Are state quarters each their own type?

[Zoins]

It seems that many type sets contain coins that have been issued for circulation. Since the state quarters series are in circulation and they have a different reverse, are they technically different types? Does a US type set need to have all the state quarters to be complete?

[EZ_E]

Of course not. The Dansco 7070 type album has a slot for a state quarter just as it has a slot for a commemorative dollar. Would one need all commemorative dollars to make a complete type set? Nay, not so.

[Zoins]

What about a series that's not a commemorative series, like British Commonweath coins? Since they all have a common obverse, is their entire coinage series technically one type?

 

If not, what's the technical definition of a commemorative? A 1 year type, something else? Is it just whatever Dansco says it is?

 

So far, the definitions of type that make sense to me would lead me to conclude that circulating state quarters are each different types. The only definition that leads me to conclude they are not is the definition where type is determined by the Dansco album. If they are not separate types, I hope there's a better reason than what Dansco determines works well with their album business.

[EZ_E]

The NGC and PCGS registries consider state quarters but one type. Clad and silver are not even differentiated.

[Zoins]

Hmm. I was hoping for a defintion that can be used as a rule to determine whether a coin is a separate type or not, as opposed to just what someone happens to feel or makes sense for a business. However, there doesn't seem to be a concrete definition (the PCGS lingo page is ambiguous and subjective). It seems to be whatever the major companies (Dansco, NGC, PCGS) want it to be on a per-coin or per-series basis. Subjective classification.

[zrlevin]

I consider each state quarter and commem coin to be a different type, but that is JMHO.

 

Zach

[Zoins]

I'm thinking of classifying some coins and I'm leaning to saying each state quarter and commem coin is a different type. I think that's the only way that makes logical sense and removes subjective, arbitrary decisions on a per-coin and per-series basis.

[MTHead-migration]

I consider each state quarter and commem coin to be a different type, but that is JMHO.

 

Zach

 

 

Krause Publishing would agree with you. In the Standard Catalog Of World Coins each new State Quarter issue is given it's own Krause/Mishler number. The silver Proof is a sub-type of the issue. Connecticut is KM # 294; the Connecticut Proof is KM # 294a.

 

If the design changes then it's a different type.

[Zoins]

In the Standard Catalog Of World Coins each new State Quarter issue is given it's own Krause/Mishler number. The silver Proof is a sub-type of the issue. Connecticut is KM # 294; the Connecticut Proof is KM # 294a.

 

If the design changes then it's a different type.

Thanks for mentioning this. This is how I feel. I'll probably get a copy of Krause now.

[spiny]

I don't have much time so this is a brief definition...

A major change in design or metal content is what determines if a coin is a new type. Each State quarter is a type.

Minor changes in the design elements are varieties.

An anomoly that can be attributed to a single die (usually from an error in the die making process) and is present in some degree on all coins struck from that die, is a die variety.

There's always something that will fall in a grey area in between, but it's a good rule of thumb.

[EZ_E]

If you do that then it nullifies the whole point of type collecting. With your definition, any type collector must also acquire complete collections of all commemoratives and state quarters. Although I collect all three of the mentioned sets, I still regard each set as separate and independent of each other.

[Zoins]

If you do that then it nullifies the whole point of type collecting. With your definition, any type collector must also acquire complete collections of all commemoratives and state quarters. Although I collect all three of the mentioned sets, I still regard each set as separate and independent of each other.

I don't think so. What Dansco/NGC/PCGS calls a type set, I may call a "short type set" or something along those lines. I'm more interested in making sure classification doesn't get compromised which I think is also a goal of the Krause book.

 

I also think you can have type sets for circulating coins including the state quarters and a separate type set for NCLT like the modern precious metal commems and satin finish coins.

 

I think Dansco and the TPG registries make a compromise with respect to type sets to make them easier to collect, but in doing so, they replace logic with subjectivity in their classification system.

[MTHead-migration]

Thanks for mentioning this. This is how I feel. I'll probably get a copy of Krause now.

 

Borrow one from the library if you can. At $50 plus unless you need the latest edition an older one will suffice. ALSO - COINS and COIN PRICES magazines list KM #'s along for all US coins. They're about $5 each which means more money for coins.

[Zoins]

Thanks for mentioning this. This is how I feel. I'll probably get a copy of Krause now.

