<< <i>Lee, the pedigreed set is not named after a user id !! My family's coin collection has been called "The Sunnywood Collection" for more than 40 years. The correct pedigree is "The Sunnywood Collection," an entity which owns the coin. My PCGS user ID was named after the collection, not the other way around. >>
Thats what I was looking for Greg!
I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.
Well Sunnywood good thinks come to those who wait as eye appeal wise IMHO I would much more want to own your example the the technically higher graded Norweb and Lee.
As past the rarity I would tire looking at either of those examples quickly, as they just come across as fillers then something to oogle continually.
If I recall correctly you spotted this 1893-S out of the corner of your eye at a dealers table at a show whom you stopped to visit
To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
I put only so much importance on coin provenances. Even the Eliasberg pedigree is generally well overstated. You have an 1883 No Cents Liberty nickel out of the sale of his collection? BFD. There were 2 1/2 rolls of them and none particularly special among them. This coin, the 1893-S Morgan dollar, is entirely different however. It has long been understood as the business strike key to the series. Eliasberg had the resources to include any of several high quality examples for his set. He deliberately chose that piece. It is among the minority of selections in his collection that are of genuine importance and where the provenance is entirely relevant.
Very great acquisition, Sunnywood! It fits you well. I would also point out that B&M not only chose it to be among the coins on the catalogue's cover, but they devoted 3 pages to the lot. That says something too. I personally prefer the coin over the more documented 1804 dollar and the 1913 Liberty nickel, neither being real coins IMO (though entirely collectible if they float your boat and you can afford them).
As I noted earlier, the coin is somewhat paler in hand, under ordinary lighting conditions. The PCGS image is accurate, but the paler images are also accurate !! It depends on viewing angles and ambient lighting.
RealOne, by the 1890's, the elder Clapp was already procuring many of his contemporaneous coins from the Mint. The Chapman pedigree is more often found on earlier-dated coins from the Clapp estate. In the present case, as noted above, the coin was purchased by Clapp from Philadelphia dealer J. Corvin Randall as part of a group of Morgans that Randall had evidently gathered together for sale to Clapp. This special group included the three branch mint Morgans dated 1892, plus those dated 1893. As first, early or special strikes of the 1893-dated coins would have been sent by the various branch mints to the Assay Commission in Philadelphia, it is often speculated that Randall acquired this group of coins through the Assay Commission. It is also possible, however, that Randall acquired them directly from the various branch mints. The coins all have a special quality, with some appearing to be presentation pieces or special strikings. The 1893-CC, for example, is essentially a proof; the 1893-O is at least specimen quality. These six coins have virtually no field marks, another indication that they did not see the ordinary channels of production. I often wonder how the '93-S acquired the few small ticks on Miss Liberty's portrait, as even they are inconsistent with the virtually flawless quality of the rest of the coin.
Broadstruck, yes it was a stroke of good fortune to run across this coin, seen obliquely across a table, and only barely visible, but immediately recognizable to anyone who had studied the series as obsessively as I had !! Only a crazed collector such as one of us would consider it a blessing to have the opportunity to part with a huge sum in exchange for a silver dollar !!
Sunnywood - your post is the epitome of what I've often said: it isn't necessarily about price, it's about opportunity! You can have all the money in the world to pay the price, but sometimes you just don't have the opportunity to acquire the right coin.
(1) The Lee 1893-S $1 looks much prettier in person than the pictures show. It is indeed a great coin.
(2) Your Eliasberg $1 is awesome. A no brainer purchase. How did you acquire it?
(3) I believe I remember the Norweb 1893-S $1 when Ambassador Henry Norweb showed it to me back in 1972. I recall that it was a toned coin then. Am I crazy?
Hi oreville, I think you are right on all counts. The Vermeule-Lee coin is really nice, and I don't have good images of it. The images posted above were taken from ANR's website when the coin was offered by them at auction in April 2005, and enhanced by me in Photoshop to make them look more like the coin, but they still aren't good images. I hope the new owner gets better images done.
The Norweb coin did have more toning once upon a time. It has been dipped several times. That's why I didn't like it in the PCGS MS67 holder even before the recent NCS conservation and re-slabbing as NGC MS67. That coin has effectively been ruined, as far as I am concerned. People in the coin business should take a page out of the antique and art businesses. In those areas, restoration and repair are two different words, just as conservation and cleaning are two different words in the world of coins. Restoration or repair can add value to something that is damaged, but removing original surfaces and refinishing them is considered terrible practice, and severly impairs value. This is especially true at the very high end.
Unquestionably, there exist coins as well as antiques that benefit from conservation/restoration, both in appearance and value. But to commit such acts on the (once) finest known specimen of a classic rarity, with a famous pedigree to boot, is heresy. Of course it still has some value. An MS64, for example, is still a $250,000 coin, so an impaired MS67 obviously still carries plenty of value. But it has clearly been knocked off the pedestal.
