many were originally struck, the survivability numbers for them are largely unknown.

I also think in correlation to your observation of mintage number accuracy, a bigger defining number in regards to rarity is the survivability number which is even more difficult to pin down than the accuracy of the number originally minted as some coins can be lost, buried, worn beyond year and mintmark recognition, corroded to below Poor 1, thrown or fallen into the ocean never to be recovered, etc.

[Henri Charriere]

Interesting topic.  It would have never occurred to me that mintage figures could be challenged, questioned or even debated... Then again, I was not aware  proof sets, and to a larger extent, certified coins were being disassembled.

[RWB]

On 3/12/2024 at 11:30 PM, powermad5000 said:

Another series where the mintage numbers can no longer be used to determine rarity are Morgan Dollars which many millions were melted under the Pittman Act and the dates and mintmarks of the melted coins were not processed so it is unknown exactly which and how many of each date and mintmark were melted. While the original mintage numbers may be listed as a "reference" for how many were originally struck, the survivability numbers for them are largely unknown.

I also think in correlation to your observation of mintage number accuracy, a bigger defining number in regards to rarity is the survivability number which is even more difficult to pin down than the accuracy of the number originally minted as some coins can be lost, buried, worn beyond year and mintmark recognition, corroded to below Poor 1, thrown or fallen into the ocean never to be recovered, etc.

These are excellent points that pertain more to post release than to actual manufacture. There are other, lesser known examples, such as melting of 1877 half dollars to meet urgent demand for dimes, and the condemnation of defective CC dollars followed by unrecorded production of replacements 2 years later.

The published mintages are, for the most part, reasonably accurate - there are few instances where discrepancies are large enough to possibly affect initial availability.

As for the table. This is part of a series covering proof coins 1873-1916 that I made for Whitman Publishing about a decade ago. They wanted to validate Guide Book quantities and identify data sources.

[Mike Meenderink]

They are delivered by white storks in wooden baskets silly. Everyone knows that...it's just like how we get babies. 

[RWB]

On 3/13/2024 at 11:04 PM, Mike Meenderink said:

They are delivered by white storks in wooden baskets silly. Everyone knows that...it's just like how we get babies. 

Red storks for cents, and blond storks (all named "Barbie") for gold.

[Henri Charriere]

On 3/13/2024 at 9:53 AM, RWB said:

These are excellent points that pertain more to post release than to actual manufacture. There are other, lesser known examples, such as melting of 1877 half dollars to meet urgent demand for dimes, and the condemnation of defective CC dollars followed by unrecorded production of replacements 2 years later.

The published mintages are, for the most part, reasonably accurate - there are few instances where discrepancies are large enough to possibly affect initial availability.

As for the table. This is part of a series covering proof coins 1873-1916 that I made for Whitman Publishing about a decade ago. They wanted to validate Guide Book quantities and identify data sources.

What were their (Whitman Publishing) conclusions as to the results of your investigation?

[RWB]

On 3/14/2024 at 8:49 PM, Henri Charriere said:

What were their (Whitman Publishing) conclusions as to the results of your investigation?

They wanted to verify numbers - most of which were OK - and have the source data to make it easier to respond to questions.