 

Borrow one from the library if you can. At $50 plus unless you need the latest edition an older one will suffice. ALSO - COINS and COIN PRICES magazines list KM #'s along for all US coins. They're about $5 each which means more money for coins.

Good suggestions. I'll stop by my public library and see if they have it.

[Hoot]

I wrote an article for CV on this a while back, as the hobby jargon is very often misused. From the majority of resources, here's what I arrived at:

 

Series: A denomination with all major conformities of design. For example, quarter dollars (1796-present) share all major conformities of design.

 

Subseries: A denomination that shares minor variations in major aspects of design. For example, early quarter dollars (1796-1828) are a subseries, and small diameter silver quarter dollars (1831-1964) form another subseries; clad quarters from 1965-present are yet another subseries.

 

Type: Coins that depict major changes in devices within a subseries represent a type. For example, draped bust, small eagle reverse is a one year (1796) quarter type, then the heraldic eagle reverse is another type (1804-1807), then Reich's capped bust (1815-1828) is another type, etc.

 

Subtype: Minor variations to devices that are readily distinguished but do not alter the central devices represent a subtype. For example, No Drapery, no motto reverse seated quarters from 1838-40 are one subtype, then "with drapery," no motto reverse from 1840-1853 and 1856-1866 are another subtype, then the arrows and rays quarters of 1853 are another subtype, then no arrows and rays of 1854-55 another subtype, then no arrows, no rays, motto reverse of 1866-1873 and 1875-1891 are another subtype, and lastly, the arrows, no rays, motto reverse of 1873-74 are another subtype. (A note: the Red Book is the biggest violator of this language.)

 

Variety: coins that represent intentional alterations within a subtype. For example, Overton varieties are discoverd on the basis of die marriages, where unique characteristics of obverse and reverse dies are identified and the pairing of each unique die is counted as an Overton variety. "Variety" is the most misused term in all of numismatics.

 

Die states: These represent progressional changes in die characteristics based on markers of the coins produced. For example, the progression of a die crack or die break as seen on a particular variety of coin.

 

Errors: All unintentional blunders that are not intentionally repeated. There is some ambiguity in this, as there are both unique and repeated errors. For example, a die cap can produce can produce several brockages, but each is an error. Overdates and RPMs are not errors in this context, rather they are varieties because they are unique to the die and not a mishap in the production of the blanks, planchets, or coins. Die cracks are errors, as they are unintentional, but they also are representative of the die state; thus, errors that are representative of the die state blend with the die state definition, but they are only one form of error, as there are many.

 

Some common usages: Shield nickels with rays and without rays are subtypes, as are "with CENTS" and "no CENTS" subtypes of Liberty nickels. These are not varieties or types, although you see them called both. U.S. Five cent pieces represent a bigger challenge when considering the definitions above. Strictly speaking, silver five cents are a subseries, and nickel-copper five cents are another subseries, although these are often regarded as unique series. The problem comes down to nomenclature and our innate proclivity to denegrate the subtleties of language.

 

If the draped bust, small eagle reverse quarter dollar is considered a type, and the draped bust, heraldic eagle reverse is a type, then so are all the state quarters. Defining types on the basis of Dansco or any other album is an error.

 

Hoot

[Hoot]

One other thing to add is that "State Quarter series" and "Westward Journey series" are misnomers. Neither are series in the context of numismatic definition, and one might view these collective types as convenient thematic categorizations.

 

Another unrelated consideration is that of proofs and business (circulation) strikes. For any given subtype, MS and PF manufactured coins are (nearly always) assuredly from different dies (with funny exceptions appearing where a business strike has an obverse or reverse retired proof die). Comparing MS and PF coins are like comparing very evident types. No doubt, there are many types within the category of each manufacturing process for a given subtype.

 

Taxonomies are exacting, and that's why we tend to lose our way with them. However, , our use of the English language is, for the most part, atrocious and embarrassingly primitive.

 

Hoot

[Zoins]

Great information Hoot! I appreciate the response a lot.

[TomB]

Terrific response, Hoot!!!

[MikeInFL]

Great post Hoot! Thanks for sharing!

