1883 0 Branch Mint proof
Deniss222
Posts: 103 ✭
Hi I buy this nice 1883 o Morgen Dollar but thay make Proof too ... heritage comments ....
The lot brought $10.00, a significant amount for a coin that was struck just a year previous.
While we will probably never know for certain why proof dollars were struck in New Orleans in 1883, it is abundantly evident when examining this coin that they were. This particular coin has been recognized as a proof since 1894. The surfaces are simply magnificent. The fields are deeply reflective, and the devices show a significant amount of mint frost, the combination yielding strong cameo contrast. As one would expect from a proof, the surfaces lack the coin-to-coin contact normally seen on dollars struck for circulation, most of which spent decades in bags. As a result, the surfaces of this all-brilliant dollar are quite limited when it comes to pedigree identifiers. The only two are both on the reverse, a shallow tick in the field below the E in STATES and a russet-colored planchet lamination from the right star after DOLLAR to the wreath. Exceptional quality for any proof dollar, and almost unheard of in a branch mint proof.
Acquired as a proof from Édouard Frossard, November 1894; J.M. Clapp; John H. Clapp; Clapp Estate, 1942 to Louis Eliasberg, Sr.; Eliasberg II (Bowers and Merena, 4/1997), lot 2264, where it brought $121,000.
From The Greensboro Collection, Part III. (PCGS# 87346) ..................................................Can be this coin what Thay say?![]
..Thank you
Comments
The coin you posted is nothing like a branch mint proof.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
And that is not the Eliasberg coin.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
thats original
Unfortunately the Heritage Auction in 1996 was a bit too long ago to have a modern digital photo to go with it.
But you can try looking at the 1893-CC branch mint specimen/proof photos:
http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/Detail/7347
OK, I see the photo in your post immediately above is from the 2013-4 Heritage auction:
https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-morgan-dollars/1883-o-1-branch-mint-pr67-cameo-pcgs-cac-vam-11/a/1184-4397.s
As @Regulated implied, the fields in your coin do not have the smooth and reflective look to be a proof or proof-like.
You could attend a major coin show, where there will be proof morgans for sale, and you will see about the surfaces, although the photos also show it quite well.
Interesting !!!
that original pix from HA ...I will show you 20 detals this coins match ..
They aren't the same die pair, your coin is frosty with heavy clashmarks, it's poorly struck, and has bag marks. Other than that, it's vaguely similar.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
You have been told that the coin is not a proof by some of the top people on this forum and yet you still want to believe it is a proof. It isn't a proof. It isn't even close to a proof.
Sorry to have to tell you this but that is not a proof.
Not even close to a proof. In fact it has the typical weak struck reverse for an o mint coin. Typical business strike IMO.
Not even close to proof
I’ll do it for you. Here are the 20 things this coin has in common with the heritage proof.
I see how you could be confused since your coin has these 20 things in common with the actual branch mint proof, but please take the advice of these talented numismatists and be assured that this IS NOT A PROOF
Have a nice day and keep looking.
It's a nice coin, but not even Proof-Like characteristic details exist on this piece.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
Better than 'Is this An Error?" threads.
....but not by much
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
Send to PCGS, spend a few bucks and wait and see. Then tell us what it is when you get it back, please.
bob
Short answer: No.
Additional Info: The 12 83-O Branch Mint Proofs were all made from the VAM 19 die pair. A quick look at the mint mark position on your coin shows that your coin is not VAM 19.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Definitely not a proof.....Cheers, RickO
Not even close.
100% yours is not a proof
BHNC #203
Steve
Come on Roger.....................we're waiting for you.
Pete
OK, Pete.
To state the obvious: "No proofs were made at any US Mint except Philadelphia. Even the few legitimate proof coins with mintmarks were made there."
Did branch mints even have medal presses?
Collector, occasional seller
It's not even a nice 1883-O MS.
I think you guys piled on enough. He hasn't commented back in like 20 posts, lol.
It is the above mentioned toning that makes some of the diagnostics difficult to verify on this coin. However, others are unmistakable and this coin is consistent with the Anita Maxwell 1883-O branch mint proof we sold in our 1995 ANA Sale. In an article published in the October 9, 1995 issue of Coin World was based on the Maxwell coins, the following diagnostics are easily discernable.
Obverse: There is a short die crack at the lower crease of the neck.
Reverse: 1. A faint die crack angles up and to the right from the top left of the D in DOLLAR.
2. On the second cluster of leaves on the left side, the bottom two leaves are noticeably thinner from excessive die polishing, the upper leaf on the third cluster is disconnected, as is the rightmost leaf on the fourth cluster.
3. A "notch" of die polish is on the upper right wing feather, close to the wing tip.
4. Complete die polishing between the eagle's head and right (facing) wing.
The 1883-O is one of only four issues that Wayne Miller classifies as Type One branch mint proofs, i.e., an authorized and definite issue. This is a rare opportunity to acquire for the Dollar collector.
Ex: Harmer Rooke (11/69), lot 1136; 1993 ANA Sale (Heritage, 8/93), lot 7853. (NGC ID# 27ZD, PCGS# 7346)
It’s interesting because Wayne Miller in his books says the 83-o bmp has a scratch above the eagles head. Almost like a cap around the back of the head.. the Elisiaberg has scratches above the eagles head that are long and strange indeed.. the jack lee bmp, well I can’t even see a scratch above the eagles head so as far as VAMS go for the 83-o, I just don’t know if there is one that flows through every coin minted.
PROOF
If you don't believe the people who have taken the time to reply to your post then it is time for you to spend some money and send the coin into PCGS for attribution and slabbing.
