$5 1843 Dahlonega - Only known SPECIMEN or PROOF from the Dahlonega Mint

TopographicOceans · February 26, 2015 3:21PM

Pretty Cool SP65 for $1,000,000

lordmarcovan · February 26, 2015 3:47PM

O. M. G.

Boosibri · February 26, 2015 3:52PM

Previous thread on the topic
Thread

lasvegasteddy · February 26, 2015 3:53PM

was a thread awhile back....someone stated if you can find it on ebay...it's not rare
i posted this offering

mike sure has quite the inventory
gotta love his IHC struck on a $2.5 gold planchet

Timbuk3 · February 26, 2015 4:48PM

Sweet !!! :-)

rhedden · February 26, 2015 5:07PM

But bluesheet is only $500. PASS.

Kidding.

What a great and unique coin. One can only imagine what was going on at the mint on that day in Dahlonega back in 1843. The Civil War was only a distant whisper, and southern gold had only been minted for a few years. This incredible specimen of the half eagle was somehow spared the ravages of time, sitting in pristine, mirrored condition right through the War and for another 150 years after that. Why was a special coin prepared with mirrored surfaces? Did it sit in a private collection in a Georgia plantation for many decades? How did it survive the War? Why is it in such marvelous condition, unlike most of its brethren? Who has owned it all these years?

GeorgeKellogg · February 26, 2015 5:10PM

There isn't universal agreement on the manufacturing status of this coin. While having close to a full proof surface, it was graded MS64 by our host, as part of the Harry Bass Collection, where it realized $48,300 -- in October 1999. Cataloguer Dave Bowers described it as "prooflike" in the Bass catalog.

While this piece may well have been presented to someone -- or at least put away -- as a very attractive example, I don't think any special process was followed in its manufacture. The piece has contact marks -- which would not be present if the coin had been specially struck. These include what appears to be two reeding marks at 8:00, between the jaw-line and stars 1 and 2 (from coin-to-coin contact). In my opinion, the coin fell into the hopper -- with the rest of the coins -- and was later selected as a very choice example.

This isn't intended to be a negative appraisal of the coin -- only my opinion on how it was made.

BigMoose · February 26, 2015 7:46PM

Agree with GeorgeKellogg. This does not look like a proof to me. Based on the past auction history of this coin it looks like this dealer is trying to win the Lottery.

DaveWcoins · February 26, 2015 10:21PM

CaptHenway · February 26, 2015 10:42PM

Had this piece come through ANACS while I was there we would probably have certified it as a Specimen. Don't think we would have called it a Proof. Magnificent coin regardless.

Ablinky · February 26, 2015 11:34PM

Really cool piece, out of budget though. Mr. Byers does have a rather interesting assortment of things listed on eBay none the less.

ricko · February 27, 2015 12:08AM

Beautiful coin, no doubt about that.... and certainly conditionally rare... Cheers, RickO

crypto79 · February 27, 2015 12:13AM

One of my pet peeves in the hobby is when people inject imagination and purport it as fact. What it is wrong with calling it an unprecedented PL survivor, everything else is a guess at best and wishful up selling at worst. Even NGC calling it a specimen is unsubstantiated and grants any and all theories with unearned legitimacy. If I wanted people to inject a story where there was no facts in an attempt to explain the hard to explain, I would go to church.

johnny9434 · February 27, 2015 4:13AM

way cool, i like

SaorAlba · February 27, 2015 5:39AM

Some may gripe about whether it is proof or not, all I know is I want it.

agentjim007 · February 27, 2015 5:46AM

Don't forget the $100 ebay bucks.

mrearlygold · February 27, 2015 6:26AM

Lakesammman · February 27, 2015 9:56AM

Wow - is that a nice piece! Sure glad I don't collect D-mint gold or I would have to buy it!

crazyhounddog · February 27, 2015 10:06AM

<< O. M. G.

>>

I'll cosign that WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ChangeInHistory · February 27, 2015 11:00AM

That's a Great coin! Its so odd to see after looking at typical Dahlonega pieces.

yosclimber · February 27, 2015 11:33AM

<< Who has owned it all these years? >>

Garrett Collection
Harry Bass
Mike Byers

and a few others along the way

Tookybandit · February 27, 2015 9:17PM

Frosty and delicious!

MrEureka · February 27, 2015 11:53PM

One of my pet peeves in the hobby is when people inject imagination and purport it as fact. What it is wrong with calling it an unprecedented PL survivor, everything else is a guess at best and wishful up selling at worst. Even NGC calling it a specimen is unsubstantiated and grants any and all theories with unearned legitimacy. If I wanted people to inject a story where there was no facts in an attempt to explain the hard to explain, I would go to church.

While I don't disagree, it's worth stating the the designation "SP" is, when applied to early US coins, always a subjective call. TPG's use "SP" to indicate a coin that appears to have been specially made, but that does not meet the clearer standards for "Proof". And because there is almost never documentation on such things, all anyone can do is take his best guess. Anyone considering the purchase of a "SP" coin needs to understand that.