 

As an aside, I was pondering the other night, while attempting to do a coin database design, how to uniquely identify each coin verbally -- I'm not fond of PCGS's numerical method or the columns in my present spreadsheet. Using Hoot's example, I think that corresponds to the following fields:

 

Series, Subseries, Type, Subtype, Variety, Die State, Error

 

But am left wondering how this would handle proof versus business strike coins (i.e. do I need to add a "Strike" field?)...Mike

 

I wrote an article for CV on this a while back, as the hobby jargon is very often misused. From the majority of resources, here's what I arrived at:

 

Series: A denomination with all major conformities of design. For example, quarter dollars (1796-present) share all major conformities of design.

 

Subseries: A denomination that shares minor variations in major aspects of design. For example, early quarter dollars (1796-1828) are a subseries, and small diameter silver quarter dollars (1831-1964) form another subseries; clad quarters from 1965-present are yet another subseries.

 

Type: Coins that depict major changes in devices within a subseries represent a type. For example, draped bust, small eagle reverse is a one year (1796) quarter type, then the heraldic eagle reverse is another type (1804-1807), then Reich's capped bust (1815-1828) is another type, etc.

 

Subtype: Minor variations to devices that are readily distinguished by do not alter the central devices represent a subtype. For example, No Drapery, no motto reverse seated quarters from 1838-40 are one subtype, then "with drapery," no motto reverse from 1840-1853 and 1856-1866 are another subtype, then the arrows and rays quarters of 1853 are another subtype, then no arrows and rays of 1854-55 another subtype, then no arrows, no rays, motto reverse of 1866-1873 and 1875-1891 are another subtype, and lastly, the arrows, no rays, motto reverse of 1873-74 are another subtype. (A note: the Red Book is the biggest violator of this language.)

 

Variety: coins that represent intentional alterations within a subtype. For example, Overton varieties are discoverd on the basis of die marriages, where unique characteristics of obverse and reverse dies are identified and the pairing of each unique die is counted as an Overton variety. "Variety" is the most misused term in all of numismatics.

 

Die states: These represent progressional changes in die characteristics based on markers of the coins produced. For example, the progression of a die crack or die break as seen on a particular variety of coin.

 

Errors: All unintentional blunders that are not intentionally repeated. There is some ambiguity in this, as there are both unique and repeated errors. For example, a die cap can produce can produce several brockages, but each is an error. Overdates and RPMs are not errors in this context, rather they are varieties because they are unique to the die and not a mishap in the production of the blanks, planchets, or coins. Die cracks are errors, as they are unintentional, but they also are representative of the die state; thus, errors that are representative of the die state blend with the die state definition, but they are only one form of error, as there are many.

 

Some common usages: Shield nickels with rays and without rays are subtypes, as are "with CENTS" and "no CENTS" subtypes of Liberty nickels. These are not varieties or types, although you see them called both. U.S. Five cent pieces represent a bigger challenge when considering the definitions above. Strictly speaking, silver five cents are on subseries, and nickel-copper five cents are another subseries, although these are often regarded as unique series. The problem comes down to nomenclature and our innate proclivity to denegrate the subtleties of language.

 

If the draped bust, small eagle reverse quarter dollar is considered a type, and the draped bust, heraldic eagle reverse is a type, then so are all the state quarters. Defining types on the basis of Dansco or any other album is an error.

 

Hoot

 

p.s. I consider all the state quarters as members of one distinct type.

[Zoins]

I consider all the state quarters as members of one distinct type.

What definition of type do you use? I understand some people consider the state quarters a single type but I haven't heard of an objective way to do so yet. If the only way to achieve this is through a subjective definition that's fine but I won't use it myself.

[Hoot]

Series, Subseries, Type, Subtype, Variety, Die State, Error

 

But am left wondering how this would handle proof versus business strike coins (i.e. do I need to add a "Strike" field?)...Mike

 

Proofs are just varieties. But for a numbering system, a unique identifier could be tagged on, such as PCGS's "9" to identify the proof.

 

Hoot

[Zoins]

Are silver proofs also just varieties of the clad version?

[Hoot]

Are silver proofs also just varieties of the clad version?

 

No. What makes a variety is the use of at least one new die in the pairing used to strike a planchet and transform it into a coin. A silver coin could be struck from the same dies as a clad coin. Such peculiarities are given a "subvariety" designation, such as 18a and 18b to distinguish the metal compositional difference but to retain the distinction of the die pairing.

 

In today's modern Mint, it would be unlikely that the same dies used to produce silver proofs would also be used to produce clad coinage. Thus, silver and cald proofs will likely be different varieties due to their unique die pairing.

