3 lovely 1796 gold counterstruck coins, 2 silver 1/2 dollars and Ron Landis that I want to share
coinsarefun
Posts: 21,682 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have been a fan of GMM and Ron Landis for a long time. I have purchased several of his newer pieces and posted them here
on this forum. Like many of you here, I have so many of his other pieces in silver, copper and gold and love each and every one of them.
.
For the last couple of years I've been going back and forth telling Ron I would love a few 1796 gold counterstuck pieces.
Fast forward trough my personal illness and he and I finally decided what they will look like AND......I even purchased a
1/2 Silver Dollar die (obv & rev) from him, he made 2 obverse and reverse impressions for me.
.
.
Here is a group photo of the silver 1/2 dollar and the 3 gold sisters.
.
.
.
.
This is a video of the 1/2 dollar being struck. As you can see the blanks were quite thick (32.9 grams)
They were hot struck. His initials RL are counter marked on the reverse.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZBv5AJ19kQ
.
.
This is the picture Ron sent me of the dies and 1/2 dollars
.
.
My image of the 1796 1/2 Silver Dollar
.
.
.
.
Now, to get to my 3 Beautiful 1796 gold Overstrikes.
The Double Eagle was overstruck on a 1869-S
.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqfTwfJlQ5M
.
.
.
.
The Eagle was struck on a 1904 double eagle
.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1RvSWgB_Aw
.
.
.
.
.
The Half Eagle was struck on a 1882 $10
.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paOt_ZBJ0bw
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
Comments
Very nice Stef....Some custom work in gold.... Next do one with your initials added....for provenance purposes. Cheers, RickO
Really neat stuff. I really like the half with all the cracks.
Collector
75 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 45 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
Those are gorgeous Stef!
Great write up and cool pieces, Stef! It is really something when you can communicate directly to the artist what you're looking for and then hold that finished product. They look great
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
Where is the incused “COPY” on the half dollars as legally required by the Hobby Protection Act of 1973 and revisions?
Thanks everyone for your kind remarks.
@CaptHenway the 2 struck pieces are counter marked with RL on the reverse. Both are overweight and hot struck with markings. I’m going to assume but can ask Ron,
I’m fairly certain the dies would shatter if struck normally.
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
All quite useful, but they do not fulfill the requirements of the law.
I really like that operation.
Sign me up😊
I'm incredibly jealous! Very very cool pieces. Thanks for sharing!
I used to collect and enjoy HPA complant, COPY- marked 1990s era Gallery Mint items...
until he started making the same designs again. apparently now not HPA compliant.
What's next? "Latest from RL" spam thread for new fantasy/counterfeits?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Wow @Baley . He is not making any of these shown here or anything else from GMM.
He did the above just for me and they will not be sold either.
The gold overstrikes are more fantasy coins not fakes / counterfeits. You can easily see the under type coins.
As for the silver 1/2 D’s they are well marked albeit not according to the HPA . But sufficient for even a beginner collector to know the difference.
Didn’t mean to spam and I’m sure he doesn’t need any help as he is doing his own original work, which I have posted here several times.
Btw, these are his old personal dies from GMM. He hasn’t made anything like this nowadays
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
very interesting, on the half what does 'hot struck' mean?
Wow that's so cool!
.
.
It means The blanks are heated before it goes into the press.
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
Awesome Thread !!!!!!!
I wish I had placed more "Special Orders" back when GMM were in business in the 90's & 2000s.
You are lucky to have commissioned such epic examples !!!!!
Very interesting and quite the special piece. Great idea. I'm gonna try something like that with a friend who has a hydraulic press. Gotta think about what to restrike. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon
This is also non-compliant:
I won this in a Sheridan Downey auction many years ago, and he told me that a number of other dealers implored him to stamp COPY on it. However, Sheridan knew me and trusted me to not pass it off as legitimate. I still have it, and the skill of the maker was very very fine! (I have shown the piece to knowledgeable dealers, and all believed it was a product of the US Mint....that is, until they looked really close,)
I the maker of this known? Any estimate of when and where it was made?
This piece once belonged to Leo Young, and when original coin came up in an auction, Leo did not go after the original coin, thinking that his piece was the better.
