@Weiss said:
Are these Morgan silver dollars Morgan silver dollars?
Yes. These Morgan silver dollars are Morgan silver dollars.
Collect what you like. Include them or don't include them. But they are absolutely, positively, US Mint-produced, dollar-denominated, George T. Morgan-designed United States of American silver dollars.
You left out a word in the Mint's description of them. They are Commemorative Morgan Silver Dollars. Yes, collect what you want BUT you don't get to assign the official designation of the coins or arbitrarily proclaim they are part of the Morgan Dollar series. YOU can assign whatever attributes you'd like to them You can also proclaim the Earth is flat and water boils at 33 degrees but the legislation defines, and the history, composition, finish supports, these Morgans are commeratives, period end of story.
Newsflash - you don’t get to end a debate or argument by writing “...period end of story”.
And the same goes for claiming that your opinions are facts, while stating those who disagree are expressing opinions, rather than facts.😉
Period, end of story is a way to convey the person added nothing to the debate.
I did NOT state an opinion, I stated facts. Here are those facts.
The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives.
The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives.
The member of Congress that voted for the authorization also referred to them in his presentation of the coin to the Carson City Museum as commeratives.
The coins were struck 100 years after the Morgan series was end and replace by another circulation dollar coin.
The new coins struck have a different composition, weight and finish.
Feel free to draw irrational conclusions not based in fact all you want and argue those conclusions for another 100 post BUT the facts speak for themself.
“End of story” doesn’t simply mean that “the person added nothing to the debate.” That, alone, wouldn’t necessarily indicate that the debate had been decided or ended.
“ end of story
Meaning
there is nothing more to add to the matter under discussion
the discussion is complete, nothing more to be said
said to emphasize that what is said is true there is no other possibility to change it
there is no more to be said
Source: www.theidioms.com”
Sorry for not having been clear in my comment about opinions vs, facts. It pertained to a number of your posts, not just the previous one.
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
As I mentioned before, the story doesn’t end just because you say so. I happen to think the 2021 Morgan’s are or should be classified as commemoratives, but that’s largely beside the point.
I've totally lost track of the point. I think it had something to do with fried bologna, didn't it?
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
You have the temerity to disagree with him and claim to not want to be confrontational? Do you have any idea with whom you are disagreeing?
End of sarcasm and end of story. Paul Harvey is dead.
For those who feel that the 2021Morgan is part of the original series, here are two questions related to the following hypothetical: suppose the mint issues a 2022 dollar that is very close in design and specifications to the 1795 flowing hair dollar.
Would you agree that a date set of flowing hair dollars requires three coins to be complete?
Would you agree that a type collector (who does not collect relatively minor design adjustments) should be happy to fill the flowing hair slot with the 2022 coin?
@Higashiyama said:
For those who feel that the 2021Morgan is part of the original series, here are two questions related to the following hypothetical: suppose the mint issues a 2022 dollar that is very close in design and specifications to the 1795 flowing hair dollar.
Would you agree that a date set of flowing hair dollars requires three coins to be complete?
Would you agree that a type collector (who does not collect relatively minor design adjustments) should be happy to fill the flowing hair slot with the 2022 coin?
Define "close"? Are they using original designs?
Maybe
Maybe
Alternate question. Does a type collector need 1 Morgan (1921)? 2 (1921, pre-1921)? 3 (1921, pre-1921 rev of 1979, rev of 1878)? Or 4 (pre-1921, 1921 rev 1879, rev of 1878, 2021)? More???
@Weiss -- can you point to a post where someone says that the 2021 Morgan is not a Morgan? I absolutely consider it a Morgan dollar, but not one that is part of the original series.
(If the coin were a clad, like the Ike dollar, so that it arguably had some monetary intent, I might have a different view. The actual coin is in the nature of a commemorative. I am a Morgan collector and I did in fact purchase a few, but I consider them novelties rather than part of my Morgan collection)
@Higashiyama said: @Weiss -- can you point to a post where someone says that the 2021 Morgan is not a Morgan? I absolutely consider it a Morgan dollar, but not one that is part of the original series.
