Here's custom 5c holder auction text :
Note the Five 1913 Liberty nickels also had a 1913 Indian 5c full size copper strike
Unique and Historic Coin Holder
Housed the Five Original 1913 Liberty Head Nickels
(c. 1920) Leather Coin Holder for the Original 1913 Liberty Nickels. For the better part of three decades after their mysterious striking, the five famous, original 1913 Liberty Head nickels traded hands as a set through a chain of ownership that is nearly as intriguing as the nickels themselves. During most of that time, they were housed in this fine leather eight-coin holder, purchased intact from the "Col." E.H.R. Green estate - the legendary nickels in place - by the partnership of Eric P. Newman and B.G. Johnson.
Five of the openings were occupied by the original 1913 Liberty nickels, leaving places for three additional nickels. One was a pattern Type One style Buffalo nickel proof described by Eric P. Newman as from the "regular type," but with broader rims and shorter feathers on the headdress, probably unique. Another Buffalo nickel was an Uncirculated Type Two of regular mintage. The third Buffalo nickel was also a Type Two piece, described as "in copper, Unc., probably unique."
This historic and splendid leather case offered now (without any of the nickels) is inextricably linked to the most celebrated coins of all numismatic lore, carefully preserved and virtually as it was when acquired in 1942. It is made from soft leather over hard paperboard stiffeners, with flaps lined with fine quality satiny fabric, all in black. The case shows only minimal wear on the snap closure and no signs of damage other than a bit of faint edge wear. This authentic case is housed in an NGC archival plastic sleeve.
Ex: Possibly Samuel Brown, before 1919; more likely August Wagner or Stephen K. Nagy, circa 1924; Wayte Raymond, circa 1924; "Colonel" E.H.R. Green; Green Estate; Partnership of Eric P. Newman/B.G. Johnson d.b.a. St. Louis Stamp and Coin Co.; Eric P. Newman; Eric P. Newman Numismatic Education Society.
That holder is an amazing piece of numismatic history.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@Zoins said:
Laura called the Dexter Dollar "a true GEM Proof."
Graffiti and all.
And John Albanese has opined that the graffiti wasn’t the cause of failing CAC, suggesting there are other reasons the coin is not a true gem proof.
One doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
Bruce @tradedollarnut has indicated that 1804 dollars don't CAC in general because they are over graded, including mentioning the Dexter Dollar specifically. If this is the case, the coin could still be "a true GEM Proof" but not CAC because it's not strong "for the grade".
@Zoins said:
Laura called the Dexter Dollar "a true GEM Proof."
Graffiti and all.
And John Albanese has opined that the graffiti wasn’t the cause of failing CAC, suggesting there are other reasons the coin is not a true gem proof.
One doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
Bruce @tradedollarnut has indicated that 1804 dollars don't CAC in general because they are over graded, including mentioning the Dexter Dollar specifically. If this is the case, the coin could still be "a true GEM Proof" but not CAC because it's not strong "for the grade".
I believe the comment from TDN showed support for a sticker at lower grade level (PF63). Most define gem proof as PF65-PF66.
@Zoins said:
Laura called the Dexter Dollar "a true GEM Proof."
Graffiti and all.
And John Albanese has opined that the graffiti wasn’t the cause of failing CAC, suggesting there are other reasons the coin is not a true gem proof.
One doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
Bruce @tradedollarnut has indicated that 1804 dollars don't CAC in general because they are over graded, including mentioning the Dexter Dollar specifically. If this is the case, the coin could still be "a true GEM Proof" but not CAC because it's not strong "for the grade".
I believe the comment from TDN showed support for a sticker at lower grade level (PF63). Most define gem proof as PF65-PF66.
That's a good point. Gem normally means PR65 and above and @tradedollarnut mentioned it didn't sticker due to being overgraded, along with other 1804 dollars. Perhaps Bruce and Laura have a different perspective?
For further discussion on grade, I'll let Bruce and Laura comment on their own, as they have.
Mark Twain, in "Roughing It", described the government's attention to detail with regards to expenditures...
"Those “instructions” (we used to read a chapter from them every morning, as intellectual gymnastics, and a couple of chapters in Sunday school every Sabbath, for they treated of all subjects under the sun and had much valuable religious matter in them along with the other statistics) those “instructions” commanded that pen-knives, envelopes, pens and writing-paper be furnished the members of the legislature. So the Secretary made the purchase and the distribution. The knives cost three dollars apiece. There was one too many, and the Secretary gave it to the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The United States said the Clerk of the House was not a “member” of the legislature, and took that three dollars out of the Secretary’s salary, as usual."