Here's the full story:
Leo Young’s 1796 Half Dollar
The following article appeared in the John Reich Journal. I wrote it because I was the only person
who had all of the pieces to this puzzle and realized what a great coin story it was. The piece in
question is quite a dangerous forgery and although I’ve on more than one occassion heard light made
of its ability to deceive, I would caution anyone in that regard. Most probably such people simply
like to reassure themselves by uttering such nonsense. Jesse Patrick
AN INTERESTING 1796 BUST HALF DOLLAR
Anyone seriously interested in United States coins that has not spent time with old auction
catalogues is really missing something. Besides being loaded with interesting information, and in
some cases being primary source documents, these catalogues are the most extensive database we have
for rare coins. Auction catalogues thoroughly cover the over 150 years that United States coins
have been actively collected and are essential in establishing the existence and whereabouts of
particular rare coins during that time. While it is extremely rare that any given coin does not
have an auction history, it is rather unusual to have any of that record preserved. In some cases
the information supplied in auction catalogues can be of considerable monetary value. Personally I
find it a great way to spend time with my hobby without having to have the coins themselves around.
No common burglar would ever steal an auction catalogue as it often takes years of collecting these
before a person learns which has the most monetary value. The lore and tradition of our hobby is no
where better preserved than by the well catalogued contents of significant collections placed at
auction. Quite often the cataloguers of these sales are the finest numismatic minds of their time
and the opinions offered of great importance, surviving the test of time. Frankly, I attach so much
importance to these sales catalogues and derive so much pleasure from them that given the choice, I
would sooner sell all of my coins than part with the catalogues. As a dealer, I've heard it said
that before you can figure out where to sell an item it helps to know where it came from. I know of no better education in that department than old auction sales catalogues. Once in a while you run across a really special catalogue that can take you on an adventure. Such was the case one evening over a decade ago as I perused a catalogue in which a previous owner had made comments about some of the lots in the margins.
One such comment read,
"Nice, but I think mine is nicer few defects & etc." This is the sort of statement one would
expect to find in an old auction room copy of a sale catalogue. It was written neatly in the margin
beside lot 1289 of the KreisbergSchulman March 1821, 1964 Sale of the BrandLichtenfels et al.
Collections held in New York City. The coin in question was a 1796 half dollar with 15 stars.
Although a noteworthy offering in any grade, this particular specimen was described in various
places in the write up as, "brilliant proof, obviously a presentation piece, a gem and the finest
specimen we have ever seen." The lot description mentioned that this coin was originally in the
famous Dr. C.A. Allenberger Collection auctioned by B. Max Mehl on March 23, 1948, then having
passed into the collection of Dr. J.H. Judd. A check of the Allenberger catalogue shows that the
coin was indeed the same sold by Mehl as lot 385, having realized for the time a strong $735.00.
Mehl described the coin with similar accolades noting its, "perfectly centered, unusually sharp,
with even the feathers on the eagle's breast struck up and a few minute hairlines due from the die
and not from imperfections." Mehl also mentioned that Allenberger had bought the coin from S.H.
Chapman "many years ago". Since S.H. Chapman died in 1931, Allenberger must have owned the coin for
at least 17 years if Mehl's statement is to be believed and perhaps considerably longer. Abe
Kosoff's Illustrated History of United States Coins, published in 1962, which is nothing more than
a catalogue of Dr. Judd's Collection, shows a picture of the same coin called proof and lists it as
item 36 on page 9. That all three coins are identical is quickly determined by a ragged, V shaped
lint mark depression on the lower left neck of Liberty. That the writer of the concise note next to
lot 1289 in the KreisbergSchulman sale would notice a "few defects & etc." and prefer his own
coin, although essentially agreeing that the coin was "nice", is not uncommon. It is, however,
rather unusual to find such a comment next to a 1796 half dollar described as proof! The real
adventure begins in pondering how nice the writers coin could be compared to that being offered and
the myriad reasons any person prefers one coin over another. A multitude of factors come into play
whenever anyone attends an auction and views lots. Aside from financial circumstances, which seem
particularly able to alter ones perception of a coin, bidders often must rely on mental images of
other coins. Frequently a comparison must be drawn between the coin at hand and one's memory of
another, perhaps in one's own holdings or that of a client's. If many lots are being viewed one's
stamina may come into play, here favoring those of us that are younger. Of course ones level of
expertise is extremely important. In regard to expertise, the person making the written notation
that his coin was "nicer" was eminently qualified. Our commentator was Leo Young, not only one of
the best known dealers of his time, but also a world class collector. His list of achievements
include being one of the first members of the Professional Numismatists Guild as well as once its
president. Leo Young was well known as a result of the many talks he gave on coins to various
groups and his close ties with many numismatic clubs and organizations. He was very active on the
West Coast, having held over two dozen coin auctions, and was the official auctioneer for the 1959
ANA Sale held in Portland, Oregon.
