Why did the mint seemingly have no problem creating Cameo proof coinage in the late 1800s but rarely did they strike any in the late 1930s early 40s?
jom
The tradition of how proof dies were prepared changed several times at the mint over the years. It was deliberate. The mint experimented with several different proof finishes during the first two decades of the 20th century.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
@oldabeintx said:
Here’s one that may be answerable. The foreign coins accepted as legal tender changed over time and successive coinage acts. Were these changes simply due to assay results or we’re there political motives?
The most significant one that I'm aware of is the 1857 Act that made foreign coins illegal.
I think that any country would have preferred to have only their currency in circulation as legal tender but the U.S. was unable to produce enough coins on a consistent basis and keep them in circulation until the 1850s. Yes, I think that the 1857 change was political and not based on the metal content.
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
The problem with doing a Google search on "P & R.R. Smith" is that all of the results relate to the Dcarr restrikes' except a single link to the sale of the surviving die.
I wonder about the the O mint Morgan Dollar counterfeits, too, not only who but also how were they made so good to be undetected for so long. We know the "why"?
Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
@oldabeintx said:
Here’s one that may be answerable. The foreign coins accepted as legal tender changed over time and successive coinage acts. Were these changes simply due to assay results or we’re there political motives?
The most significant one that I'm aware of is the 1857 Act that made foreign coins illegal.
I think that any country would have preferred to have only their currency in circulation as legal tender but the U.S. was unable to produce enough coins on a consistent basis and keep them in circulation until the 1850s. Yes, I think that the 1857 change was political and not based on the metal content.
Don't forget that the U.S. silver coin supply increased dramatically in the 1853-1857 period after the weight changes of 1853. Look at the mintage figures. A case can be made that foreign silver coinage was simply no longer needed to handle day to day commerce.
BTW, foreign coinage did not become "illegal." It simply lost its "legal tender" status.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@dcarr said:
Maybe not "unanswerable", but "unanswered" at this point:
1) Who made the VAM-listed "privately-made" Morgan Dollars (1896/1900/1901/1902 micro-o & family) ?
2) Who was "P & R.R. Smith" (the dies for this coin exist, but no coins have ever turned up) : ?
I still wonder if the Russians had anything to do with the VAM counterfeits. I have been trying to find a 1923-D or 1930-D dime, commonly attributed to them though I don't think ever proven, to do some serious metallurgical testing of them vs. the VAM counterfeits.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@jacrispies said:
Here is one that stumps me! Is this double struck or a dramatic double profile? If a double profile, it is unique in location and displacement to my knowledge. Clear separation in the eyes and mouth demonstrate double striking qualities. Something going on at the breast line as well. A sight to see nonetheless!
I vote double struck because of the two shield clashes under the ear.
Striking a planchet does not cause clash marks.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@Married2Coins Taking a look at the ear section, there does seem to be some doubling in the hair. Tough to differentiate the clash marks but they seem relatively similar to comparable die states of the same marriage.
I think there are effects of both double striking and machine doubling. Perhaps the die bounced after the first strike and shifted, producing a unique combo of the two.
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you" Matthew 6:33. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.
BHNC #AN-10
JRCS #1606
@MsMorrisine said:
why is the end of the blank die conical before pressing into the working hub?
I believe (from observation only) it is because the face of a coin is slightly concave, or dished, which makes the face of a die slightly convex, or domed, and since the hub has the same topography as the coin the conical shape of the die blank helps it achieve that convex shape.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
The tradition of how proof dies were prepared changed several times at the mint over the years. It was deliberate. The mint experimented with several different proof finishes during the first two decades of the 20th century.
The most significant one that I'm aware of is the 1857 Act that made foreign coins illegal.
I think that any country would have preferred to have only their currency in circulation as legal tender but the U.S. was unable to produce enough coins on a consistent basis and keep them in circulation until the 1850s. Yes, I think that the 1857 change was political and not based on the metal content.
The problem with doing a Google search on "P & R.R. Smith" is that all of the results relate to the Dcarr restrikes' except a single link to the sale of the surviving die.
I wonder about the the O mint Morgan Dollar counterfeits, too, not only who but also how were they made so good to be undetected for so long. We know the "why"?
Don't forget that the U.S. silver coin supply increased dramatically in the 1853-1857 period after the weight changes of 1853. Look at the mintage figures. A case can be made that foreign silver coinage was simply no longer needed to handle day to day commerce.
BTW, foreign coinage did not become "illegal." It simply lost its "legal tender" status.
I still wonder if the Russians had anything to do with the VAM counterfeits. I have been trying to find a 1923-D or 1930-D dime, commonly attributed to them though I don't think ever proven, to do some serious metallurgical testing of them vs. the VAM counterfeits.
Striking a planchet does not cause clash marks.
@Married2Coins Taking a look at the ear section, there does seem to be some doubling in the hair. Tough to differentiate the clash marks but they seem relatively similar to comparable die states of the same marriage.
I think there are effects of both double striking and machine doubling. Perhaps the die bounced after the first strike and shifted, producing a unique combo of the two.
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you" Matthew 6:33. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.
BHNC #AN-10
JRCS #1606
why is the end of the blank die conical before pressing into the working hub?
I believe (from observation only) it is because the face of a coin is slightly concave, or dished, which makes the face of a die slightly convex, or domed, and since the hub has the same topography as the coin the conical shape of the die blank helps it achieve that convex shape.
TD