"Liberty" Medals for 2015?

I read at Lou Golino's "The Coin Analyst" column that the U.S. Mint plans to issue an American Liberty ultra high relief gold coin and silver medal in 2015.   

I'm not generally interested in medals, but I might make an exception in this case as the gold coin will be too expensive for my budget.  The silver medal would be more affordable and, although these will not actually be so, I see them as patterns for what should be on our coins.

In my view, it's a shame that we started using portraits of people on our coinage in 1909. That "cult of personality" is something that our founding fathers were opposed to. It's true that their opposition was because of the royalty depicted on other countries coins and our presidents are not that,  but even George Washington himself shot down the idea of using his portrait on our first coins.

Certainly Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson and Kennedy deserve recognition. In the view of the founders, that's what medals were for. They felt that our money should use the symbols of the ideals that define our nation: Liberty and Union.  The Eagle as a symbol of strength was added later, but for more than 100 years no person appeared on our coins.

Oh, well. Trying to remove Lincoln or Washington now would undoubtedly cause great outrage, especially among the nations conservatives. If they know anything about history, they should be as opposed as I am, but that's not going to happen.

I'm looking forward to this. We don't know what it will look like, but the idea of“to create modern images of American liberty and freedom that will leave a legacy of coin designs that reflect our era” is on the right track, I think.

Reference: The Coin AnalystJuly 24, 2014

Note: All my coins are in a safe deposit box. I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Book Review: The Collectors Handbook

The Collector's Handbook: Tax Planning, Strategy, and Estate Advice for Collectors and their Heirs 

This book is not focused on numismatic collections, although that subject is mentioned frequently. Nor is it strongly focused on the acquisition phase of your collection. Instead, it is advice for selling or giving way any sort of collection, be it art, stamps, paintings, coins or whatever.

This is mostly aimed at collections of higher value - say at least a few hundred thousand dollars - and much of the advice wouldn't really apply until much higher values. Still, there can be surprises and this book is interspersed with tales of collections not thought to be worth much (even by the appraisers) that ultimately sold for astonishing sums. The opposite is also true, of course.

It's that admixture of stories that turns what might otherwise be a dull (though useful) book into something actually interesting to read even if you don't need to worry about your heirs squabbling over your multi million dollar collection when you are gone.

Buy this book at Amazon and help support this site.

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Book Review of Numismatic Art in America: Aesthetics of the United States Coinage

I really don't understand why I hadn't heard of this. Published in 2007, this 289 page book with over 400 color illustrations is one of the best numismatic books I have ever read!

One of the few Amazon reviewers said "Not a coin book filled with history info".  In fact, it is chock full of history and trivia! 

Perhaps that reviewer skimmed and noticed only the commentary on the artistic antecedents and merits. There is a lot of that and I found it very interesting.   Or perhaps they expected mintage figures, die states and prices? That's not the point here - this is the history of the designs and the designers!

In addition to the coins from 1792 to 2007, this covers the medals created by the designers.

History, criticism, praise: it's all here. Cornelius Vermeule pulls no punches when a coin is ugly, but is lavish in his praise when not. Interestingly, he likes the Barber coins, which I do not. I admit that they are attractive when not circulated, but he insists that even worn Barbers retain their beauty.

On most other things, I agree. By the way, he includes other people's opinions and quotes liberally from newspaper and magazine reviews. As I have little knowledge of art history, this book also taught me quite a bit about that and how prior art has influenced the design of our coinage.

I ordered the print version after reading the digital because I assumed it would be a truly beautiful book and was not at all disappointed - the photos are excellent and very impressive.

This is not a book you will just sit down and read once. I expect to be going back to it again and again.

Buy this book at Amazon and help me support this site!

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

The Smithsonian's National Numismatic Collection On-line

The National Numismatic Collection at the Smithsonian is one of the largest collections in the world. I have seen parts of it, but have never had the opportunity to see as much as I would like. It includes the original collection of the U.S. Mint as well as the Josiah K. Lilly gold collection and more - over 1.6 million objects.  It is also the only place in the world where you could see two 1933 Double Eagles.

However, you may never get the chance to visit the Smithsonian and even if you do, you may not have the luxury of seeing everything you'd like to see.  You can see some of it on-line, but unfortunately only a few hundred pieces are shown.  It does include some of the more interesting objects like a 1933 Pismo Beach Clamshell Dollar, 1804 Dollars and interesting patterns like this 1792 pattern quarter, but the selection is disappointing.

National Numismatic Collection

It's not just the paucity of on-line items.  Surely there is more to say about 1933 Double Eagles than this?

They do say:

We are working to expand and improve online access to additional objects in the near future, so stay tuned.

I certainly hope so.

National Numismatic Collection On-Line

  

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Why is MD (Machine doubling) worthless?

A recent thread at Collectors Universe asked "Is Machine Doubling ever worth a premium?"

Most of the answers were a resounding "No!" but there was at least one person who asked 

whatever happened to "buy what you like"?

That's a fair question, I think, but let's look at why variety and error collectors are so disdainful of machine doubling.   One response was

No premium applies to this type of error as it is strictly caused by the machine itself and not through true human error as it were. 

But that's not entirely true.  As explained at the "Mechanical Doubling" article at the Wexler Double Die site:

The loose coining press parts result from the continuous pounding of the presses as they strike coin after coin, and from wear on the coining press parts. The coining press operators have reported that when they see this doubling on the coins, all they have to do is grab their tools and tighten up all of the loose parts in the coining press. As soon as those loose parts are tightened, the doubling no longer occurs.

I'd say loose parts are human error - or neglect, perhaps, but that's close enough for me.