(If the coin were a clad, like the Ike dollar, so that it arguably had some monetary intent, I might have a different view. The actual coin is in the nature of a commemorative. I am a Morgan collector and I did in fact purchase a few, but I consider them novelties rather than part of my Morgan collection)
That's the issue, isn't it?
YOU may consider this United States Morgan silver dollar in any way you wish. You're welcome to that position.
But that doesn't change the facts.
I would argue that a clad Morgan would be less true to the Morgan series than the 2021 Morgan. It would be of a substantially different weight, alloy, and size.
On the other hand, the 2021 Morgan dollar is:
*A faithful execution of the coin designed by George T. Morgan
*Minted by the United States Mint
*Minted of silver
*Nominally the same size and weight as the others in the Morgan silver dollar series
*Designated by the United States Mint as the "Morgan 2021 silver dollar"
*Denominated at one United States dollar
We are like children who look at print and see a serpent in the last letter but one, and a sword in the last. --Severian the Lame
@Weiss said:
Are these Morgan silver dollars Morgan silver dollars?
Yes. These Morgan silver dollars are Morgan silver dollars.
Collect what you like. Include them or don't include them. But they are absolutely, positively, US Mint-produced, dollar-denominated, George T. Morgan-designed United States of American silver dollars.
You left out a word in the Mint's description of them. They are Commemorative Morgan Silver Dollars. Yes, collect what you want BUT you don't get to assign the official designation of the coins or arbitrarily proclaim they are part of the Morgan Dollar series. YOU can assign whatever attributes you'd like to them You can also proclaim the Earth is flat and water boils at 33 degrees but the legislation defines, and the history, composition, finish supports, these Morgans are commeratives, period end of story.
Newsflash - you don’t get to end a debate or argument by writing “...period end of story”.
And the same goes for claiming that your opinions are facts, while stating those who disagree are expressing opinions, rather than facts.😉
Period, end of story is a way to convey the person added nothing to the debate.
I did NOT state an opinion, I stated facts. Here are those facts.
The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives.
The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives.
The member of Congress that voted for the authorization also referred to them in his presentation of the coin to the Carson City Museum as commeratives.
The coins were struck 100 years after the Morgan series was end and replace by another circulation dollar coin.
The new coins struck have a different composition, weight and finish.
Feel free to draw irrational conclusions not based in fact all you want and argue those conclusions for another 100 post BUT the facts speak for themself.
“End of story” doesn’t simply mean that “the person added nothing to the debate.” That, alone, wouldn’t necessarily indicate that the debate had been decided or ended.
“ end of story
Meaning
there is nothing more to add to the matter under discussion
the discussion is complete, nothing more to be said
said to emphasize that what is said is true there is no other possibility to change it
there is no more to be said
Source: www.theidioms.com”
Sorry for not having been clear in my comment about opinions vs, facts. It pertained to a number of your posts, not just the previous one.
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
As I mentioned before, the story doesn’t end just because you say so. I happen to think the 2021 Morgan’s are or should be classified as commemoratives, but that’s largely beside the point.
O.k., but you can't refute the facts I stated.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
@Weiss -- I'd add one more item to your list of facts:
*A faithful execution of the coin designed by George T. Morgan
*Minted by the United States Mint
*Minted of silver
*Nominally the same size and weight as the others in the Morgan silver dollar series
*Designated by the United States Mint as the "Morgan 2021 silver dollar"
*Denominated at one United States dollar
*No intent whatsoever to facilitate commerce, banking, or finance
"Alternate question. Does a type collector need 1 Morgan (1921)? 2 (1921, pre-1921)? 3 (1921, pre-1921 rev of 1979, rev of 1878)? Or 4 (pre-1921, 1921 rev 1879, rev of 1878, 2021)? More???"
Personally, I would choose option 2, but of course I have no concern whatsoever if people prefer other options.
I would also offer another alternative: a single coin, but a pre-1921 coin.