 

In addition to all of this, it would be quite hard to distinguish many varieties nowadays without the use of blunders in the production of dies, particularly since laser etching is now taking hold in the production process. The more technologically advanced the Mint has gotten over time, the more difficult it's become to identify varieties since the uniformity of die manufacture (from more and more complete hubs and master dies) has increased. Bear in mind that production of a blundered die results in a variety of coin, not an error.

 

The latter statement makes it clear that things like overdates and RPMs are varieties, but what about coins like the 1922 "no D" cent or the 1937-D 3-legged buffalo? Although there's some gray area there, the blunder was subsequent to the die's manufacture, and not the blank, planchet, or in the striking process. Thus, those coins represent die states that are most often looked upon as varieties, although if we could follow the progression of each from the original die, the elevation of those blunders to the level of variety makes no sense.

 

Hoot

[spiny]

I wrote an article for CV on this a while back, as the hobby jargon is very often misused. From the majority of resources, here's what I arrived at:

 

Series: A denomination with all major conformities of design. For example, quarter dollars (1796-present) share all major conformities of design.

 

Subseries: A denomination that shares minor variations in major aspects of design. For example, early quarter dollars (1796-1828) are a subseries, and small diameter silver quarter dollars (1831-1964) form another subseries; clad quarters from 1965-present are yet another subseries.

 

Type: Coins that depict major changes in devices within a subseries represent a type. For example, draped bust, small eagle reverse is a one year (1796) quarter type, then the heraldic eagle reverse is another type (1804-1807), then Reich's capped bust (1815-1828) is another type, etc.

 

Subtype: Minor variations to devices that are readily distinguished by do not alter the central devices represent a subtype. For example, No Drapery, no motto reverse seated quarters from 1838-40 are one subtype, then "with drapery," no motto reverse from 1840-1853 and 1856-1866 are another subtype, then the arrows and rays quarters of 1853 are another subtype, then no arrows and rays of 1854-55 another subtype, then no arrows, no rays, motto reverse of 1866-1873 and 1875-1891 are another subtype, and lastly, the arrows, no rays, motto reverse of 1873-74 are another subtype. (A note: the Red Book is the biggest violator of this language.)

 

Variety: coins that represent intentional alterations within a subtype. For example, Overton varieties are discoverd on the basis of die marriages, where unique characteristics of obverse and reverse dies are identified and the pairing of each unique die is counted as an Overton variety. "Variety" is the most misused term in all of numismatics.

 

Die states: These represent progressional changes in die characteristics based on markers of the coins produced. For example, the progression of a die crack or die break as seen on a particular variety of coin.

 

Errors: All unintentional blunders that are not intentionally repeated. There is some ambiguity in this, as there are both unique and repeated errors. For example, a die cap can produce can produce several brockages, but each is an error. Overdates and RPMs are not errors in this context, rather they are varieties because they are unique to the die and not a mishap in the production of the blanks, planchets, or coins. Die cracks are errors, as they are unintentional, but they also are representative of the die state; thus, errors that are representative of the die state blend with the die state definition, but they are only one form of error, as there are many.

 

Some common usages: Shield nickels with rays and without rays are subtypes, as are "with CENTS" and "no CENTS" subtypes of Liberty nickels. These are not varieties or types, although you see them called both. U.S. Five cent pieces represent a bigger challenge when considering the definitions above. Strictly speaking, silver five cents are on subseries, and nickel-copper five cents are another subseries, although these are often regarded as unique series. The problem comes down to nomenclature and our innate proclivity to denegrate the subtleties of language.

 

If the draped bust, small eagle reverse quarter dollar is considered a type, and the draped bust, heraldic eagle reverse is a type, then so are all the state quarters. Defining types on the basis of Dansco or any other album is an error.

 

Hoot

Are silver proofs also just varieties of the clad version?

 

No. What makes a variety is the use of at least one new die in the pairing used to strike a planchet and transform it into a coin. A silver coin could be struck from the same dies as a clad coin. Such peculiarities are given a "subvariety" designation, such as 18a and 18b to distinguish the metal compositional difference but to retain the distinction of the die pairing.

 

In today's modern Mint, it would be unlikely that the same dies used to produce silver proofs would also be used to produce clad coinage. Thus, silver and cald proofs will likely be different varieties due to their unique die pairing.