For a high-profile example, consider the Cardinal-Legend 1794 Dollar, which was also given an "SP" designation. We'll never know for sure what the coiner was thinking, and if he intended to make a special coin. But we do know that the coin looks special, is special, and is so unlike any other 1794 Silver Dollar that it would just be wrong not to give it some special designation. The Garrett 1843-D $5 is, in that way, exactly the same situation.

crypto79 · February 28, 2015 12:41AM

<< One of my pet peeves in the hobby is when people inject imagination and purport it as fact. What it is wrong with calling it an unprecedented PL survivor, everything else is a guess at best and wishful up selling at worst. Even NGC calling it a specimen is unsubstantiated and grants any and all theories with unearned legitimacy. If I wanted people to inject a story where there was no facts in an attempt to explain the hard to explain, I would go to church.

While I don't disagree, it's worth stating the the designation "SP" is, when applied to early US coins, always a subjective call. TPG's use "SP" to indicate a coin that appears to have been specially made, but that does not meet the clearer standards for "Proof". And because there is almost never documentation on such things, all anyone can do is take his best guess. Anyone considering the purchase of a "SP" coin needs to understand that.

For a high-profile example, consider the Cardinal-Legend 1794 Dollar, which was also given an "SP" designation. We'll never know for sure what the coiner was thinking, and if he intended to make a special coin. But we do know that the coin looks special, is special, and is so unlike any other 1794 Silver Dollar that it would just be wrong not to give it some special designation. The Garrett 1843-D $5 is, in that way, exactly the same situation. >>

I agree with you that the historical precedence does follow the practice but lots of things get antiquated as people/collectors get more sophisticated. The hobbies used to embrace such concepts is one sided proofs and lacquer none of which are even remotely accepted these days. One of the know foibles of previous generations of numismatists was to hand out the Proof designation to mearly PL coins and I see this as an example of that.

As to the cardinal/legend dollar it not only looks special but has a die state that shows it to be the earliest known striking in silver if not the first. While circumstantial for sure, it's at least another piece of information on top of of its clearly special look to justify its SP status. It also passes the logic test of being that they would make the first (few) dollars struck special and would be set aside. Where as there is nothing (known) about the 44d. If there was record of a retirement or commencement that would add credence.

MrEureka · February 28, 2015 7:19AM

As to the cardinal/legend dollar it not only looks special but has a die state that shows it to be the earliest known striking in silver if not the first. While circumstantial for sure, it's at least another piece of information on top of of its clearly special look to justify its SP status

You're only going to get a PL coin from freshly polished dies. That means either an early strike, or a coin struck shortly after it has been repolished. In most cases, repolishing took place in the regular course of business, to remove clash marks or other flaws from the dies. In other cases, the dies, flawed or not, might be repolished because a special coin was desired for presentation purposes. So the die state doesn't tell us anything about what the coiner intended to do with the coin, i.e., if he intended it to be a "special strike" or "specimen".

crypto79 · February 28, 2015 12:17PM

<< As to the cardinal/legend dollar it not only looks special but has a die state that shows it to be the earliest known striking in silver if not the first. While circumstantial for sure, it's at least another piece of information on top of of its clearly special look to justify its SP status

You're only going to get a PL coin from freshly polished dies. That means either an early strike, or a coin struck shortly after it has been repolished. In most cases, repolishing took place in the regular course of business, to remove clash marks or other flaws from the dies. In other cases, the dies, flawed or not, might be repolished because a special coin was desired for presentation purposes. So the die state doesn't tell us anything about what the coiner intended to do with the coin, i.e., if he intended it to be a "special strike" or "specimen". >>

Good point. One could counter that not all new dies impart a PL finish but many early coins are know PL so it was clearly part of their finishing process. I hadn't really considered that angle before and it is true, an early strike of a 94 dollar is still special but not nessicary anything specfic.

habaraca · February 28, 2015 12:20PM

To Bad,,,, won't fit Roberts DOG collection

kaz · February 28, 2015 2:44PM

It's the mysteries like this that make the hobby so fascinating.

segoja · February 28, 2015 3:00PM

Interesting thread

Christos · February 28, 2015 4:50PM

<< Interesting thread >>

+1

ebaybuyer · March 1, 2015 12:57AM

id like someone to offer an opinion of why a proof coin would have no contact marks

MrEureka · March 1, 2015 2:36AM

id like someone to offer an opinion of why a proof coin would have no contact marks

Proof coins tend not to have contact marks from other coins because they typically went straight from the Mint to a collector. By comparison, business strikes tend to get tossed into bags with other coins, shipped to a bank, and jangled in pockets with other coins.

Of course, that's just the norm, and a fair number of proof coins will get mishandled over the years. Likewise, every so often a business strike will fall from the dies into a caring, gloved hand, and then go straight to the hands of a responsible collector.

GeorgeKellogg · March 1, 2015 9:41AM

<< id like someone to offer an opinion of why a proof coin would have no contact marks >>

Here's the general methodology: Proof coins were struck from specially prepared, ultra-polished dies, special planchets, and struck one at a time, under increased pressure -- in order to ensure a razor-sharp strike. The Proofs didn't fall into a hopper with other coins -- like the business strikes did, but were carefully processed by hand, in order to protect the Proof's immaculate surfaces. Then they were carefully packaged and mailed directly to collectors -- who had placed orders.

golden · March 1, 2015 11:58AM

<< Agree with GeorgeKellogg. This does not look like a proof to me. Based on the past auction history of this coin it looks like this dealer is trying to win the Lottery. >>

$5 1843 Dahlonega - Only known SPECIMEN or PROOF from the Dahlonega Mint

Comments

Leave a Comment