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
I see the word but I can also see the coin. If some one says that car drove by and it said it was blue on the side of the car but it was red. I’m sorry it was red to me. This is why some criminals get away with crimes. If the wording was not right they can get off with out being changed.
Well we will see if they use new words on the next one that comes out. I think we will be seeing them for some time. I will say this is a new Morgan and Peace Dollar if you want to put it in your set put it if not leave it out it’s your collection.
But what’s the harm in having some just in case they do say it’s part of the set now you have them.
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
My reply was to your post, in which you focused on the words “commemorative” and “commemorate”. You stated that “words mean something” and “My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.”
You’ve now shown that words only mean something if they serve your cause. No more replies to you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
My reply was to your post, in which you focused on the words “commemorative” and “commemorate”. You stated that “words mean something” and “My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.”
You’ve now shown that words only mean something if they serve your cause. No more replies to you.
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
My reply was to your post, in which you focused on the words “commemorative” and “commemorate”. You stated that “words mean something” and “My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.”
You’ve now shown that words only mean something if they serve your cause. No more replies to you.
I focused on the word in that post but have made it very clear that the issue goes beyond one word and repeated those issues a number of times. If you want to focus on the word and how it's used we can do that. If you want to focus on the other elements we can do that. I mentioned a number of FACTS in an early post. You haven't refuted any of them. Those facts in combination nullify any claim that these coins are anything but commerative coins AS WAS ECHOED by a member of the Congress that authorized them.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
My reply was to your post, in which you focused on the words “commemorative” and “commemorate”. You stated that “words mean something” and “My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.”
You’ve now shown that words only mean something if they serve your cause. No more replies to you.
Now, you're learning. Lol.
Wrong, he's shown, at least in this conversation, an inability to follow the ebb and flow of the conversation in this thread.
Take your pick. We can focus on the use of the word "commemorative" or the other factors that have a bearing on the issue. In either case the claim these coins are anything but commeratives is contrary to both.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@pmh1nic said:
The facts stated in my last post are the underlying foundation of the other post. Can you refuse any of those facts? If not, end of story.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term." Source (page #24)
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
My reply was to your post, in which you focused on the words “commemorative” and “commemorate”. You stated that “words mean something” and “My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.”
You’ve now shown that words only mean something if they serve your cause. No more replies to you.
Wrong, I've shown I can focus on more than one aspect of the subjected at the same time.
But in either case, if you want to focus on the word as used in the legislation, as used by a member of the Congress that passed that legislation, as used by a member of the Mint, that word was used to indicate these Morgans are commemorative coins.
Beyond that, try to stick with me, there are the multitude of other factors that relegate these coins to being commeratives. Your Washington quarter example meets none of those criteria.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@jmlanzaf said:
I'd call it trolling, but that's unfair to trolls.
You can call facts and rational reasoning whatever you want because with you words don't mean anything.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
I think we're all in agreement now: The 2021 United States Morgan Silver Dollars are absolutely, positively part of the United States Morgan Silver Dollar series.
We are like children who look at print and see a serpent in the last letter but one, and a sword in the last. --Severian the Lame
@Jzyskowski1 said:
The tpg companies beg to differ. Seems their not identified as part of the original series.
That is the opinion of two corporate entities who may simply have made the most convenient decision for their registry sets.
They also consider the 1913 Liberty Nickel to be part of the nickel series even though there is no record of it being struck or intended to be struck. They include the 1958 DD Lincoln as part of that series even though those come from a similarly speculative source. And shall we discuss 1964 SMS sets?
In the end, every collector makes their own determination. Should proof strikes EVER be considered part of the coin series?
@Weiss said:
I think we're all in agreement now: The 2021 United States Morgan Silver Dollars are absolutely, positively part of the United States Morgan Silver Dollar series.
No, you don't and no, we aren't.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I think an objective observer reading through this thread would agree there are plausible arguments on either side, but that ultimately the argument in favor of it being considered a commemorative rather than part of the original series come out ahead by a significant margin.
I thought it was they are there own continuation of the Morgan and Peace Dollars.
