I don't agree or disagree with H&K on the Ft. Sumter die sinker but I do agree with Dave Baldwin. & his website on the Lovetts. He includes HK-11 as a GHL product and since he is my go to guy on the Lovetts, I agree as the die work does seem consistent with his other work.
I have seen a McClellan//Ft, Sumter political in the inventory of one of my friends in the APIC some time back - I do not recall what metal it was struck in but it was not silver. Was there one in the Frent auctions?
According to this HK-11 has been muled with a 1864 McClellan campaign medal made by Lovett. Anyone have photos of this?
The Bombardment of Fort Sumter Dollar was likely struck soon after the event, as the Union capitalized on the heroics of these men to encourage enlistment. Unfortunately, the origin of the piece has been elusive to researchers. Dewitt lists this piece as being muled with a McClellan campaign medal, the dies for which were made by George H. Lovett of New York in 1864.
@Realone said:
I am confused about something, it is my understanding that this Bowers medal was produced in 1861.
And Per the HK book it is also true that the scd HK-11’s were also produced in 1861 and if so for what purpose since the scd’s and the Bowers medal are pretty darn similar? I read what the HK book gives as a reason for the HK-11 production but..........................
Again the two seem so similar???
Die sinkers often make multiple versions of a subject matter, especially if one is commissioned and one is issued on their own. Here the Robert Anderson medal was commissioned by August Benjamin Sage while HK-11 may have been issued by George Hampden Lovett himself.
In this case, I'm sure there was demand for a Sumter medal beyond the one commissioned by Sage.
Another reason is when the commissioner wants a different design. For example, if Lovett showed the Sumter So-Called Dollar design to Sage and he wanted a different design, then Lovett would have an extra design to be used for something else.
The DeWitt/Sullivan political catalog groups all five muled reverses of the George McClellan Presidential campaign medal under GMcC 1864-8 which is a McClellan Military bust with the HK-11 Type II reverse. The first three muled reverses (a-b-c) are actually Civil War identification (dog) tag reverses; reverse mule d is the Bombardment Of Fort Sumpter reverse as on HK-11; muled reverse e is "George Washington, First President of The U. States" in a laurel wreath. Also listed is Variety F which is the Type II die muled with reverse d above (Fort Sumpter die) or in other words HK-11a,d, and e.
Heritage auction records show examples of the GMcC 1864-8, -8b, -8c and -8e but none with the Fort Sumpter reverse. DeWitt confirms that the HK-11 dies are products of George Lovett.
@DCW said:
This medal sold for an astounding $19,800 all in!
Whew I didn't see that coming as I had it on my watch list and figured it would go for around $3K+. In passing I was bothered by it having been so weakly struck on the lower reverse to the point that sections of the wreath are missing. Made me wonder if it was struck at a later point in time by someone other that George Hampton Lovett with exhausted dies or a press which could not fully obtain the high relief wreath design? Yet now looking at the Tru-View what looked like a concave weak strike issue on the S/B image seems fully raised and rounded but the wreath leaf details on the reverse die might have been defaced prior to striking this example.
I also recall reading the cataloger at Stacks calling the Bushnell/Zabriskie example a silver electrotype instead of struck silver. Which was asinine as you can see pull away in the toning as there was die grease present from having been struck.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
@DCW said:
This medal sold for an astounding $19,800 all in!
Yet now looking at the Tru-View what looked like a concave weak strike issue on the S/B image seems fully raised and rounded but the wreath leaf details on the reverse die might have been defaced prior to striking this example.
How and why would that be done? Are there other examples of that being done? Normally cancellation would be done to the fields, possibly through the design, but not solely to the design elements. To me, this appears to be a weak strike, and nothing more, most apparent in the cross section of the medal where the reliefs are highest.
@Broadstruck said:
Personally I've always like the Henry Cook design best out of all the Fort Sumter commemorating medals.
1861-62 Henry Cook - Coin Dealer “Civil War” Store Card, Boston, Miller MA-BO19 / Fuld F-115Aa-1a, 43mm Copper Planchet, Dies by George H. Lovett.
I also like the Cook card - I have a raw white metal example put back somewhere. However I strongly disagree with the decision to add these pieces to the Civil War Store Card catalog (along with several similar oversized medallic additions.
@Broadstruck said:
Personally I've always like the Henry Cook design best out of all the Fort Sumter commemorating medals.