Perhaps Leo Young's most important legacy to present day collectors is the auction catalogue of his
collection. His prominence as a dealer and collector testify to the fact that Leo Young was
accustomed to looking carefully at coins. He was no doubt astutely aware that coins have many
dimensions which include surface quality, strike, luster, myriad different kinds of toning and
color, eye appeal, contact marks and pedigree; all the many factors which illustrate the utter
simplemindlessness and stupidity of current grading. What today is accepted as grading supposes that any coin can be reduced and summed up in a single number by a "grading service", subsequently to be entombed in
plastic as though something truly wonderful, or at least noteworthy, had been accomplished. Astute
collectors and dealers know better and the veterans I talked to recall Leo Young well and described
him as extremely knowledgeable about coins. Leo Young's opinion was always direct and honest. We
must believe that he thought his coin was better than the one he was viewing when he wrote his
comment. This was, after all, his personal copy of the Kreisberg Schulman sale catalogue and the
opinion was written for his own use and reference. Who else could possibly care anyway if he
thought his coin better than the AllenburgerJudd coin? Perhaps Leo's coin was finer, more original
in appearance or the surfaces might have been cleaner or more even. Anyone who knows coins will
tell you that hairlines tend to stand out on mirrorlike surfaces in pronounced fashion. This would
be especially true of a possibly proof example of a coin minted in 1796! Perhaps it was such
hairlines that made Leo Young regard his coin as finer. It could be that the V shaped lint mark on
the Allenberger-Judd specimen stood out too much, was too detracting and/or simply bothered him.
Most likely he did not have his specimen in front of him to do a direct comparison. Since the
marginal note in the catalogue doesn't give us any more information it is safe to say that at this
point we'll never know for sure exactly why he preferred his coin to the one in the auction. That
Leo Young had an eye for coins I can testify myself. Some 30 years ago, when I was still in my
teens, I met him for the first and only time. I was living in Detroit, Michigan and went downtown
to a convention that I recall was sponsored by the PNG. It was one of those sweltering, hot summer
days that only Detroit seems capable of having. One of the coins I had been searching for was a
high quality draped bust dollar. I noticed one in a case that had been set up along one wall. This
case contained a great type set of United States coins. All of the coins were of exceptional
condition. This was apparently some sort of private exhibit since there was no one around the case
and I started asking people to find out who owned the coins and if anything in the case was for
sale. Finally a man showed up and asked what I wanted. He introduced himself as Leo Young, a name I
was already familiar with from his auction catalogues, and told me that the bust dollar was not for
sale. However, he was very polite and opened the case to show it to me. In the minutes following he
showed me a number of coins in his type set.
Believe me, the impact of what I saw was slow to sink in. The superb barber dime in the type set
was not just an 1894 but an 1894S! His trade dollar was an 1885! You see, Leo Young not only
collected type coins but tried to include the rarest coin of each type whenever he could. Not only
were his coins of high quality but any given type might include the rarest coin of the series and
occasionally, as above, a legendary rarity. I cannot remember seeing his 1796 half dollar that day
as his display was mind boggling in itself, the coins so beautiful and replete with great rarities.
Around a decade later I made my way to California and established myself in the spectacular San
Francisco Bay Area. One of the people I got to know was Leo Young's son, Gary. By this time Leo
Young was not as visible on the numismatic scene and what void was left by Leo in the Oakland area
seemed to filled by Gary. After knowing Gary for a number of years I was given the opportunity in
the mid 1970's to buy his personal numismatic library which was fairly substantial and most likely
the best of its kind on United States coins, outside of my own, in the entire Bay Area. That
purchase in itself is another great story.