I leave it to you to decide for yourself if that same government was okay with allowing gold planchets intended for coinage to rattle around in the mint without supervision.
It’s fascinating that new mint error discoveries are still surfacing out of nowhere:
The (2) Cent/Dime Mules certified by PCGS.
The Bronze proof Ike Dollar certified by NGC.
The gold Buffalo Nickel certified by PCGS and then NGC.
The 7th known gold Indian Cent certified by PCGS.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@MasonG said:
Mark Twain, in "Roughing It", described the government's attention to detail with regards to expenditures...
"Those “instructions” (we used to read a chapter from them every morning, as intellectual gymnastics, and a couple of chapters in Sunday school every Sabbath, for they treated of all subjects under the sun and had much valuable religious matter in them along with the other statistics) those “instructions” commanded that pen-knives, envelopes, pens and writing-paper be furnished the members of the legislature. So the Secretary made the purchase and the distribution. The knives cost three dollars apiece. There was one too many, and the Secretary gave it to the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The United States said the Clerk of the House was not a “member” of the legislature, and took that three dollars out of the Secretary’s salary, as usual."
I leave it to you to decide for yourself if that same government was okay with allowing gold planchets intended for coinage to rattle around in the mint without supervision.
Personally, I totally agree with your standpoint. But there is also the problem that the mint was also a train wreck of errors regarding gold well into the 20th century. There are multiple cases of clerks and other employees managing to steal thousands in gold deposits and such where the mint knew about these cases and let it slide. Its security was completely lax in this time period and I just read something where a mint clerk stole $10,000 of gold and the mint books showed that nothing happened. Same thing where a bag of double eagles just went missing, and the books were still balanced. However, it seems very unlikely that a coin was coined on an entirely different planchet for this time period.
In the case of this coin, I don't think this was an accident. It's not easy to make this happen especially when the mint never allowed coins of different denominations to even come close to one another- the step of the minting process the coins or planchets were in MUST have been complete before another began. Ex. Silver dollar blanks were completely finished with blanking before the blanking of nickel blanks began.
For a gold planchet to go through the whole minting process, it would have had to go from a melt (of gold) and somehow manage to go through several steps of the process where it shouldn't have been there (nickel), be coined, checked and bagged (where it is likely severely overweight) and then released. Coincidence? I think not.
I see no possible way other than a mint employee aiding this coin along for it to exist. If anyone has any theories, I'd love to hear them. Especially for the cents struck on gold at a time period where planchets were hand fed from tubs into vertical tubes on the press where gold would have stuck out like a sore thumb against copper planchets.
@FlyingAl said:
But there is also the problem that the mint was also a train wreck of errors regarding gold well into the 20th century. There are multiple cases of clerks and other employees managing to steal thousands in gold deposits and such where the mint knew about these cases and let it slide. Its security was completely lax in this time period and I just read something where a mint clerk stole $10,000 of gold and the mint books showed that nothing happened. Same thing where a bag of double eagles just went missing, and the books were still balanced.
If one takes this position, it seems it would be difficult for the government to make the claim that the 1933 double eagles in private possession were obtained illegally.
Either they're keeping track, or they're not. Seems to me, anyway.
@FlyingAl said:
I see no possible way other than a mint employee aiding this coin along for it to exist.
@MasonG said:
If one takes this position, it seems it would be difficult for the government to make the claim that the 1933 double eagles in private possession were obtained illegally.
Either they're keeping track, or they're not. Seems to me, anyway.
Well that's a whole other can of worms there. The whole situation with the $20 coins was after they were minted and counted, and they went missing from a vault.
For coining, and all processes leading up to it, particularly melting, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the mint's policies were very tight as to the regulation of gold. The clerk got away with the ten grand because he took it before the gold was melted and slight losses were expected in that process. I don't think there was ever a scenario where gold, having been melted, was stolen or lost. It was either before, or after, the minting process. Planchets were never mixed, and coins were weighed carefully and counted carefully after coining. This gold nickel, being overweight, likely caused the bag to be off in either count, weight, or both.
And then we get back to the whole question of how on earth this coin exists outside of someone helping it along, which we both agree doesn't make sense in any logical conclusion.