1861-62 Henry Cook - Coin Dealer “Civil War” Store Card, Boston, Miller MA-BO19 / Fuld F-115Aa-1a, 43mm Copper Planchet, Dies by George H. Lovett.
I also like the Cook card - I have a raw white metal example put back somewhere. However I strongly disagree with the decision to add these pieces to the Civil War Store Card catalog (along with several similar oversized medallic additions.
Do you disagree with the date of issue or do you think they should be excluded solely because of their size?
(As most Civil War tokens are 19mm.)
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
@DCW said:
This medal sold for an astounding $19,800 all in!
Yet now looking at the Tru-View what looked like a concave weak strike issue on the S/B image seems fully raised and rounded but the wreath leaf details on the reverse die might have been defaced prior to striking this example.
How and why would that be done? Are there other examples of that being done? Normally cancellation would be done to the fields, possibly through the design, but not solely to the design elements. To me, this appears to be a weak strike, and nothing more, most apparent in the cross section of the medal where the reliefs are highest.
The high relief wreath design is basically like a cake baked in a bundt pan and if the die had leaf details they should be present to some degree. What takes this beyond possible being a typical late die stage or a misaligned weak strike is how sharp the wreath details are elsewhere and then especially again once beyond the 2 voids close to the lower shield. Grease filled dies to this degree also doesn't seem like a valid reason for the striking flaws. White metal considered a tin junk metal at the time had no strike pressure flow issues as it was soft metal. So soft we are no seeing how pronged holder pressure only damages it. Which lead me to believe it was struck by a defective or defaced disposed reverse die at some later point in time as one would assume any die sinker would strike all metal types in sequence. Here's another white metal example image below which as can be seen was still struck up sharply.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
@Broadstruck said:
Personally I've always like the Henry Cook design best out of all the Fort Sumter commemorating medals.
1861-62 Henry Cook - Coin Dealer “Civil War” Store Card, Boston, Miller MA-BO19 / Fuld F-115Aa-1a, 43mm Copper Planchet, Dies by George H. Lovett.
I also like the Cook card - I have a raw white metal example put back somewhere. However I strongly disagree with the decision to add these pieces to the Civil War Store Card catalog (along with several similar oversized medallic additions.
Do you disagree with the date of issue or do you think they should be excluded solely because of their size?
(As most Civil War tokens are 19mm.)
The addition to the Civil War store cards occurred after I purchased my examples. At 43mm being 5mm larger than a silver medal it's also way larger than any 1860's typical 28mm diameter Merchant Token. It is a large advertising medal issued by Henry Cook and not so much a store card or token.
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
@Broadstruck said:
The high relief wreath design is basically like a cake baked in a bundt pan and if the die had leaf details they should be present to some degree. What takes this beyond possible being a typical late die stage or a misaligned weak strike is how sharp the wreath details are elsewhere and then especially again once beyond the 2 voids close to the lower shield. Grease filled dies to this degree also doesn't seem like a valid reason for the striking flaws. White metal considered a tin junk metal at the time had no strike pressure flow issues as it was soft metal. So soft we are no seeing how pronged holder pressure only damages it. Which lead me to believe it was struck by a defective or defaced disposed reverse die at some later point in time as one would assume any die sinker would strike all metal types in sequence.
You’re overthinking it. There is design weakness on the obverse in the locations directly opposing the weak areas on the reverse. It could be a manifestation of not enough striking pressure, or a localized planchet defect, but a canceled or defective die is not likely, in my opinion.
Congratulations to the new owner of the Ft. Sumter medal !
I had the pleasure of visiting the fort in the Summer of 2016... here are a few photos....
... and one of the bronze pieces is in the museum on the island as shown....
... and as folks in Charleston are aware, Sullivan Island is across from Ft Sumter and known to SCD collectors for the piece in the Lovett Battle series ... my HK-94
A So-Called Dollar and Slug Collector... Previously "Pioneer" on this site...
Comments
They inconsistently apply that designation. I wouldn’t read too much into it.
According to this HK-11 has been muled with a 1864 McClellan campaign medal made by Lovett. Anyone have photos of this?
https://coins.www.collectors-society.com/wcm/CoinView.aspx?sc=299088
Die sinkers often make multiple versions of a subject matter, especially if one is commissioned and one is issued on their own. Here the Robert Anderson medal was commissioned by August Benjamin Sage while HK-11 may have been issued by George Hampden Lovett himself.