The Norweb coin was the cleanest of three, technically. The Vermeule coin has two marks on the cheek, just left of the ear, but well hidden under the toning. The Eliasberg coin has a number of minor ticks on the portrait, mainly below the eye, and at the tip of the nose. But technical surface cleanliness isn't everything.
Comments
<< <i>Lee, the pedigreed set is not named after a user id !! My family's coin collection has been called "The Sunnywood Collection" for more than 40 years. The correct pedigree is "The Sunnywood Collection," an entity which owns the coin. My PCGS user ID was named after the collection, not the other way around. >>
Thats what I was looking for Greg!
The name is LEE!
<< <i>RealOne, sure you can quote me; I'd be honored.
Here are the best images I could come up with for the conserved Norweb coin, for comparison ...
Cool - another white Morgan. [/eyeroll]
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>Here are the best images I could come up with for the conserved Norweb coin, for comparison ...
Someday, somebody will try and cross it to PCGS. I wonder if they have a body bag all ready for it.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
As past the rarity I would tire looking at either of those examples quickly, as they just come across as fillers then something to oogle continually.
If I recall correctly you spotted this 1893-S out of the corner of your eye at a dealers table at a show whom you stopped to visit
Very great acquisition, Sunnywood! It fits you well. I would also point out that B&M not only chose it to be among the coins on the catalogue's cover, but they devoted 3 pages to the lot. That says something too. I personally prefer the coin over the more documented 1804 dollar and the 1913 Liberty nickel, neither being real coins IMO (though entirely collectible if they float your boat and you can afford them).
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
RealOne, by the 1890's, the elder Clapp was already procuring many of his contemporaneous coins from the Mint. The Chapman pedigree is more often found on earlier-dated coins from the Clapp estate. In the present case, as noted above, the coin was purchased by Clapp from Philadelphia dealer J. Corvin Randall as part of a group of Morgans that Randall had evidently gathered together for sale to Clapp. This special group included the three branch mint Morgans dated 1892, plus those dated 1893. As first, early or special strikes of the 1893-dated coins would have been sent by the various branch mints to the Assay Commission in Philadelphia, it is often speculated that Randall acquired this group of coins through the Assay Commission. It is also possible, however, that Randall acquired them directly from the various branch mints. The coins all have a special quality, with some appearing to be presentation pieces or special strikings. The 1893-CC, for example, is essentially a proof; the 1893-O is at least specimen quality. These six coins have virtually no field marks, another indication that they did not see the ordinary channels of production. I often wonder how the '93-S acquired the few small ticks on Miss Liberty's portrait, as even they are inconsistent with the virtually flawless quality of the rest of the coin.
Broadstruck, yes it was a stroke of good fortune to run across this coin, seen obliquely across a table, and only barely visible, but immediately recognizable to anyone who had studied the series as obsessively as I had !! Only a crazed collector such as one of us would consider it a blessing to have the opportunity to part with a huge sum in exchange for a silver dollar !!
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
(1) The Lee 1893-S $1 looks much prettier in person than the pictures show. It is indeed a great coin.
(2) Your Eliasberg $1 is awesome. A no brainer purchase. How did you acquire it?
(3) I believe I remember the Norweb 1893-S $1 when Ambassador Henry Norweb showed it to me back in 1972. I recall that it was a toned coin then. Am I crazy?
The Norweb coin did have more toning once upon a time. It has been dipped several times. That's why I didn't like it in the PCGS MS67 holder even before the recent NCS conservation and re-slabbing as NGC MS67. That coin has effectively been ruined, as far as I am concerned. People in the coin business should take a page out of the antique and art businesses. In those areas, restoration and repair are two different words, just as conservation and cleaning are two different words in the world of coins. Restoration or repair can add value to something that is damaged, but removing original surfaces and refinishing them is considered terrible practice, and severly impairs value. This is especially true at the very high end.
Unquestionably, there exist coins as well as antiques that benefit from conservation/restoration, both in appearance and value. But to commit such acts on the (once) finest known specimen of a classic rarity, with a famous pedigree to boot, is heresy. Of course it still has some value. An MS64, for example, is still a $250,000 coin, so an impaired MS67 obviously still carries plenty of value. But it has clearly been knocked off the pedestal.
The Norweb coin was the cleanest of three, technically. The Vermeule coin has two marks on the cheek, just left of the ear, but well hidden under the toning. The Eliasberg coin has a number of minor ticks on the portrait, mainly below the eye, and at the tip of the nose. But technical surface cleanliness isn't everything.
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
This is an older thread discussing the Norweb 1893-S $1