With all due respect, that could apply to any finest known coin pop of 1, any mint error, any pattern, or any unique coin.
Furthermore, look what occurs everytime U.S. gold coins are found in hoards in shipwrecks. Several rare $20 Libs dropped from $250-350k to a fraction of that.
And when hoards of rare dated Saints are discovered in Europe.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@Byers Just wondering, has the Secret Service ever tried to reclaim some of these crazy mint errors like the clover Ike or gold errors? It would be interesting to see if they view these as intentionally created errors intended for later sale.
Not in any way condemning those that choose to collect these, I just wanted to know. It may not be what I want to collect, but many may want to and that's up to them.
You present a great question but it’s a complicated topic and answer.
I don’t know if you are familiar with some famous assisted mint errors that have been around at least half a century, that the SS knew about and it was fine.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@Byers Thanks! That helps a lot! I guess the Secret Service didn’t think these were illegal in the context of the law even though we all seem to agree they are assisted.
That definitely answers my question, thanks again!
I am glad that you found the link useful.
You presented an excellent question.
To complicate things further, many times it is difficult to try to determine if a certain ‘mint error’ was struck intentionally ( mint sport) or accidentally.
A perfect example is the gold Buffalo Nickel.
Other times, such as in the case with the proof Washington Quarter struck on a 1941 Canadian Quarter, it is obvious.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
It was struck on a $5 gold blank planchet, not a $2 1/2.
Yes, it’s fascinating that the gold Buffalo Nickel is also dated 1913.
You are correct- there was access and possibly the same Mint Employees…
The Gold Buffalo was struck on a Type 2 reverse planchet.
Since the Mint authorization for the changeover came on May 6th of that year, actual coining of the new reverse started on May 10.
The Gold Buff could not have been created any time before that date. Does anyone know when the 5 Dollar Gold Indians were struck?
If the same perpetrators that made the 5 1913 Barber Nickels had anything to do with the Gold Buffalo, They had to do it after May 10. Does this smell of upper level Mint official involvement? If it does, we know how the coin COULD have been made. Presumably the same "buds" had a hand in it.
Just some more food for thought.
Peace and Love.
Pete
"I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
It was struck on a $5 gold blank planchet, not a $2 1/2.
Yes, it’s fascinating that the gold Buffalo Nickel is also dated 1913.
You are correct- there was access and possibly the same Mint Employees…
The Gold Buffalo was struck on a Type 2 reverse planchet.
Since the Mint authorization for the changeover came on May 6th of that year, actual coining of the new reverse started on May 10.
The Gold Buff could not have been created any time before that date. Does anyone know when the 5 Dollar Gold Indians were struck?
If the same perpetrators that made the 5 1913 Barber Nickels had anything to do with the Gold Buffalo, They had to do it after May 10. Does this smell of upper level Mint official involvement? If it does, we know how the coin COULD have been made. Presumably the same "buds" had a hand in it.
Just some more food for thought.
Peace and Love.
Pete
@tradedollarnut posted a great CoinWorld article about this a year ago which indicated that on Dec. 31, 1913 there were 50 obverse and 80 reverse dies for the Barber NIckel, so there's more than half a year of overlap during which the Buffalo Type 2 reverse and the 1913 Barber nickel dies were available, assuming the Barber Nickel dies were created before the Type 2 Buffalo dies.
Paul Gilkes said:
Itemized among the completed unused dies slated for destruction, Barber accounted for 50 obverse and 80 reverse dies for his own Barber (Liberty Head) design, and 24 obverse and 72 reverse dies for the 1913 Indian Head 5-cent coin, which succeeded the Liberty Head series.
@BuffaloIronTail said:
Thanks for the info. I would not have thought that any Barber Nickel dies would have been around when the Mint authorized the new Buffalo Nickel.
I thought for sure that they would have been destroyed early on,
Just goes to show you how much I DON'T know.
Guess I should just keep my mouth shut from now on.
Pete
Keep posting! I think this information is rare enough that it’s an important discussion to have!
Ofcourse rare and or unique special exciting coins are sometimes given leeway. Some of these have sold for six and seven figures, some even with the CAC sticker!
Having examined the gold buffalo RAW, in my humble opinion…
It never circulated. It was not found in change or in a junk box.
There are not the typical circulation marks normally found on AU coins. It has retained most of its luster and, as I mentioned in my article… it kind if has a matte frost or look to it!