In this case, I'm sure there was demand for a Sumter medal beyond the one commissioned by Sage.
Another reason is when the commissioner wants a different design. For example, if Lovett showed the Sumter So-Called Dollar design to Sage and he wanted a different design, then Lovett would have an extra design to be used for something else.
The DeWitt/Sullivan political catalog groups all five muled reverses of the George McClellan Presidential campaign medal under GMcC 1864-8 which is a McClellan Military bust with the HK-11 Type II reverse. The first three muled reverses (a-b-c) are actually Civil War identification (dog) tag reverses; reverse mule d is the Bombardment Of Fort Sumpter reverse as on HK-11; muled reverse e is "George Washington, First President of The U. States" in a laurel wreath. Also listed is Variety F which is the Type II die muled with reverse d above (Fort Sumpter die) or in other words HK-11a,d, and e.
Heritage auction records show examples of the GMcC 1864-8, -8b, -8c and -8e but none with the Fort Sumpter reverse. DeWitt confirms that the HK-11 dies are products of George Lovett.
Whew I didn't see that coming as I had it on my watch list and figured it would go for around $3K+. In passing I was bothered by it having been so weakly struck on the lower reverse to the point that sections of the wreath are missing. Made me wonder if it was struck at a later point in time by someone other that George Hampton Lovett with exhausted dies or a press which could not fully obtain the high relief wreath design? Yet now looking at the Tru-View what looked like a concave weak strike issue on the S/B image seems fully raised and rounded but the wreath leaf details on the reverse die might have been defaced prior to striking this example.
I also recall reading the cataloger at Stacks calling the Bushnell/Zabriskie example a silver electrotype instead of struck silver. Which was asinine as you can see pull away in the toning as there was die grease present from having been struck.
Personally I've always like the Henry Cook design best out of all the Fort Sumter commemorating medals.
1861-62 Henry Cook - Coin Dealer “Civil War” Store Card, Boston, Miller MA-BO19 / Fuld F-115Aa-1a, 43mm Copper Planchet, Dies by George H. Lovett.
How and why would that be done? Are there other examples of that being done? Normally cancellation would be done to the fields, possibly through the design, but not solely to the design elements. To me, this appears to be a weak strike, and nothing more, most apparent in the cross section of the medal where the reliefs are highest.
I also like the Cook card - I have a raw white metal example put back somewhere. However I strongly disagree with the decision to add these pieces to the Civil War Store Card catalog (along with several similar oversized medallic additions.
Do you disagree with the date of issue or do you think they should be excluded solely because of their size?
(As most Civil War tokens are 19mm.)
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
The high relief wreath design is basically like a cake baked in a bundt pan and if the die had leaf details they should be present to some degree. What takes this beyond possible being a typical late die stage or a misaligned weak strike is how sharp the wreath details are elsewhere and then especially again once beyond the 2 voids close to the lower shield. Grease filled dies to this degree also doesn't seem like a valid reason for the striking flaws. White metal considered a tin junk metal at the time had no strike pressure flow issues as it was soft metal. So soft we are no seeing how pronged holder pressure only damages it. Which lead me to believe it was struck by a defective or defaced disposed reverse die at some later point in time as one would assume any die sinker would strike all metal types in sequence. Here's another white metal example image below which as can be seen was still struck up sharply.
The addition to the Civil War store cards occurred after I purchased my examples. At 43mm being 5mm larger than a silver medal it's also way larger than any 1860's typical 28mm diameter Merchant Token. It is a large advertising medal issued by Henry Cook and not so much a store card or token.
You’re overthinking it. There is design weakness on the obverse in the locations directly opposing the weak areas on the reverse. It could be a manifestation of not enough striking pressure, or a localized planchet defect, but a canceled or defective die is not likely, in my opinion.
Anyway....this is a tangent.
Congratulations to the new owner of the Ft. Sumter medal !
I had the pleasure of visiting the fort in the Summer of 2016... here are a few photos....
... and one of the bronze pieces is in the museum on the island as shown....
... and as folks in Charleston are aware, Sullivan Island is across from Ft Sumter and known to SCD collectors for the piece in the Lovett Battle series ... my HK-94
A So-Called Dollar and Slug Collector... Previously "Pioneer" on this site...