I personally don’t look at it as a commemorative so is this year a commemorative as well and there will be more to come for years. Maybe some more big surprise in the pike like 10th oz buffalo’s I hope they do silver as well.
@Absolution asked "doesn't that mean this is no longer a commemorative but a reboot continuation of the coin?"
There are many examples of two year commemoratives, and many examples of commemorative "series" that extended over years and years -- Arkansas, Boone, Oregon, BTW, WC, etc.
So, maybe this is "Morgan, take two, the commemoratives"
@Jzyskowski1 said:
The tpg companies beg to differ. Seems their not identified as part of the original series.
That's the one with Spock, right?
100th pint of blood donated 7/19/2022 . Transactions with WilliamF, Relaxn, LukeMarshal, jclovescoins, braddick, JWP, Weather11am, Fairlaneman, Dscoins, lordmarcovan, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, JimW. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Comments
I've totally lost track of the point. I think it had something to do with fried bologna, didn't it?
I think I'm collecting wrong.
I do not want to be confrontational, but I would like to comment on a couple of your points.
1) "The legislation authorizing the minting of these coins refers to them as commeratives."
The '1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act' (Public Law 116-286) includes the words "commemorating" (section 2.1), and "commemorate" (section 2.6). While I agree that this demonstrates an intent to commemorate specific events, the inclusion of these terms in the legislation does not make the releases "commemorative coins" as defined by the Mint.
2) "The statement from mint official quoted by MetroD "differentiated from OTHER commemorative coins" also refers to them as commeratives."
Respectfully, you are focusing on one word in an entire paragraph (i.e., "other").
There are other portions of the paragraph which directly and unambiguously address the issue.
"While the 2021 Morgan and Peace Dollars coins commemorate the 100th anniversaries of each coin, they are not technically considered commemorative coins according to traditional definitions of that term."
Source (page #24)
You have the temerity to disagree with him and claim to not want to be confrontational? Do you have any idea with whom you are disagreeing?
End of sarcasm and end of story. Paul Harvey is dead.
I'm sorry, but "end of story" has been declared.
Or so I'm told.
For those who feel that the 2021Morgan is part of the original series, here are two questions related to the following hypothetical: suppose the mint issues a 2022 dollar that is very close in design and specifications to the 1795 flowing hair dollar.
Green eggs and ham, sir, green eggs and ham.
End of story has been called, yet it never ends.
Define "close"? Are they using original designs?
Alternate question. Does a type collector need 1 Morgan (1921)? 2 (1921, pre-1921)? 3 (1921, pre-1921 rev of 1979, rev of 1878)? Or 4 (pre-1921, 1921 rev 1879, rev of 1878, 2021)? More???
I'm sure glad I'm not trying to argue that this United States Morgan silver dollar isn't a United States Morgan silver dollar.
--Severian the Lame
A Morgan is not a Morgan. However, a commemorative is a commemorative unless it is a quarter or it fails to prove my point.
The fact is you are simply not allowed to decide for yourself what fits into your collection. You can try, but you'd be wrong. End of story.
I apologize.
I am not very adept with social cues. Am even worse in an online environment.
This is your thread. If you are "done" with the ancillary topic of "commemorative coins", I am too.
No more posts from me on the subject.
@Weiss -- can you point to a post where someone says that the 2021 Morgan is not a Morgan? I absolutely consider it a Morgan dollar, but not one that is part of the original series.
(If the coin were a clad, like the Ike dollar, so that it arguably had some monetary intent, I might have a different view. The actual coin is in the nature of a commemorative. I am a Morgan collector and I did in fact purchase a few, but I consider them novelties rather than part of my Morgan collection)
I’m confident that he was being facetious and that his post was in no way aimed at you. I hope you will continue to post as you wish.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Your continued input is highly valued.
That's the issue, isn't it?
YOU may consider this United States Morgan silver dollar in any way you wish. You're welcome to that position.
But that doesn't change the facts.
I would argue that a clad Morgan would be less true to the Morgan series than the 2021 Morgan. It would be of a substantially different weight, alloy, and size.