There is rub on the high points, once again in my humble opinion due to being handled, touched and looked at the old fashion way. Person to person by hand to hand.
Clearly no marks from bouncing in a horse or buggy or even a Ford Model T. No marks from being in a penny arcade machine a century ago.
Ofcourse rare and or unique special exciting coins are sometimes given leeway. Some of these have sold for six and seven figures, some even with the CAC sticker!
Having examined the gold buffalo RAW, in my humble opinion…
It never circulated. It was not found in change or in a junk box.
There are not the typical circulation marks normally found on AU coins. It has retained most of its luster and, as I mentioned in my article… it kind if has a matte frost or look to it!
There is rub on the high points, once again in my humble opinion due to being handled, touched and looked at the old fashion way. Person to person by hand to hand.
Clearly no marks from bouncing in a horse or buggy or even a Ford Model T. No marks from being in a penny arcade machine a century ago.
Having examined the Gold Buffalo carefully before selling it, I grade it AU 53-55 with considerable mint luster still present!
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
It’s definitely almost uncirculated (AU something) with some original luster and test cut.
I believe that due to it’s unique status, the technical numerical grade isn’t critical.
Obviously MS 65 is preferred like on this gold Indian Head Cent:
But then again, this other gold Indian Head Cent in VF 25 and very circulated has very active bidding in GC at the moment.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
I really like errors, shenanigans, assisted USA or world Coinage.
Lately there is a push to retroactively make anything that does not make sense illegal by citing current laws violated decades ago even though these all were accepted and seen as legal to buy sell trade over the decades.
I would be proud to own a gold buffalo 5c, whether fantasy or US Mint error or shenanigans. I dig the Bison Art.
This is a very desirable Buffalo.
I have always said where there is one, there is another. Over the last four decades I have been proven right.
There are 5 1913 Liberty Nickels which were all owned by one Philly Mint employee.
Shenanigans were afoot at Philly in 1913, what else is out there ?
Comments
Here's custom 5c holder auction text :
Note the Five 1913 Liberty nickels also had a 1913 Indian 5c full size copper strike
Unique and Historic Coin Holder
Housed the Five Original 1913 Liberty Head Nickels
(c. 1920) Leather Coin Holder for the Original 1913 Liberty Nickels. For the better part of three decades after their mysterious striking, the five famous, original 1913 Liberty Head nickels traded hands as a set through a chain of ownership that is nearly as intriguing as the nickels themselves. During most of that time, they were housed in this fine leather eight-coin holder, purchased intact from the "Col." E.H.R. Green estate - the legendary nickels in place - by the partnership of Eric P. Newman and B.G. Johnson.
Five of the openings were occupied by the original 1913 Liberty nickels, leaving places for three additional nickels. One was a pattern Type One style Buffalo nickel proof described by Eric P. Newman as from the "regular type," but with broader rims and shorter feathers on the headdress, probably unique. Another Buffalo nickel was an Uncirculated Type Two of regular mintage. The third Buffalo nickel was also a Type Two piece, described as "in copper, Unc., probably unique."
This historic and splendid leather case offered now (without any of the nickels) is inextricably linked to the most celebrated coins of all numismatic lore, carefully preserved and virtually as it was when acquired in 1942. It is made from soft leather over hard paperboard stiffeners, with flaps lined with fine quality satiny fabric, all in black. The case shows only minimal wear on the snap closure and no signs of damage other than a bit of faint edge wear. This authentic case is housed in an NGC archival plastic sleeve.
Ex: Possibly Samuel Brown, before 1919; more likely August Wagner or Stephen K. Nagy, circa 1924; Wayte Raymond, circa 1924; "Colonel" E.H.R. Green; Green Estate; Partnership of Eric P. Newman/B.G. Johnson d.b.a. St. Louis Stamp and Coin Co.; Eric P. Newman; Eric P. Newman Numismatic Education Society.
https://coins.ha.com/itm/miscellaneous/other-collectibles/-c-1920-leather-coin-holder-for-the-original-1913-liberty-nickels/a/1260-15073.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515
@LindyS
That holder is an amazing piece of numismatic history.
Duplicate post
Graffiti and all.
And John Albanese has opined that the graffiti wasn’t the cause of failing CAC, suggesting there are other reasons the coin is not a true gem proof.
One doesn't necessarily follow from the other.