More likely the disrespect comes from how common this type of error is. Modern presses are very fast and strike very hard: keeping things tight is probably very difficult.  That thought raised another question in my mind, though: is MD more common in modern coins than in older?

I did not get a good answer from the experts, but I would guess that it is.  More speed and force would seem to be a good reason for parts to shake lose more often.  Not that it never happens on older coins: this picture of an 1873 MD nickel is rather dramatic:

But that picture reminded me of a Two Cent piece that is in my collection. It too has a doubled date:

Doesn't that look like Machine Doubling to you?  It certainly does to me, but apparently it's a repunched date (see the "1871/1871 2C VP-002" link under References).  I asked how I could tell the difference if I were not aware of the VP-002 and was told

If you go look at the photo of the 1871 2 center at the [VP-002] link posted above, the notch at the lower right of the second 1 is very evident. If this coin were machine doubled, that notch would be filled in.

I don't see the "notch".  I know what he's talking about because Wexler says the same thing at the link I already mentioned.

genuine doubled dies are characterized by a splitting of the serifs on letters with serifs, or a “notching” of the corners of the letters which are doubled.  This splitting of the serifs or notching of the letter corners will not be found on coins with mechanical doubling.

I did some Googling on split serifs and found "Determining Die Doubling from Other Forms of Doubling" by J.T. Stanton, but that also failed to clear my confusion.

However, the the person who posted the picture of the 1873 nickel explained:

Think of machine doubling as a drawer sliding out from the device of the coin. The drawer must be full-width, because the slide is the same along the entire edge of the device. The notch shows us that this is not machine doubling, but (in the case of a 2-center) an RPD. 

THAT helps a lot!

I also found "Collecting my Thoughts: Understanding Machine Doubling Damage" by Alan Herbert, which mentioned something that had bothered me about the "twisting" die theory:

From the very first, attempts were made to claim that doubling was caused by the die twisting at the moment of impact. A little thought will discount that theory, because you are dealing with a die which is meshing with the forming design on the coin under 25 or more tons per square inch of pressure. The amount of force needed to rotate the die under those conditions would run into the thousands of tons. If such a force were available, it would shove the entire design out of position. MDD always affects only part of the design, so this cannot be the cause. To prove my point, hold your hands together, with your fingers interlaced. Now, try and move one hand sideways without moving the other.

But wouldn't the same argument apply to "bouncing dies"? Well, it would unless the die had tipped slightly so that only one part hit the coin again. But Alan Herbert confused me more:

The strike ends with the "final impact of the die pair." Die bounce or chatter involves only one die. While you can find MDD on both sides of a coin, the cause is different on each side as there are at least three forms of MDD, each with a different cause. 

He unfortunately neglected to explain the three causes.   Fortunately I was able to find a page that does describe them - it's in the references. However, the "slide doubling" described there seems just as unlikely as "twist doubling", for the same reasons.

I remain somewhat confused by this whole subject.

References:

Is Machine Doubling ever worth a premium? It sure does look really cool!!!

Wexler's Double Die Site "Mechanical Doubling"

1871/1871 2C VP-002

Determining Die Doubling from Other Forms of Doubling

Collecting my Thoughts: Understanding Machine Doubling Damage

Three basic forms of machine doubling

Clue for the second 2014 Silver Eagle Giveaway:  A joker and a numismatist
LAST CHANCE TO ENTER IS TODAY!

Note: All my coins are in a safe deposit box. I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Hard Times tokens: A complete revision and enlargement of Lyman H. Low's 1899 classic reference

There is something strange about this book. It sells on Amazon for anywhere from $20 to more than ten times that. I don't understand why - I paid $10 for my copy and would have been very unhappy to have paid more.  It is out of print and I suspect it will remain so because it's not such a great book at all.

It's not the written content: that's fine. There are examples shown for everything covered and even some larger pictures too. The pictures are black and white, as is expected for a book of this time. Although I'd obviously prefer color, the real problem is that they are low quality. You really can't make out much detail, and that's not helpful when trying to identify tokens.

In addition to the tokens catalogued in the main book, an appendix has the 1980 Garret auction of hard times tokens, which contained some rarely seen pieces. Perhaps the perceived value here is as an antique?

Well, if you think so, buy this book at Amazon and help me support this site!

Clue for the second 2014 Silver Eagle Giveaway:  C.S.A, Sommer Islands and Continental Congress Congress too! 

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

The Price of Proof Sets

When I started buying proof sets from the Mint in the mid 1950's, the price for 91 cents of face value coins was $2.10.   That was an increase from the pre-1950 price of $1.89 and it stayed at $2.10 until 1965, when no proofs were issued but a "Special Mint Set" could be ordered for $4.00.

When proofs resumed in 1968, the price was raised to $5.00.  The coins were now enclosed in a more solid holder, so I suppose the price increase had some justification, but that and the ugly clad coins turned me off and I stopped buying proof sets.

I did buy a 2013 America the Beautiful Quarters Silver set last year. That also is in a better holder, and cost  me $36.90.  The coins are silver, so there may be some argument for that price, but even the 14 coin 2014 proof set (no silver) is $27.95.

Certainly it's good that coin collectors can help defray some of our taxes by giving the Mint these astonishing profit margins, but is it really necessary to charge so much? As a young boy with a $2 weekly allowance, I could afford the $2.10 yearly expense, but I wonder if $27.95 is so easy for today's 7-10 year olds. Perhaps it is: Average Allowances in America, by Age says that $16 per week is about average.

It still seems too expensive to this old fogey.

References:

United States Proof Set Prices

United States Uncirculated Mint Set Prices

Clue for the second 2014 Silver Eagle Giveaway: The Lovett Cent

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html