When did collecting coins by Mint Mark become popular?

braddick

I know in the early days collectors did not care too much about where a coin was minted. They collected by date. When did the location of the Mint a coin was produced at become important and desirable?

Secondly, do you believe collectors today place too much importance on a coin's minted location?

Walmann

Bumped the thread regarding this from a few months back.

The importance of a mintmark is legit. The relevance of mintage and rarity martters.

Link to thread in case you missed the bump

Coxe

A.G. Heaton published his treatise on mint marks in 1893. Prior to that, the "better" collectors were in the know to avoid the branch mint coins as inferior products. That higher echelon attitude prevailed for decades. Even into the 1970s, a typical 19th century series date set that went to auction generally had mostly Philadelphia coins and proofs wherever possible. Branch mint gold was probably the first area to gain respect. Part was due to the gold rush mystique, part due to the long gone Dahlonega and Charlotte mints, and part due to recognized rarity. Collecting by mint mark largely was a trickle up phenomenon from the average collector pulling from circulation though. It was certainly already popular 15 years after Heaton's publication. Evidence is in the retention of the 1909-S VDB cents. However, that also could have been the first year of the series effect too. We know some of the lower mintage cousins to follow it were not overwhelmingly saved in quantity in UNC.

As tot he second question, except for ultramoderns, I do not see too much attention being paid to the individual mints. The tide is flowing toward die vairieties and die states/stages. The mint then has definite relevance. For the most recently minted products? The mintages are way too high and the quality balanced universally today. I can't see the distinction being as important. However, to complete a set, of course each is needed.

pcgs69

My guess is probably around 1825