 

In addition to all of this, it would be quite hard to distinguish many varieties nowadays without the use of blunders in the production of dies, particularly since laser etching is now taking hold in the production process. The more technologically advanced the Mint has gotten over time, the more difficult it's become to identify varieties since the uniformity of die manufacture (from more and more complete hubs and master dies) has increased. Bear in mind that production of a blundered die results in a variety of coin, not an error.

 

The latter statement makes it clear that things like overdates and RPMs are varieties, but what about coins like the 1922 "no D" cent or the 1937-D 3-legged buffalo? Although there's some gray area there, the blunder was subsequent to the die's manufacture, and not the blank, planchet, or in the striking process. Thus, those coins represent die states that are most often looked upon as varieties, although if we could follow the progression of each from the original die, the elevation of those blunders to the level of variety makes no sense.

 

Hoot

 

I'm going to go against the grain and say that I find these definitions and examples adding to the confusion and misuse of terminology instead of clarifying it. I think using the definitions listed in the glossary of the ANA grading guide make it a simple and logical process of classification.

 

Denomination->Series->Type->Variety->Die Variety

 

ANA Definitions (used without permission)

 

Series: One coin of each year and mint of a specific design and denomination. I.E., Buffalo Nickels 1913-1938.

Type: A coin's basic distinguishing design. (composition isn't mentioned in this particular definition, but it is in others. I'll go into that)

Variety: A minor change from the basic type design of coin.

Die Variety: A variation of a design attributed to a particular die.

 

I would call the "series" the basic theme of the coin instead of "specific design" as above. For example, the Jefferson Nickel series for the last three years has had significant changes to the specific design, but the theme is still Jefferson and therefore part of the Jefferson Nickel series.

Those coins are also a good example for type. Since each is a significant change in the basic distinguishing design, they are each a different type.

I also consider a change of metal composition as a change of type. This is consistent with Krause, Red Book (although with them, type = my series and variety = my type), and Dansco. If war nickels, steel cents, and clad coinage are distinct types, then a silver proof version of a clad coin would also be a distinct type.

Varieties. This gets a little tougher since it’s subjective as to what constitutes only a minor change in design. Changes like small date/large date, adding/removing designer initials, moving mintmark locations, spaghettifying hair , etc are pretty easy to see as varieties. Others, like arrows at date, are a tougher call to distinguish between type or variety.

Die varieties. Originally meant for the early coins struck from handmade dies, it has also come to encompass modern coins with design elements, usually due to errors in the die making process, that are attributable to a particular die. Examples of these would be doubled dies, repunched mintmarks, over mintmarks, misplaced dates, etc. Further, it’s generally considered that to be a die variety that all coins struck from the die will have this same attributable element to some degree. Coins with die chips, scratches, gouges, cuds, eroded/abraded dies, clashes, etc are errors, not die varieties. The three legger and 22 no D are errors. Under the PDS (Planchet, Die, Strike) method of error classification, they would be die errors. eroded/abraded dies.

 

Die State and Die Stage. These are often confused and misused.

The die state is simply the progression of wear of a die. Coins struck from a new die will be Very Early Die State (VEDS) and will rapidly go to Early Die State (EDS), then Mid Die State (MDS), Late Die State (LDS), and Very Late Die State (VLDS). Some people even use EMDS. I’m doing good to pick out a MDS from a LDS and I’m not even going to try and explain the differences in characteristics.

Die stages are used in attributing die varieties. A change in die stage is usually from a notable change to the die or die marriage. Die states are also used to mark die stages (just to make it more confusing). For example…

 

Fictitious and oversimplified RPM#1

Stage A: Obverse EDS, Reverse LDS

Stage B: Reverse Die Crack

Stage C: New Reverse EDS, Obverse LDS

[Hoot]

Hey Spiny - In the definitions that I supplied, one could readily substitute Denomination for Series, then Series for Subseries.

 

Anyhow, I think the Red Book and ANA have significantly muddied the waters. Their Type and Variety definition are wholly ambiguous, which is what has led to the widespread misuse of the terms. Perhaps just my opinion.

 

Hoot

[Hoot]

I really appreciate Spiny's reply and the replies of others. I'm going to re-visit this issue, trace the use of the terms, and attempt to do a more rigorous analysis that parallels a modern taxonomic approach (e.g., from a scientific field of biotic classification). I believe this is the only way to accurately sort out these matters.

 

Hoot