Suffice it to say that among the books and auction catalogues which came with the purchase was Leo
Young's personal copy of the KreisbergSchulman Brand Lichtenfels Sale boldly signed by him on the
cover. Noting that the catalogue had a lot of information written in the margins and that it had
been Leo Young's I decided to keep it. Both Leo and Gary Young seem to have been blessed with the
best market timing.
This is clearly evident in Leo's case with the sale of his United States coin
collection in 1980, right around the time of the ANA convention, by RARCOA in their part of Auction
'80. United States coins were bringing record prices at the time. Some four months earlier the
second part of the John Work Garrett Collection had been sold at simply astounding prices. Leo
Young's coins also brought very strong prices and included in the sale as lot 1594 was his specimen
of the 1796 15 Star variety half dollar. The coin was shown on one of the full color plates in that
catalogue and it was described in part as, "The rarest silver type coin in the entire United States
series. Brilliant uncirculated, cleaned at one time." The coin realized $75,000.00 and was the
fourth most expensive lot in the RARCOA session following the 1894S dime, a PanPac set and the
1885 trade dollar. Another knowledgeable, well known and well healed dealer purchased the 1796 half
dollar for inventory. We can only imagine that the dealer who purchased Leo Young's 1796 half
dollar thought that it had gone cheaply at the price and would be either a quick turn for him or
something he'd have to keep awhile but that would yield a nice profit when eventually sold. After
all, how often do you get to even see a coin like that let alone have an opportunity to buy it? But
the high prices of that era and the great demand for rare United States coins was not to last and
Leo's timing of their sale near flawless. By 1981 coin prices had begun to weaken considerably and
began a decline that unfolded over several years. The bullion markets had collapsed and silver,
which had once traded as high as $48.00 an ounce was well on its way down to below $5.00. The coin
business was not a pretty picture. Fortunes were lost virtually overnight. Many of the Garrett
patterns, sold in early 1980, had dropped to about 20 cents on the dollar within a year. Needless
to say, the hard times hit all dealers including the one who purchased Leo Young's 1796 half
dollar. In the mean time the coin remained unsold in the new owner's inventory. I was told at the
time that the dealer dipped the coin to improve its appearance and placed it on a window sill to
retone, all in an effort to improve its appearance and increase its salability. Still, the piece
remained in inventory. Finally coming to grips with the fact that the coin was no longer worth
close to what he paid and that it needed to be sold, the coin was reconsigned through Superior to
Auction '86. It was offered in that sale as lot 1136 and sold for a mere $46,200.00. Considering
this hapless dealer held on to the coin for six long years of declining market and lost nearly
$30,000.00 on the sale price, his purchase of the coin had been a complete and utter disaster.
Again in Auction '86 comment was made about the great quality of Leo Young's 1796 half dollar. The
clean, matt like surfaces and the fantastic strike were emphasized in the catalogue. "This is the
boldest strike on this coveted date that we have seen with full sharpness, including full
separation within all the denticles and full separation in the hairlines." It may have realized
less this time around but still everybody liked the coin. Later in 1986 I was at a coin show in San
Francisco held at what was then called the Jack Tar Hotel. I was walking down the isle and Gary
Young flagged me over to his table. He asked me if I wanted to see something very interesting. He
pulled out his father's specimen of the 1796 half dollar and told me I might want to study the coin
for reference sake because it was a counterfeit. Believe me, this coin looked great. It was as
sharp as a tack detail wise, had terrific surfaces, and looked like a coin that was essentially
uncirculated but had been cleaned at one time. Even the detail in the edge device was sharp under
magnification. Gary related the story of how the individual who had purchased the coin out of
Auction '86 had sent it in to be authenticated and that the coin had come back as counterfeit. In
the intervening six years Leo Young's health had taken a turn for the worse and Gary was handling
all of his affairs. Immediately upon the determination that the coin was counterfeit it had been returned and refunds
given from one prior owner to another until it had made its way back to Gary. Of course Leo had
owned the coin so many years that he had no recourse and simply had to "eat" it. Could it have been made by E.G?