Branch Mint Proof 1883-O Dollar
...Nice Coin!...try this place https://www.ngccoin.com/boards/forum/6-us-world-and-ancient-coins/
THANK YOU SO MUCH
HEER IS THIS NOTCH
I WILL SPEND MONEY ..AND I DID MY HOME WORK ..WILL SEE TRY TO FIND MUCH I CAN ..THANKS TO ALL
THAY SAY VAM 11
Hey OP, you oughtta stick to your greeter at Wal-Mart day job, sorry but comedian on the coin forum just ain't cutting it.
No.
I just noticed you posted this on another forum. As many have mentioned above it is not even the same die pairing as the branch mint proof.
he convinced me it's a proof
smart boys its vam 11 http://ec2-13-58-222-16.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com/wiki/ 1883-O_VAM-11 1883-O $1 Branch Mint PR67 Cameo PCGS. CAC. VAM-11
you are professionals...wow
https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=320226
WHY A COIN WAS MADE
Regular Issue: A coin officially struck at the United States Mint and delivered for commercial purposes (regular strikes and the 1836 and 1839 proof Gobrecht dollars) or special strikings (proofs, specimen strikes, experimental strikes, and special mint set strikes) of those commercial issues made for sale or presentation to collectors or dignitaries. Included in this category are the proofs made in a continuing series even though business strikes of the particular year were not made. Examples are proof only issues such as 1895 silver dollar and 1841 $2 1/2.
Commemorative Issue: Special coin issues minted to commemorate a specific historical event or person and sold at a premium over face value. United States commemorative coins are legal tender and have sometimes been seen in circulation.
Branch Mint Proof Strike: Prior to 1968, proofs were usually only struck at the Philadelphia Mint. Beginning in 1968, proofs were struck at the San Francisco Mint instead of at Philadelphia. Pre-1968 proofs struck at Branch Mints are called "Branch Mint Proofs". Branch Mint Proofs were generally struck to commemorate the openings (or re-opening) of a Mint, or special events, or as presentation pieces. Examples of Branch Mint Proofs include the 1879-O, 1883-O, and 1893-CC Morgan Dollars and the 1838-O half dollar.
Pattern: A test striking of a proposed coin design (whether adopted or not). Patterns often come in other than the proposed metals. Examples are the aluminum and copper strikings of trade dollar patterns.
Die Trial: Test pieces for regular issue, commemorative, early American, and U.S. Territorial coins struck in a different metal than the intended coin. Most of these are simply off-metal strikings made for collectors. Some true die trials, like the copper 1795 $5 do exist. Examples of die trials include the 1864 through 1876 gold coin issues struck in copper and/or aluminum.
Restrike: An officially minted coin struck at a date significantly later than indicated on the coin. Examples are 1873 $3 gold pieces and 1804 $10.
Clandestine Strike: A coin struck at the Mint but without authorization. Clandestine strikes were the work of Mint employees who conspired to "create" numismatic rarities that could be sold to coin collectors. Examples: 1913 Liberty nickel and 1885 Trade dollars. Patterns can also be clandestine strikes. Examples include the 1859 and 1860 so-called "transitional" half dimes.
Private Issue: A coin struck, either outside the Mint or before the U.S. Mint began striking coins in 1792, to satisfy local coinage demand or attempt to gain coinage contracts. Territorial gold issues are private issues. Early American coins are also private issues.
Private "Restrike": An unofficially minted coin struck outside the Mint to satisfy collector demand for certain regular issue dates. These are literally counterfeit coins. Example: 1804 so-called "restrike" Large Cent.....have nice day
I'll put this as simply as I can...............
You're dreaming!!
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
Maybe the text you posted above is causing confusion:
Examples of Branch Mint Proofs include the 1879-O, 1883-O, and 1893-CC Morgan Dollars and the 1838-O half dollar.
Yes the New Orleans mint produced proofs in 1883 however think about this for a minute. Per the Redbook there were 1.876,000 business strike Morgans produced that year and 4-8 proofs of which some are known. Despite what folks have advised you about it not being a proof example (and I concur, it is not) if you are convinced it is I would recommend that you take, do not send, the coin directly to PCGS or NCG and have it graded. Alternatively you could take it directly to a major auction house like Heritage and consign it....they will handle getting it graded etc. for you. An 1883-O Morgan proof is too valuable to entrust to a shipping service IMO. A 500.00 airline ticket and a day off from work is worth it to make sure a truly valuable coin arrives safely!
Good luck and please post the results!
K
@Deniss222
Welcome to CU. I keep coming back to read this discussion and applaud the research that you have done on this coin you bought. I am also in awe of your credentials. Being a member of those grading services and CAC has definitely made you someone to listen to when it comes to Proof coins!
One thing that does not make sense in the diagnostics you provided is the "crack" on the obverse: Obverse: There is a short die crack at the lower crease of the neck. You see, someone is terribly mistaken. Due to your credentials, it cannot be you so I'll blame the person at the auction house for this ignorant ERROR. The "line" at the neck resulted from a die clash. It is not a die break!
I cannot wait for you to send your coin to one of the grading services so you can prove you were correct. Please post an image of the slab after it comes back as a BMP.
PS Do you plan to tell the seller about his mistake?
This is one of the twistiest trollings yet. He keeps quoting sources about a coin that is NOT the one he has, posting pictures of coins that are NOT the one he has, and that is somehow supposed to validate the one he has - even though the die diagnostics don't line up.
Um, I'm thinking you have a VAM-57 and anyway the Eliasberg BMP is a VAM-19 not 11. It was not correctly attributed for that auction appearance. I think there's even a thread on the old VAMworld discussion board about this. Look at the mint mark location, clearly not 11 position. But, do prove us all wrong with a trip to your favorite tpg...