Bruce @tradedollarnut has indicated that 1804 dollars don't CAC in general because they are over graded, including mentioning the Dexter Dollar specifically. If this is the case, the coin could still be "a true GEM Proof" but not CAC because it's not strong "for the grade".
I believe the comment from TDN showed support for a sticker at lower grade level (PF63). Most define gem proof as PF65-PF66.
That's a good point. Gem normally means PR65 and above and @tradedollarnut mentioned it didn't sticker due to being overgraded, along with other 1804 dollars. Perhaps Bruce and Laura have a different perspective?
For further discussion on grade, I'll let Bruce and Laura comment on their own, as they have.
I'll just leave it at I'm glad for unique coins
Mark Twain, in "Roughing It", described the government's attention to detail with regards to expenditures...
"Those “instructions” (we used to read a chapter from them every morning, as intellectual gymnastics, and a couple of chapters in Sunday school every Sabbath, for they treated of all subjects under the sun and had much valuable religious matter in them along with the other statistics) those “instructions” commanded that pen-knives, envelopes, pens and writing-paper be furnished the members of the legislature. So the Secretary made the purchase and the distribution. The knives cost three dollars apiece. There was one too many, and the Secretary gave it to the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The United States said the Clerk of the House was not a “member” of the legislature, and took that three dollars out of the Secretary’s salary, as usual."
I leave it to you to decide for yourself if that same government was okay with allowing gold planchets intended for coinage to rattle around in the mint without supervision.
@Zoins
It’s fascinating that new mint error discoveries are still surfacing out of nowhere:
The (2) Cent/Dime Mules certified by PCGS.
The Bronze proof Ike Dollar certified by NGC.
The gold Buffalo Nickel certified by PCGS and then NGC.
The 7th known gold Indian Cent certified by PCGS.
Personally, I totally agree with your standpoint. But there is also the problem that the mint was also a train wreck of errors regarding gold well into the 20th century. There are multiple cases of clerks and other employees managing to steal thousands in gold deposits and such where the mint knew about these cases and let it slide. Its security was completely lax in this time period and I just read something where a mint clerk stole $10,000 of gold and the mint books showed that nothing happened. Same thing where a bag of double eagles just went missing, and the books were still balanced. However, it seems very unlikely that a coin was coined on an entirely different planchet for this time period.
In the case of this coin, I don't think this was an accident. It's not easy to make this happen especially when the mint never allowed coins of different denominations to even come close to one another- the step of the minting process the coins or planchets were in MUST have been complete before another began. Ex. Silver dollar blanks were completely finished with blanking before the blanking of nickel blanks began.
For a gold planchet to go through the whole minting process, it would have had to go from a melt (of gold) and somehow manage to go through several steps of the process where it shouldn't have been there (nickel), be coined, checked and bagged (where it is likely severely overweight) and then released. Coincidence? I think not.
I see no possible way other than a mint employee aiding this coin along for it to exist. If anyone has any theories, I'd love to hear them. Especially for the cents struck on gold at a time period where planchets were hand fed from tubs into vertical tubes on the press where gold would have stuck out like a sore thumb against copper planchets.
Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.
If one takes this position, it seems it would be difficult for the government to make the claim that the 1933 double eagles in private possession were obtained illegally.
Either they're keeping track, or they're not. Seems to me, anyway.
That's what I think, but what do I know?
Well that's a whole other can of worms there. The whole situation with the $20 coins was after they were minted and counted, and they went missing from a vault.
For coining, and all processes leading up to it, particularly melting, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the mint's policies were very tight as to the regulation of gold. The clerk got away with the ten grand because he took it before the gold was melted and slight losses were expected in that process. I don't think there was ever a scenario where gold, having been melted, was stolen or lost. It was either before, or after, the minting process. Planchets were never mixed, and coins were weighed carefully and counted carefully after coining. This gold nickel, being overweight, likely caused the bag to be off in either count, weight, or both.
And then we get back to the whole question of how on earth this coin exists outside of someone helping it along, which we both agree doesn't make sense in any logical conclusion.
Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.
Would one be wise to buy with caution not knowing when a duplicate or 2 of these unique errors may show up in the marketplace?
With all due respect, that could apply to any finest known coin pop of 1, any mint error, any pattern, or any unique coin.
Furthermore, look what occurs everytime U.S. gold coins are found in hoards in shipwrecks. Several rare $20 Libs dropped from $250-350k to a fraction of that.
