Penny Whimsy: Are proofs really coins or "medal/tokens"
Keyrock
Posts: 961 ✭
While re-reading Penny Whimsy by W.H. Sheldon I stumbled on the following statement which Sheldon makes during his discussion of the grading scale:
"Proof coins were never struck for circulation and therefore, strickly speaking, should not be regarded as coins at all. They belong rather in the class with medallic and ornamental pieces, which are struck on highly polished and specially prepared planchets. Proofs were first used as presentation pieces, principally for politicians, members of Congress and the like. They were regarded as "polished up portraits" of the coinage itself....."
Do most members feel the same?
Rich
"Proof coins were never struck for circulation and therefore, strickly speaking, should not be regarded as coins at all. They belong rather in the class with medallic and ornamental pieces, which are struck on highly polished and specially prepared planchets. Proofs were first used as presentation pieces, principally for politicians, members of Congress and the like. They were regarded as "polished up portraits" of the coinage itself....."
Do most members feel the same?
Rich
0
Comments
Coins are "A small, usually flat and circular piece of metal issued and authorized by a government for use as money." Well proofs are usually flat and circular
The closest definition of token is: "A piece of stamped metal used as a substitute for currency." Proofs ARE authorized as money so are not tokens.
Medals are "A flat piece of metal stamped with a commemorative design, or a religous symbol."
I guess it depends on how you define the terms. They way I read my Websters I would say proofs are coins
To me proofs are simply specially prepared coins, so they are still coins. But they are specially prepared. So by my definition all SMS coins are proofs.
Pete
<< <i>should not be regarded as coins at all. >>
Blasphemy!
Russ, NCNE
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
Is the challange in collecting finding the highest quality of bus. strikes? For example, If you wanted the best state Quarter collection (disregarding mint marks) wouldn't you be happier with a PR69dcam versus a MS69. I know there are exceptions but aren't proof coins supposed to be the best?
truly coins to the degree to which they actually circulated as a group. Proofs
are more like extremely well made representations of coins. In this country,
legal tender has a pretty hard and fast definition, but this may not be true in
the future and is not true in much of the world. For years the Canadian olym-
pic coins were not accepted by the large banks. This effectively made them
to be not legal tender so it would be difficult to consider them "coins"- - at
least at that time. This is not to say that to be a 'coin' that it must stay legal
tender but it must have been at it's issuance, and it must have either circulated
or intended to have been circulated. There are many grey areas in the terms
we use. Take tax tokens for instance. They do fit all the definitions for coins,
they were issued by the government for use as money, they circulated exten-
sively for years. Collectors have chosen to consider them tokens because they
were issued by state government rather than the fed. There's nothing wrong
with thinking of proofs as coins and reasonable arguments can be made that
they truly are coins. But they most assuredly were never intended to circulate.
Try doing that with a token or a metal.
peacockcoins
<< <i>Ok so everyone thinks they are coins, so to look at in another light:
Is the challange in collecting finding the highest quality of bus. strikes? For example, If you wanted the best state Quarter collection (disregarding mint marks) wouldn't you be happier with a PR69dcam versus a MS69. I know there are exceptions but aren't proof coins supposed to be the best? >>
Yes there is a great challenge in finding BUS. Strikes in 69. Fairly rare. A much greater opportunity for them to increase in value compared to a proof. But for sheer eye appeal a proof cannot be beat IMHO. But you cannot say that proofs are the best, only that the quality in striking them is better. It is a matter of individual taste as to which you prefer. Back to the topic: proofs are real coins.Look at it this way, if you can spend it, then it is a real coin plain and simple.
couldn't even be told apart. (it does get difficult sometimes), but in the case of
the states issues there is one huge difference. There are no S-mint business
strikes or P, D-mint proofs. Yes, there are some proof like business strikes, but
if one wants a proof he'll get an S-mint not a proof like. It's still apples and oranges;
One doesn't make apple pie of oranges or marmalade of apples.
Pete,
You can always take a 1/10oz gold coin out and have some $5 fun!
In God We Trust.... all others pay in Gold and Silver!
I just wanted to get my 2 cents in.
Certainly proofs are coins as demonstrated by Braddick. They have a face value and are accepted as coins.
Personally I prefer to collect Business strikes, but that is just me!
And by the way, I would take an MS66 over a PR68 Ike anyday!
JJacks
Websters says a coin is a "piece of metal issued by a governmental authority for use as money." Technically, they weren't meant to be used as money, although legally they can be and certainly have been. So I would like to answer a definite maybe.
Except for Kennedy Proofs, they are meant to be used as tiddly winks. Right MR. RUSS?
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
as coin before it got so worn. It's incredible that no one either noticed or cared that it
had been made as a proof.