On the other hand, the 2021 Morgan dollar is:
*A faithful execution of the coin designed by George T. Morgan
*Minted by the United States Mint
*Minted of silver
*Nominally the same size and weight as the others in the Morgan silver dollar series
*Designated by the United States Mint as the "Morgan 2021 silver dollar"
*Denominated at one United States dollar
--Severian the Lame
Gentlemen,
I am humbled that you took the time to reply, and grateful for the comments.
Thank You !!!
I bet the execs down at the mint are getting a good laugh, especially as they ponder what’s in store for 2022.
O.k., but you can't refute the facts I stated.
Which is closer to the original design, the 2021 Morgan or...
I don't see your post as confrontation at all.
Words mean something. When the legislation says these coins are minted to commemorate something that defines them as commeratives.
My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.
If one of the individuals that voted for the legislation in making a major presentation uses the word commemorative to describe them that holds a great deal of weight in the discussion, much more than any individual collector or coin seller.
Beyond that are the other facts surrounding the minting of these coins that I've already stated and repeated.
So according to you, are Washington quarters commemoratives? If not, why not?
@MasonG previously posted:
December 6, 2021 4:51PM
Legislation authorizing the Washington quarter defines them as commemorative:
Congressional Research Service
Washington Quarter
In March 1931, President Herbert Hoover signed a law (46 Stat. 1523) to change the design of the quarter dollar coin to commemorate “the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington.”
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11394/3
46 Stat. 1523 (Pub. Law 71-852)
AN ACT To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington. March 4, 1931 1523
https://uslaw.link/#q=46 Stat. 1523
SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS. SESS. III . CHs. 504-506 . 1931
CHAP. 505 .-An Act To authorize a change in the design of the quarter dollar to commemorate the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington .
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That notwithstanding the provisions and limitations of section 3510 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed, for the purpose of commemorating the two hundredth anniversary of the birth of George Washington, to change the design of the twenty-five-cent piece so that the portrait of George Washington shall appear on the obverse, with appropriate devices on the reverse, of said piece . The new coins shall be issued for general circulation beginning in 1932, the year of the said bicentennial anniversary .
Approved, March 4, 1931 .
https://govtrackus.s3.amazonaws.com/legislink/pdf/stat/46/STATUTE-46-Pg1523.pdf
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Weiss -- I'd add one more item to your list of facts:
*A faithful execution of the coin designed by George T. Morgan
*Minted by the United States Mint
*Minted of silver
*Nominally the same size and weight as the others in the Morgan silver dollar series
*Designated by the United States Mint as the "Morgan 2021 silver dollar"
*Denominated at one United States dollar
*No intent whatsoever to facilitate commerce, banking, or finance
@MasonG
The 1998 Washington quarter is definitely hideous.
"NSFW" warning needed?
@jmlanzaf asked:
"Alternate question. Does a type collector need 1 Morgan (1921)? 2 (1921, pre-1921)? 3 (1921, pre-1921 rev of 1979, rev of 1878)? Or 4 (pre-1921, 1921 rev 1879, rev of 1878, 2021)? More???"
Personally, I would choose option 2, but of course I have no concern whatsoever if people prefer other options.
I would also offer another alternative: a single coin, but a pre-1921 coin.
You're kidding right?
The Washington quarters were minted for circulation. They replace the quarter that had been in circulation (Standing Liberty quarter). They didn't follow the SLQ a 100 years after the fact. As stated, there are a combination of factors, INCLUDING the wording of the legislation, the understanding of which by the legislature (as reference in my quote of a member of Congress) in addition to a representative of the Mint regarding the status of the Morgans, relegate them to be commeratives.
But your effort to pull a rabbit out of a hat is commendable.
I see the word but I can also see the coin. If some one says that car drove by and it said it was blue on the side of the car but it was red. I’m sorry it was red to me. This is why some criminals get away with crimes. If the wording was not right they can get off with out being changed.