And when hoards of rare dated Saints are discovered in Europe.
@Byers Just wondering, has the Secret Service ever tried to reclaim some of these crazy mint errors like the clover Ike or gold errors? It would be interesting to see if they view these as intentionally created errors intended for later sale.
Not in any way condemning those that choose to collect these, I just wanted to know. It may not be what I want to collect, but many may want to and that's up to them.
Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.
@FlyingAl
You present a great question but it’s a complicated topic and answer.
I don’t know if you are familiar with some famous assisted mint errors that have been around at least half a century, that the SS knew about and it was fine.
Here is the link with the full story.
https://mikebyers.com/1949701-013.html
@Byers Thanks! That helps a lot! I guess the Secret Service didn’t think these were illegal in the context of the law even though we all seem to agree they are assisted.
That definitely answers my question, thanks again!
Young Numismatist, Coin Photographer.
@FlyingAl
I am glad that you found the link useful.
You presented an excellent question.
To complicate things further, many times it is difficult to try to determine if a certain ‘mint error’ was struck intentionally ( mint sport) or accidentally.
A perfect example is the gold Buffalo Nickel.
Other times, such as in the case with the proof Washington Quarter struck on a 1941 Canadian Quarter, it is obvious.
The Gold Buffalo was struck on a Type 2 reverse planchet.
Since the Mint authorization for the changeover came on May 6th of that year, actual coining of the new reverse started on May 10.
The Gold Buff could not have been created any time before that date. Does anyone know when the 5 Dollar Gold Indians were struck?
If the same perpetrators that made the 5 1913 Barber Nickels had anything to do with the Gold Buffalo, They had to do it after May 10. Does this smell of upper level Mint official involvement? If it does, we know how the coin COULD have been made. Presumably the same "buds" had a hand in it.
Just some more food for thought.
Peace and Love.
Pete
@tradedollarnut posted a great CoinWorld article about this a year ago which indicated that on Dec. 31, 1913 there were 50 obverse and 80 reverse dies for the Barber NIckel, so there's more than half a year of overlap during which the Buffalo Type 2 reverse and the 1913 Barber nickel dies were available, assuming the Barber Nickel dies were created before the Type 2 Buffalo dies.
Thread: https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1055929/coin-world-article-on-the-1913-lhn-letter-regarding-unused-dies#latest
Thanks for the info. I would not have thought that any Barber Nickel dies would have been around when the Mint authorized the new Buffalo Nickel.
I thought for sure that they would have been destroyed early on,
Just goes to show you how much I DON'T know.
Guess I should just keep my mouth shut from now on.
Pete
Keep posting! I think this information is rare enough that it’s an important discussion to have!
That's gotta be my favorite error of all time! Even cooler than the 43 bronze or aluminum cents...
My YouTube Channel
I like this 1913 Gold 5c obverse image
Bump for 1913 Gold 5c reverse image
I agree! It's a great looking coin and always worth enjoying!
Gold is softer than nickel, so I guess NGC figured that into the grade. Looks AU 50ish with a bean to me.
Pete
Having examined the Gold Buffalo carefully before selling it, I grade it AU 53-55 with considerable mint luster still present!
Good to hear that. Why should I compete with all the established been around done that people. I'm just a soldier in this Army.
I really don't mean to excite anyone or get a reply.
This is a PCGS AU-53:
Pete
And really, no disrespect intended. If taken, I apologize.
Pete
@BuffaloIronTail
Hi Pete!
It’s all good!
It’s definitely almost uncirculated (AU something) with some original luster and test cut.
I believe that due to it’s unique status, the technical numerical grade isn’t critical.
Obviously MS 65 is preferred like on this gold Indian Head Cent:
But then again, this other gold Indian Head Cent in VF 25 and very circulated has very active bidding in GC at the moment.
I really like errors, shenanigans, assisted USA or world Coinage.
Lately there is a push to retroactively make anything that does not make sense illegal by citing current laws violated decades ago even though these all were accepted and seen as legal to buy sell trade over the decades.
I would be proud to own a gold buffalo 5c, whether fantasy or US Mint error or shenanigans. I dig the Bison Art.
This is a very desirable Buffalo.
I have always said where there is one, there is another. Over the last four decades I have been proven right.
There are 5 1913 Liberty Nickels which were all owned by one Philly Mint employee.
Shenanigans were afoot at Philly in 1913, what else is out there ?