Bare-Breasted Liberty

[WoodenJefferson]

Edit: Be certain to read the follow-ups to the original thread, some very interesting, thought provoking comments about what really happened!

 

In 1916, Mint officials were not plotting to put bare-breasted ladies on our quarters! A competition was held, and several of the nations top sculptors were invited to submit designs to be considered for use on coinage. The design selected for the quarter was Hermon A. MacNeil's, which depicts Miss Liberty standing between two large pedestals, holding an olive branch in her right hand, and a shield in her left. She wears a flowing garment that slips off her right shoulder exposing her breast.

 

 

There has been much speculation into why MacNeil's design was selected and what the symbolism meant. The olive branch Liberty holds is a universal sign of peacemaking. The shield depicted is clearly a symbol of warfare along with defense. And what about Liberty's exposed breast? History does not record the answer, only speculations prevail.

 

The dies for the 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter were ready for production by July of 1916, but production didn't begin until the last half of December that same year.

 

That intial production run of SLQ's consisted of 52,000 pieces, all of which were produced at the Philadelphia Mint, and all of which left the mint by December 29, 1916. This small production run made its way through the Treasury distribution system in early January of 1917 where they awaited release into circulation. In the meantime Philadelphia along with the San Francisco and Denver Mints, began striking the 1917 SLQ's and releasing them for distribution as well.

 

 

On January 17, 1917 the once bare-breasted Standing Liberty Quarter finally entered circulation. The outcry from the public was immediate and loud. Religious leaders used words like "obscene" and "filthy" to describe the visage of our beautiful Miss Liberty with her breast exposed. Citizens' groups rallied their memberships to lobby Congress to have the disgusting coin recalled.

 

Congress had little choice but to submit to all the clamor and the bare-breasted Liberty Quarters soon began disappearing from circulation.

Alas, MacNeil was obliged to modify his original design. Miss Liberty would need to be properly covered in accordance with the citizens of our so-called enlightened nation. It is easy to imagine that MacNeil might have been a little resentful about the modification chore he had to undertake. Rather than simply rearrange the drapery on Liberty's shoulder to cover the offending breast, he crafted a suit of armor instead, and chastely clothed Miss Liberty nearly to the neck in chain mail.

 

 

The SLQ needed a third design change starting in 1925 because the date was wearing off too quickly. The design was re-cut so that the date was recessed, rather than raised. A summary of the Standing Liberty Quarter types:

 

Type I - Liberty's breast exposed (1916-1917)

Type II - Liberty clothed, 3 stars below eagle on reverse (1917-1924)

Type III - Same as II, but date is recessed (1925-1930)

 

One major error variety is recognized - the 1918 8-over-7 repunched date.

 

Resource: re-written from an article by Susan Headley @About.com

 

Post your thoughts, ideas and show us your Standing Liberty Quarters!

[DaveG]

Actually, I'm not sure that anyone has ever found any contemporary evidence to support the story of a public outcry about Liberty's bare breast.

 

You may want to consult Renaissance of American Coinage, 1916 - 1921 by our esteemed fellow board member, Roger Burdette.

[TomB]

On January 17, 1917 the once bare-breasted Standing Liberty Quarter finally entered circulation. The outcry from the public was immediate and loud. Religious leaders used words like "obscene" and "filthy" to describe the visage of our beautiful Miss Liberty with her breast exposed. Citizens' groups rallied their memberships to lobby Congress to have the disgusting coin recalled.

 

Congress had little choice but to submit to all the clamor and the bare-breasted Liberty Quarters soon began disappearing from circulation.

Alas, MacNeil was obliged to modify his original design. Miss Liberty would need to be properly covered in accordance with the citizens of our so-called enlightened nation. It is easy to imagine that MacNeil might have been a little resentful about the modification chore he had to undertake. Rather than simply rearrange the drapery on Liberty's shoulder to cover the offending breast, he crafted a suit of armor instead, and chastely clothed Miss Liberty nearly to the neck in chain mail.

 

This is entirely false! It is a numismatic "myth", to put it kindly, and there is no contemporary account that I am aware of to support the falsehoods contained within. This is one of the most oft-repeated myths in all of numismatics.

