Options
1822 Half Eagle- What an interesting coin!
BigE2
Posts: 1,037 ✭
Almost 18,000 minted and only 3 now known.
Couple of quick questions:
how did the 1 in private hands end up in private hands?
and
What is the best reading material on this coin?
Thanks so much!
Couple of quick questions:
how did the 1 in private hands end up in private hands?
and
What is the best reading material on this coin?
Thanks so much!
0
Comments
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Just ask RWB, he is familiar with the work and time it is to read and search for this kind of stuff.
<< <i>Not sure how it ended up in private hands, but I'm guessing there should be good reading material on it in the Eliasberg gold catalog. Just how much reading material are you looking for? >>
Do they have a Cliff Notes version?
This is my favorite rarity, as it was not struck in limited mintage to create a rarity, although the mintage probably includes part of another year mixed in the number.
So there is no definitive book or article on this coin?
Where should I search for the Eliasberg write-up?
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Answers here and here. >>
MrEureka, thanks for the links. The web is becoming more and more useful.
The first and foremost is that John Reich was the "chief" engraver and Robert Scot was the "assistant" engraver.
John Reich was hired on April 1st, 1807 as the "assistant" engraver to Robert Scot, who was the "chief" engraver from November 23rd, 1793 until his death in November, 1823. Reich resigned from the post of "assistant" engraver in late March, 1817.
While I cannot speak about the date these coins were struck due to the progression of the reverse die stages (as I have not studied the series), I can say that it would be a surprise to me if this were the case.
My reason for the last statement is tied to the facts that were stated in the article, namely that all of the 1823 & 1824 dated dies found in the quarter and dime denominations are from over-dated 1822 dies. This is also true for the 1824 date of the $2 ½ denomination and for a few of the half dollar obverse dies as well as to being over-dates although they are over-dated 1821 dies.
When Robert Scot died in November 1823, there were a number of completed, but unused, 1822 and 1821 dies on hand for all of the denominations mentioned above. According to letters written by Dr. Samuel Moore (who was the Mint Director during this time), Christian Gobrecht was hired temporarily to “complete dies” (see The 1827 Quarter reveals its secrets , by Karl Moulton published in B&M Rare Coin Review #146 and edited and adapted for inclusion in the new quarter book on page 177).
It is my contention that Gobrecht merely over-dated all of the available dies with a 4, so the coiner (Adam Eckfeldt) would have already completed dies to work with. Due to the fact that William Kneass wasn't commissioned as the new Chief Engraver until January 24th, 1824, this would allow Kneass some time to get started on engraving new dies and allow production to continue.
I suppose it is possible that there was one $5 1822 dated obverse die lying around that somehow escaped being over-dated by Gobrecht, but as I said, I would be surprised…
The main issue I want to point out is, that not everything posted on line is completely accurate and if you are trying to research something, you need to go further than just copying what you find there and assuming it to be correct.
Someone might find fault with the statements I have made above as well and I have no problem with someone else providing newer more accurate information (provided they have viable documentation to back it up).
QN
Edited to correct the source from Karl Moulton (shouldn't post when I am at work and can't look at my library!)
Go to Early United States Coins - to order the New "Early United States Half Dollar Vol. 1 / 1794-1807" book or the 1st new Bust Quarter book!
Please be aware that there are several misstatements in the article on the ANACS web site.
The first and foremost is that John Reich was the "chief" engraver and Robert Scot was the "assistant" engraver.
John Reich was hired on April 1st, 1807 as the "assistant" engraver to Robert Scot, who was the "chief" engraver from November 23rd, 1793 until his death in November, 1823. Reich resigned from the post of "assistant" engraver in late March, 1817.
While I cannot speak about the date these coins were struck due to the progression of the reverse die stages (as I have not studied the series), I can say that it would be a surprise to me if this were the case.
My reason for the last statement is tied to the facts that were stated in the article, namely that all of the 1823 & 1824 dated dies found in the quarter and dime denominations are from over-dated 1822 dies. This is also true for the 1824 date of the $2 ½ denomination and for a few of the half dollar obverse dies as well as to being over-dates although they are over-dated 1821 dies.
When Robert Scot died in November 1823, there were a number of completed, but unused, 1822 and 1821 dies on hand for all of the denominations mentioned above. According to letters written by Dr. Samuel Moore (who was the Mint Director during this time), Christian Gobrecht was hired temporarily to “complete dies” (see Henry Voigt and Others Involved with America’s Early Coinage, by Karl Moulton).
It is my contention that Gobrecht merely over-dated all of the available dies with a 4, so the coiner (Adam Eckfeldt) would have already completed dies to work with. Due to the fact that William Kneass wasn't commissioned as the new Chief Engraver until January 24th, 1824, this would allow Kneass some time to get started on engraving new dies and allow production to continue.
I suppose it is possible that there was one $5 1822 dated obverse die lying around that somehow escaped being over-dated by Gobrecht, but as I said, I would be surprised…
The main issue I want to point out is, that not everything posted on line is completely accurate and if you are trying to research something, you need to go further than just copying what you find there and assuming it to be correct.
Someone might find fault with the statements I have made above as well and I have no problem with someone else providing newer more accurate information (provided they have viable documentation to back it up).
QN
Quarternut say Dr. Moore was mint director when Christian Gobrecht was hired to complete dies
from the time Scot died – early November 1823 – until Kneass began work on January 29, 1824. As
Moore’s first day in office was July 15, 1824, one might think that quarternut’s timeline is slightly
confused.
Denga
I meant to say that Moore's letter referred to the hiring of Gobrecht by Robert L. Patterson (Moore's Father-in-law) who was Mint Director until July of 1824.
Thank you Denga for the correction.
QN
Go to Early United States Coins - to order the New "Early United States Half Dollar Vol. 1 / 1794-1807" book or the 1st new Bust Quarter book!