Well we will see if they use new words on the next one that comes out. I think we will be seeing them for some time. I will say this is a new Morgan and Peace Dollar if you want to put it in your set put it if not leave it out it’s your collection.
But what’s the harm in having some just in case they do say it’s part of the set now you have them.
Hoard the keys.
My reply was to your post, in which you focused on the words “commemorative” and “commemorate”. You stated that “words mean something” and “My focus on one word is related to the fact that the main subject of this thread is that one word.”
You’ve now shown that words only mean something if they serve your cause. No more replies to you.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Now, you're learning. Lol.
I focused on the word in that post but have made it very clear that the issue goes beyond one word and repeated those issues a number of times. If you want to focus on the word and how it's used we can do that. If you want to focus on the other elements we can do that. I mentioned a number of FACTS in an early post. You haven't refuted any of them. Those facts in combination nullify any claim that these coins are anything but commerative coins AS WAS ECHOED by a member of the Congress that authorized them.
Wrong, he's shown, at least in this conversation, an inability to follow the ebb and flow of the conversation in this thread.
Take your pick. We can focus on the use of the word "commemorative" or the other factors that have a bearing on the issue. In either case the claim these coins are anything but commeratives is contrary to both.
Baloney!
I'd call it trolling, but that's unfair to trolls.
Wrong, I've shown I can focus on more than one aspect of the subjected at the same time.
But in either case, if you want to focus on the word as used in the legislation, as used by a member of the Congress that passed that legislation, as used by a member of the Mint, that word was used to indicate these Morgans are commemorative coins.
Beyond that, try to stick with me, there are the multitude of other factors that relegate these coins to being commeratives. Your Washington quarter example meets none of those criteria.
You can call facts and rational reasoning whatever you want because with you words don't mean anything.
I think the 2022 obverse is even worse
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
I think we're all in agreement now: The 2021 United States Morgan Silver Dollars are absolutely, positively part of the United States Morgan Silver Dollar series.
--Severian the Lame
The tpg companies beg to differ. Seems their not identified as part of the original series.
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
That is the opinion of two corporate entities who may simply have made the most convenient decision for their registry sets.
They also consider the 1913 Liberty Nickel to be part of the nickel series even though there is no record of it being struck or intended to be struck. They include the 1958 DD Lincoln as part of that series even though those come from a similarly speculative source. And shall we discuss 1964 SMS sets?
In the end, every collector makes their own determination. Should proof strikes EVER be considered part of the coin series?
I entered my Peace$ and Morgan$ in my set. The True Views are nice
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/denomination-type-sets/dollar-type-set-circulation-strikes-1794-present/publishedset/121490
Ken
My Washington Type B/C Set
No, you don't and no, we aren't.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
As mentioned, both sides can be argued. The marketplace is undecided as well. I think it comes down to your personal perception.
Perception is reality in this instance.
The End.
Some folks just need pictures
My Washington Type B/C Set
I'm sorry but the End of Story has already been proclaimed multiple times on prior pages.
Get used to disappointment.
I think an objective observer reading through this thread would agree there are plausible arguments on either side, but that ultimately the argument in favor of it being considered a commemorative rather than part of the original series come out ahead by a significant margin.
I thought it was they are there own continuation of the Morgan and Peace Dollars.
I personally don’t look at it as a commemorative so is this year a commemorative as well and there will be more to come for years. Maybe some more big surprise in the pike like 10th oz buffalo’s I hope they do silver as well.
Hoard the keys.
Question: It looks like they are making a 2022 Morgan Coin?
https://catalog.usmint.gov/morgan-2022-silver-proof-dollar-22XF.html?cgid=2022-product-schedule
If that's the case, doesn't that mean this is no longer a commemorative but a reboot continuation of the coin?
@Absolution asked "doesn't that mean this is no longer a commemorative but a reboot continuation of the coin?"
There are many examples of two year commemoratives, and many examples of commemorative "series" that extended over years and years -- Arkansas, Boone, Oregon, BTW, WC, etc.
So, maybe this is "Morgan, take two, the commemoratives"
That's the one with Spock, right?