New medal from 1883 The Society of the Cincinnati 34.9 mm
trueblood
Posts: 609 ✭✭✭✭
Discussion appreciated
10
trueblood
Posts: 609 ✭✭✭✭
Comments
A medal I have never seen before. The exceptional detailing of the eagle adds interest.
Society of the Cincinnati materials are highly desirable. As a Mint medal, the large premium does not necessarily come from it being a Mint medal, it comes from the fact that it is a Society of the Cincinnati medal.
This one doesn’t come up often. Did you get the silver too?
Edit: I’d also like to say that there are limited distractions - no large spots, scratches, or dings. It’s a wholesome example!
Very special.
Nice looking medal. Much older design style than what I typically see for 1883.
It looks like it’s designed to be engraved but wasn’t. What are these engraved for?
It’s nice that it’s a US Mint medal. Who was the engraver?
Super nice and from my home State too!
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
The Society of Cincinnati is based in Washington DC.
Here is a cool link that describes the purpose of the medal and other details:
http://www.srcalifornia.com/cincinnati/medals3.htm
I see references mentioning Henry Mitchell as the engraver.
The medal has nothing to do with Ohio
yes
The eagle is bad ass!
Nice medal with excellent engraving of the eagle. I am not familiar with the centennial medal, but I did primary research of the initial engraving for the Society of the Cincinnati. My book is now in the Society of the Cincinnati Library.
The medal eagle is derived from the original diploma for the Society, along with another engraving done by Robert Scot for the Society. Scot engraved the script for the diploma, working on Sundays as he was busy engraving six days a week on the 1784 Captain William McMurray map of the US. Scot was recruited by Captain George Turner, who in a letter to General Otho Holland Williams described Scot as "the only engraver, perhaps, on the Continent, that can do it justice." By that time Scot had earned a stellar reputation for his engraving of projects for US Military officers.
This is Robert Scot's version of the eagle for the Society in 1785, which is similar to a couple of eagles he engraved in 1782, including one for a portrayal of Ezekiel's Vision. The image is greatly enlarged and the circle inside the rays is about 20mm, the lettering inside the oval is very small and can only be read with a loupe:
The Society Motto means "He relinquished everything to save the Republic." This is Scot's version:
.
.
Well, I learned something tonight!
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC
A wonderful piece, but if I might pick a nit, 1-3/8th inch would be 34.925 mm in diameter. Looking at in the slab, that looks about right.
TD
@Nysoto.... Beautiful medal.... really intricate detail on the Eagle.... And thanks for the history. Did not know about this society. Cheers, RickO
I am confused with your above statement, slab reads 32mm, and you wrote 1 3/8" or 34.9mm, where did you get that ,measurement from?
From the description in here:
http://www.srcalifornia.com/cincinnati/medals3.htm
It is always possible that they are wrong.
That is interesting, the site which appears very credible seems to have many measurements, hard to believe they are wrong. And yet NGC has 32mm on all of them and NGC is noted for its superiority with medals. So I guess it will be up to me to measure when I receive them from StacksBowers. Stay tuned
Nice looking medal! Never seen that before.
The website it is correct, the medal is not 32mm, but 34.9mm. Hard to believe NGC got this one wrong, they are typically so good with metals. I had my first unengraved silver that I acquired some time ago to measure.
Looking at the slab in the OP and knowing the width of the slab I knew that that piece could not be only 32 mm. The referenced article gave the correct size.
Thank you for pointing that out.
So is 3mm a sizable difference affecting the value of the medal in anyway out of curiosity, or is it negligible?
I know nothing about values. That said, does it matter? Is this just the normal size that the slabber mis-described? Or did you buy it thinking it was something previously unknown?
I collect them, all the holders say 32mm (ngc holders). I just was wondering because many collectors feel size matters, and I was just wondering if 3 additional mm affects collectors in any way. I personally don't care whether it is 32 or 35mm.