Gary knew that I collected auction catalogues, having sold me his own library previously, and asked me if I knew of any catalogues containing plates of high grade 1796 half dollars. The search was on to find the
prototype coin. Any extremely high quality cast counterfeit must have been produced from a mold
taken from an original coin. Tracing the providence of the original coin makes it conclusive that
the coin in question is in fact counterfeit because no two coins will have exactly the same
defects. Finding the prototype coin also aids in fixing the time the counterfeit might have been
produced. This 1796 half dollar, being a cast counterfeit of incredibly high quality, had to have
been produced from a mold made from a genuine 1796 half dollar. I recalled several examples from
memory having spent much time as a kid looking over old auction sales catalogues and told him I
would check on it that evening when I got home. I knew I would find the prototype coin since, as I
said earlier, almost invariably such rare coins have some auction history and I did. On the drive
home that evening I became astounded with the thought of the windfall this meant to the major
dealer who had purchased the coin out of Auction '80. What spectacular good fortune! This dealer
had gone to the auction and carefully looked at lots and picked out the coins he wanted and bought
them. What he didn't know is that by a stroke of vast luck he picked out one of the few coins in
the entire sale which wouldn't go down in value and which he would be able to recover his full cost
on! Instead of losing $30,000.00 he got his money back in full! So, a short note written beside a
single lot in an old auction catalogue has led us on an adventure and left us with one final
question. Which coin really was finer, the Allenberger-Judd coin or Leo Young's? I suppose that
ultimately you can't really compare a counterfeit coin to a genuine one and ask which is in better
condition. On the other hand, if you don't know one of the coins isn't real then I guess you can.
In retrospect, what Leo Young might really have disliked about the Allenberger-Judd coin was the V
sharped lint mark on Liberty's lower left neck and the deep, subliminal uneasiness he felt as he
held the prototype coin.
[Contact us with comments]
(c) Copyright 1997 The Patrick Mint
Straight up fascinating post.
Makes me feel like I have missed quite a bit of information while learning quite a bit simultaneously.
I would truly love to know more about your story @coinsarefun ...I'm guessing someone can point me towards some of it
Thank you @coinsarefun and @cardinal just wonderful stuff.
Coins are Neato!
"If it's a penny for your thoughts and you put in your two cents worth, then someone...somewhere...is making a penny." - Steven Wright
i'm not sure just how much more obvious that coin is in-hand but those pics make me want to never risk buying a 96 half. of course at first i thought it was the quarter despite staring RIGHT at the 1/2. ><
haven't used this in a while so i'll say from those images scans?, i'll give that thing a class V out of V rating.
Was that made in a transfer process from this coin (below) ? I see the same lint marks on both and the black planchet inclusion across the "I" of UNITED seems to have been transferred to the coin above as a shallow depression.
Excellent and fascinating post! Thank you @cardinal
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Yes, the piece was made from the Allenberger specimen. At some time, someone borrowed the Atwater specimen and created dies from that coin. Supposedly, there are more of these out there, but I have never seen another one.
I am glad to know that all of the owners pf these "non-compliant" counterfeits have left strict instructions to have all of their counterfeits buried with them so that no future generation can sell them fraudulently!
I'm not familiar with the pedigree on these. Is the "Allenberger specimen" and the "Atwater specimen" the same coin (just different owners at different times) ?
From the limited ownership history of the original coin, is it possible to determine who made the copies ?
The original coin had many notable owners, including those. Judd own it, the Knoxville collector owned it, and Pogue owned it.
@dcarr
This is the provenance of the piece, as listed in PCGS CoinFacts:
Dr. Christian A. Allenburger Collection - B. Max Mehl 3/1948:385 - Dr. J. Hewitt Judd Collection - Kosoff 1962 (or 2?) FPL, lot 36 - Kreisberg & Schulman 3/1964:1289 - L.A. Collection - Stack’s 10/1990:1646 - John Whitney Walter Collection - Stack's 5/1999:1777, $138,000 - D. Brent Pogue Collection - Stack’s/Bowers & Sotheby’s 5/2015:1100, $587,500
.
.
.
Absolutely beautiful! That’s something you hold on forever and toss it in the box with you
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
Are there other copies of different coins, but of a similar fabric, where the original copied coin was in any of those collections ?
It seems that one of these owners had the copy made (or allowed it to be made). Maybe they had copies of other coins made as well ?
I could imagine that an owner of a valuable collection might want to have high-quality copies made of their best coins so that they could enjoy them everyday without having to worry about keeping them hidden away all the time.
As a numismatist I could enjoy looking at a high quality photo of something I knew I had in the SDB. I could not enjoy looking at a counterfeit of it. Your mileage may vary.
