by Len Ratzman – California Numismatist – Vol. 6 No.2 (Summer 2009)

When a mint error is first discovered, a predictably lengthy process is begun involving multiple recognized experts in the field to examine and scrutinize the coin’s authenticity under high magnification to separate a bona fide error from a manufactured counterfeit.

Ideally, after sufficient time and examinations have been made, the coin is either accepted or rejected by the numismatic community. But, in reality, there is a third possibility – unending disagreement among the experts. This outcome, of course, leaves many of us who are looking for definitive answers in relative limbo.

If decades go by and recognized, numismatic authorities still are conflicted as to the authenticity of the coin, what then? If, for instance, someone tried to buy or sell a specimen with this error to a dealer, another collector or at auction, how could they vouch for the legitimacy of the error and, in turn, ask a realistic price? This article is devoted to one such enigma that the author discovered by accident.

In a relatively recent attempt to determine if the Smithsonian Institute’s buffalo nickel collection was missing any specimens after all these years, an email inquiry was sent in early January to Mr. Richard Doty, the senior curator of numismatics for the Behring Center.

Sent from the American Museum of Natural History Behring Center where the coins are stored, Mr. Doty’s e-mail responded, “Your inquiry was passed to me. We do have a set of buffalo nickels, only lacking the 1934 two-legged and 1916 doubled die and 1918/7 varieties.”

Nineteen thirty-four, two-legged? When anyone specializes in one coin and finds (after decades devoted to researching that coin) that a variety exists unknown to that collector, it’s a very humbling experience.

A search of the Red Book, several Internet population reports, and reference books containing buffalo mint errors revealed many mint errors were listed but no mention of any two-legged varieties. (more…)

By Greg Johnson from Volume 5, Issue 5 (May 2009) of The E-Gobrecht

I purchased an 1849 quarter in November of 2006 that I was, at the time, unable to attribute using Briggs’ “Comprehensive Encyclopedia of United States Seated Quarters” (Lima, OH 1991 ISBN 1-880731-05-3). A short article by John McCloskey in The Gobrecht Journal (Issue 98, pages 35-36) published the following March described in detail a coin from the same die pairing as the coin in my possession.

During the past two plus years I have examined every 1849 quarter that I could find, whether in auctions, at bourse tables, or on eBay (when photo quality permitted) in an effort to complete the puzzle. I now own four distinct business strike die marriages of the 1849 quarter and though there is not yet a definitive conclusion, I do have what I call a working hypothesis.

I believe that the “unknown” obverse is actually obverse 3 in the Briggs Encyclopedia and that there are a couple of typos in the description that have caused some confusion.

First, the date location of “just right of 5″ is in error and should read “6/7″. Note that date position is determined based on an imaginary line drawn along the right side of the upright portion of the “1″ in the date. The date position number then references where this line intersects the shield above with respect to the shield lines numbered from left to right.

Second, instead of “slopes up left to right” it should read “slopes down left to right.” I’ve noted that the distance measurements from digit to rock provided in the book read 0.5 – 0.5 – 0.5 – 0.6 indicating a downward slope from left to right, though the text says “up”. Figure 1 shows three dates of 1849 seated quarters, the top is obverse 2, the middle is obverse 3 (or the unlisted obverse if the hypothesis is proven wrong), and the bottom is the proof obverse (obverse 4, from the Heritage online archive, Lot 2390, Auction 1104, April 16, 2008).

It should be mentioned here for completeness that obverse 1 has a date that is much further to the left than any of those shown. (more…)

Content Partner: Pinnacle-Rarities

We’ve entered the last year of the popular modern commemorative quarter program. For better or worse, all fifty states have created designs and the final mintages will hit the nation’s cash registers during the remainder of the year. While I find these final five designs attractive, they (like their modern predecessors) lack the historical depth and symbolisms many of their classic commemorative cousins encompassed. And, as I look over the 2008 proof set that just crossed my desk, my mind goes back to the original commemorative quarter.

The 1893 Isabella Quarter, was created for the Columbian Exposition. $10,000 of the funds intended for the Board of Lady Mangers at the Expo was delivered in the form of forty thousand of these commemorative quarters. The board had been formed at the urging of woman’s rights activist Susan B. Anthony, who felt both genders should be represented in the managerial makeup of this great national project the expo had become. The inclusion of a coin to commemorate female contributions to industry seems almost trifling by today’s standards. But the Woman’s Suffrage movement was full steam ahead at the time. In fact, women didn’t legally win the right to vote until Colorado adapted an amendment to allow them to do so, during this year, 1893. A cause Anthony had championed over the previous two and a half decades. What seems like just a novel idea now, was a veritable coup at the time. The quarter served not only to raise money for the cause, but as a sort of name recognition ad for the woman’s rights movement. And it fueled the growing fires of suffrage. The coins were to be sold at the fair for $1 each. A premium over face that was obscene to some. For this and a variety of other reasons, thousands went unsold during the fair. The balance was slowly sold off to dealers during the coming decade.

The dies were prepared by Charles Barber, presumably from sketches done by Kenyon Cox. Later research has brought this into question. But regardless of where the original ideas came from, the coin is wrought with symbolism – especially the reverse. The use of a monarch on the obverse is somewhat controversial, but considering what event the coin was supposed to commemorate, it was a natural choice. Queen Isabella was the backing Christopher Columbus needed to fund his adventure. The reverse is simply described in most numismatic literature as a kneeling woman holding a distaff, the spool used to hold unspun cotton. This image is now reported to represent “woman in industry.” This may be the case but, Barber’s image would have meant a lot more to the people in his time. (more…)

By Jim Fehr of North American Certified Trading

The most gifted designer in the history of U.S. coinage never lived to see his magnificent $20 gold coins enter circulation. Augustus Saint-Gaudens died on August 3rd, 1907, three months before his first pieces were struck.

Saint-Gaudens’ pupil Henry Hering and President Theodore Roosevelt were the two people most directly responsible for the completion of Saint- Gaudens work. Roosevelt himself chose the standing liberty obverse and flying eagle reverse for the new $20 gold piece from a group of designs submitted by Saint- Gaudens.

Roosevelt also (amid extreme controversy over whether or not the motto “In God We Trust” should be included) ordered Mint Engraver Charles E. Barber to begin producing them.

The high relief Saint is considered the most beautiful of all U.S. coins. There are two varieties – the flat rim and knife rim, with the flat rim being rarer. Both have the Roman numerals MCMVII in place of an Arabic numerical date (1907) and both have concave surfaces. Although surviving populations are high, only 11,250 high reliefs were minted. It is the only Saint actually designed by Saint- Gaudens – all others were designed and engraved by Barber based on his interpretation of Saint-Gaudens original high relief.

Since PCGS and NGC started certifying them in 1986 and recording populations, there have been two revelations about the St. Gaudens double eagle series from a market standpoint. First, how common the common dates are. No one guessed that there were more than 200,000 Saints floating around in MS65 or higher condition. Or 350,000 MS64′s. Or 425,000 MS63′s. Market prices for common date Saints have adjusted accordingly over the past 20 years.

But the better dates are much scarcer than realized.

There are 52 dates in the series. 93% of the coins certified are one of 11 common dates, leaving only 7% of the coins to make up the other 41 dates. 80% of the dates are rare, yet because Saints are big, beautiful gold coins, many buyers overlook the numismatic potential inherent in better date Saints.

What follows is a breakdown of the St. Gaudens series into six categories of rarity, with recommendations. Prices listed are approximations of actual acquisition cost. Populations are combined PCGS and NGC figures from the October 2007 census reports. (more…)