[Conder101]

The "public outcry" is all fiction, and Congress had nothing to do with the changes made to the quarter. All the decisions on altering the design came from within the mint and from the designer himself. And there was never any discussion about covering Liberty's breast. In fact in J Clines book on the SLQ you will find a copy of a letter between the Mint director and MacNeil listing all the changes to be made with the specific statement that no changes other than the ones listed there were to be made to the coin. The covering of the breast is NOT mentioned. So hat was actually an illegal change and probably one made solely by MacNeil.

 

He probably didit to fit with the other symbolism of the coin. The entire design speaks of a desire for peace but a readiness and preparation for war. (An understandable design given the war raging in Europe that was drawing us in. hence the uncovering of the shield. but by 1917 it was probably clear that we were going to be drawn in, it was just a matter of time, and you don't go into battle nude. So MacNeil, now given the chance, put armor on Miss Liberty.

[BillJones]

The odd part is after MacNeil changed the design, the mint was seldom able to strike it properly. One would be hard pressed to find a 1917 Type 1 quarter that does not have a full head.

[AzLarry]

I’ve always liked the MacNeil SLQ design and would have liked to have seen the series last longer. It was only minted from 1916 to 1930 with no proofs being issued. It would have been nice to have seen the series go to at least 1936 so there could have been a proof minting.

The only SLQ’s that I own are the three different varieties in my type set.

 

Variety 1 1917 MS64FH PCGS

 

 

Variety 2 1924-D MS66 NGC

 

 

Variety 3 1930 MS65FH NGC

 

[MikeKing]

This is a great post! I didn't know about that story being a 'myth'.

And Larry, I didn't know they had discos in 1824!

[RoelSports]

The 1916 cannot be lumped together with the others..because of many different design features, it should be noted as Type 1;1917 bare breast type 2; 1917 chain mail type 3, and recessed date type 4..these are the obsevations of J Cline, noted expert on SLQ's

[DC Dawg]

This is a great post! I didn't know about that story being a 'myth'.

And Larry, I didn't know they had discos in 1824!

You need to read Roger Burdette's book Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921. His research uncovered that there was no public outcry--infact, there were no letters or editorials ever recorded (one, but that was a few years later). The changes were made to the SLQ at the request of Hermon MacNeill.

 

Get the book... it's a great read!!

 

Scott

[lclugza]

The 1916 is not usually as well struck on the head as the 1917 Type One. Perhaps the poor strikes are why the Mint made certain small changes to the design for the 1917 Type One (which allow one to discern a dateless 1916).

[RWB]

Factual errors in the original posting are too extensive to address here. As others have suggested, read the book and the source documents, then draw your own conclusions. Readers of "Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921" will also note that MacNeil's post-war design for the Peace dollar competition shows Liberty removing the chain mail she wore during the war.

 

The design was never popular with mint officials and they were pleased to get rid of it in favor of the Washington design for 1932.

 

[MAULEMALL]

Factual errors in the original posting are too extensive to address here. As others have suggested, read the book and the source documents, then draw your own conclusions. Readers of "Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921" will also note that MacNeil's post-war design for the Peace dollar competition shows Liberty removing the chain mail she wore during the war.

 

The design was never popular with mint officials and they were pleased to get rid of it in favor of the Washington design for 1932.

Are there any patterns out there for it?

[RWB]

There is a pattern piece of the 1916 release design with part of the obverse olive branch scratched off (and documentation as to when/where/whom – other specimens are mentioned in the same documents, but we don’t know where the coins are). Jay Cline used to own the piece and it is featured in his SLQ book.

 

No patterns are known of either the mint's 1917 design or MacNeil's revised 1917 design. However, MacNeil mentions seeing several different patterns when he visited the mint on January 10

 

Also, no patterns are known of the design MacNeil thought was going to be produced - the one with dolphins on lower obverse next to the date and the original reverse with olive branches instead of stars.

 

See RAC 1916-21 or Judd Patterns for a complete list of 1916 pattern silver coins.

[WoodenJefferson]

http://www.birdcoin.com/1916%20pattern%20quarters%20a.pdf

 

Examination of 1916 Pattern Quarters in the Smithsonian National NUmismatic Collection

By: Rodger W. Burdette

PDF format

[RWB]

Yep. Those are two pieces from the first models. What MacNeil expected to see in January 1917 used the reverse on the NNC pattern, and a different obverse that corrected faults in the original obverse and added a dolphin on each side of the date. IGWT is on a ribbon connecting liberty's hands and not on the wall.