The Original 1916 Quarter
BuffaloIronTail
Posts: 7,493 ✭✭✭✭✭
I just have to post this pic because I am so enamored with this design. It just deserves to be seen by those that never viewed it.
Pete
"I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
19
Comments
This is the design that should have been. I personally never liked the type 1 or 2 SLQ, but if they had carried this design all the way through the series it would have been one of the most attractive designs ever produced IMO. Too bad they decided not to use it.
Coin Photographer.
Maybe it would have passed muster if the banner or sash with IGWT on it had been placed strategically higher.
It was cool holding those plasters admiring them in hand at the JustHavingFun auction preview about a decade ago.
Man, that must have really been "Kool With a K".
Pete
Love those dolphins! Thanks for sharing. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall, coinsarefun, MichaelDixon, NickPatton, ProfLiz, Twobitcollector,Jesbroken oih82w8, DCW
Don't know why the Centennial gold piece didn't use this original.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Truly beautiful design... Real art.... Cheers, RickO
In actual production it looks like a design that would have been very difficult to strike fully. It may be appealing in appearance but was rejected as impractical for mass production. The actual adopted design had enough striking problems as it is.
This is true. The original would not have fared well (or looked good) if minted in quantity. It is more of a design based on medal making, and would have fared well if struck as such.
Pete
That is what I call a dual-porpoise design.
That design might look nice, but it’s too much detail for a coin that size. I imagine that it would not have struck up well when the coin was put into mass production. Collectors often lose sight of that factor. It was the reason why the Type II design for the Standing Liberty Quarter failed.
There is more to designing coins that are made for circulation than making them look pretty.
Some historical context:
This was the approved design.
The mint decided last minute to use a modification of the original for the 1916 coinage, and Morgan revised it further for the coinage of 1917 without informing MacNeil. The dolphin design was the design that MacNeil thought would appear on final coinage, I imagine it came as quite a shock when he saw it wasn't used. This led to a revision of the type by MacNeil in 1917, better known as the type two design.
It also seems that the reverse pictured was part of the revisions MacNeil made in 1917 regarding star placement and it has no connection to the dolphin obverse.
Edited to update: this design was not the first design, the first was very similar to the design used. The dolphin design was just the one approved for use.
Coin Photographer.
I love the dolphins!!
MacNeil actually put those Dolphins there on Porpoise.
Pete
Here’s the Heritage link for the sale of this cast, the description contains all of the information one could want relating to this cast:
https://coins.ha.com/itm/standing-liberty-quarters/1916-standing-liberty-quarter-obverse-bronze-cast-uncertified/a/1251-5616.s
Coin Photographer.
I knew something was fishy.