Yes!
While drafting my book on the Population of the 1794 Silver Dollars, I recalled a conversation with Jules Reiver, when he told me about his specimen of the 1794 dollar. He told me that he had two 1794 dollars - and they were nearly identical. Jules recognized the one of them must have been a fake. He submitted each one to the ANACS to be tested - with sending only one at a time. The tests showed that BOTH were legitimate - that showed the skill of the person that created the fake. Jules said that whenever he might sell them, they would be sold together, so that the owner would be assured that they had at least one real one. Later on in my research, I found another 1794 dollar that appeared in an Heritage Auction, that matched those two coins of Jules. Clearly, that was another fake and was noted in my book.
So if there were two or more identical copies, it can be inferred that the maker's purpose was to sell and make money.
Is it known what collection Reiver's 1794 dollar copy came from ?
When I was at ANACS back in the early 80's, the then-Curator arranged a visit for the entire team of Authenticators to some department at the University of Colorado in Boulder (his alma mater) that was making cast copies of a coin collection the University owned so they could display the counterfeits and keep the good ones locked up. As an example the technician took a common small size Pine Tree Shilling that he let everybody study, made a mold of it that he let us study, melted silver with a blowtorch and pressure cast the silver into the mold using a centrifuge and when it had cooled let us study it with the sprue still attached, trimmed the sprue and let us study it again, and then antiqued it. Did the same thing with a few other pieces. It was quite illustrating.
When we were all done he gave the Pine Tree Shilling to our Director, Ken Bressett. Ken carried it as a pocket piece for years. Every time we ran into each other at an ANA convention I would ask to see it. It was circulating down nicely and getting a more natural patina, when one convention he told me that he had lost it. I wonder where it is today?
damn that's a scary copy. If you told me it was real I'd belive you. I mean at first glance
This is original Robison 1794 dollar, and the product of the US Mint:
This is Jules' 1794 dollar, before he acquired the genuine Robison dollar. When ANACS tested it, they determined that the trace elements of were consistent with other 1794 dollars, Furthermore, it was die struck piece from transfer dies:
And this is another transfer die struck piece, but not an original 1794 dollar:
I agree....some years ago, I showed to Laura Sperber and she said It was cleaned and not fitting for my collection, suggesting that I sell it as soon as possible. I asked what I should sell it for, and she said if I could get between $45k and $50k, I should take it. When I told her that would give me an nice profit, I paused as she looked on, and then I told her it was a die struck counterfeit piece.
Some years later, I showed it to JD, and he looked briefly, thinking "why am I looking at a cleaned half dollar?" Then when I did the reveal, he looked at it much more carefully, and said it was "quite deceiving!"
If you told me it was real I would have thought it was real but cleaned. How were these made? were these made of the orignial dies? Because if the fakes are this good, our hobby is screwed. Also what do you mean "die struck" like off the orignial die? Or a new one?
There are two methods to create a die from a pre-existing die - like a criminal may borrow a key, press it in the bar of soap, and then fill the void. The other method would have you covering the coin with graphite and then pour melted metal over it. When that metal cools off, it will be strong enough to handle a hardened planchet such that it could be used as a die that would impress the design into the planchet. With the first method, if you tapped the key it would make a dull sound. With the other, the struck piece would ring like a bell. The piece I have rings like a bell when tapped on metal - just like any other US Mint coin.
Wow. That's scary. Is there a way to tell the difference between that and a real one?! Try sending it to PCGS/NGC and see if they catch it...
The telltale about the piece, it is considerably lighter than the actual coin struck by the US Mint dies.
Create a die from a die or a die from a coin? Either way there are multiple ways to make one from the other.
Ah that's good. Otherwise our hobby would be screwed.
These are so beautiful !
20+ year old discontinued dies put back into service in 2020.
Thank you very much. I am an extremely lucky girl. I so enjoy looking at these
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
Fascinating stuff Stef - thanks for posting!
Big fan of Landis' work. I particularly love his current Art Medals, that imitate ancient Greek and Roman rarities.....In hand they are truly awesome.
1 of 4 hot struck from 2 melted US gold eagles on site, at 1999 ANA Summer Seminar
.
.
.
f you ever decide to ket it go please let me know.....thanks
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC