CW article on the Bashlow Confederate Cent Restrikes...

MrEureka

Did you read the article? Are you convinced that the fakes are not from transfer dies? I'm not. To me, it looks like they're transfer dies, that there was a loss of detail and relief in the process, and that that created the illusion that the chisel marks moved a bit. I attribute this to the likelihood that the chisel entered the original die at an angle. Am I missing something?

Edited to add that it's also possible that the die damage evident on the "master coin" may have been cleaned up a bit before the transfer dies were created.

crypto79

As far as I am concerned even the originals are fake coins and are no different D Carr's 64d pieces. Fakes of fakes doesn't interest me.

MrEureka

As far as I am concerned even the originals are fake coins and are no different D Carr's 64d pieces.

The Bashlow restrikes are from the original dies. While I don't like them either, they're not the same as the Carr 64's.

crypto79

<< <i> As far as I am concerned even the originals are fake coins and are no different D Carr's 64d pieces.

The Bashlow restrikes are from the original dies. While I don't like them either, they're not the same as the Carr 64's. >>



They are from "original" dies but for a coin that was never used and the dies were originally a trial at best, made after the fact for a country that never existed = Fantasy Piece

The coin is around because they have demand form collectors not because they had a purpose in commerce. No different than say-D Carr's Ameros might be a better way to think about it as the 64 d is kind of a copy of a real coin. I am not saying they aren't collectable but I compare your theory to a restrike of the Amero years later using D Carrs dies saying they are original dies.

ambro51

The original dies were fragile and Robert Bashlow knew that. He took them to A.G. Frank Company in Philadelphia, and had transfer dies made from them. The CSA cent Bashlow Restrikes are NOT done from the original dies, but these transfer die copies. This is difficult to see but when you really look at the pieces with 10X you see that the lettering, and devices, are somewhat rounded as they break from the fields. That is a by product of the transfer die manufacture. Also, the designers initial "L" which is on the right hand cotton bale on the reverse is very lightly struck, a result of the lower striking pressures. Slightly over 30,000 of these were stuck, most in copper.

Bashlow, to his credit, donated the original Lovett dies to the Smithsonian after he was done working with them, c. 1961/62.

The original dies, which broke when Haseltine was doing his copper restrikes in 1874, only lasted for about 60-70 pieces, most in copper but a few in silver a fewer still in gold. Haseltine did not strike any in the original weight/compositon of the original Lovett cent, which was copper nickel (and probably struck on federal one cent blanks which had somehow 'left the mint'). Bashlow used the extraordinary measure of making all his tokens piedfort, so they cannot every be mistaken for an original piece.

I dont have a current redbook, but in a recent listing on Heritage of a near complete set of Bashlow test strikes for the cent, it is mentioned they are on page XXX of the Redbook. Are they finally listed??

Their popularity had been on a steady increase. One factor no doubt is that they are the only Confederate coin that is available to the average collector. Also, the Bashlow CSA Half Dollars...which are of a much smaller (but unknown) mintage, are becoming more popular, and even though they have a different reverse, they look very much like the original CSA restrike of 1879 down to the rust patches found on the die back then. Very neat coin.

BillJones

There is also the Scott restrike of the Confederate half dollar which was done in the mid 1870s. That one was from the original dies and was made from 1861-O half dollars that had the reverses planed off and then struck with the Confederate die. Some collectors poo-poo that, but it's the closest most of us will ever get to the original Confederate half dollar of which only 4 or 5 are known.

I've got one of the 500 pieces that Scott company claimed to have made, but I don't have a picture of it to post. I'll have fix that one of these days.

crypto79

It should also be noted that Robert Lovett was a drunk trades Man and the "an official of the Confederate States of America contacted Bailey & Co. of Philadelphia" story isn't really well substantiated and to me has the ring of a late 1870's well managed coin promotion, not much different then what dealers do today to drum up interest. The dies were made as a hodgepodge of existing design elements combined in a cheap size. The whole thing reeks of people making a story to fit what they want to be true instead of just facts. If D Carr spends an Amero and sell the dies we could see a similar "an official of the Unified States of the Americas contacted the Moon light Mint" As if making a penny would add something to their cause. It laughable, but were expected to believe the same story as if J Davis was like "if only we had a penny the tide would turn". Silly IMO

The Facts are: there is no proof or history of these till a decade after the War and everything goes through John Haseltine who made money off of them and sold the originals and the restrikes at the same time. These have been proped up by dealers and collector didn't take notice till it got harder to prove the story wrong with time. If John Haseltine's only connection to make the coins legitimate is a broke drunk then I say we should question everything as it sure wouldn't stand up in court.

SportsModerator

I think that they are pretty cool to own. I have this mini set in the original 1960's Bashlow holder. They are the closest thing to owning anything that resembles Confederate coinage, so what's the harm?

crypto79

<< <i>I think that they are pretty cool to own. I have this mini set in the original 1960's Bashlow holder. They are the closest thing to owning anything that resembles Confederate coinage, so what's the harm? >>



History confusing fun make believe souvenirs with tangible relics and having the original people dead to sort it out. Same reason people think the coins from 1870 are more legitimate then they probably are. People today think that because they are from a time close to the real deal that it given them credence because they forget that there was an era on almost immediate nostalgia for all things Confederate after the war and lots of people looking for ways to make money off of it.

IMO

The only confirmed real CSA coins are the
1861 O,D,C coinage and even then to guess what delineates which is which when they took over the mints by die state is tough and a guess at best with the only slam dunk coin being the 1861D dollar. The Conrad Schmidt half dollars were patterns made from real coins as gifts for officials if not in an official Government action.

SportsModerator

<< <i>History confusing fun make believe souvenirs with tangible relics >>



I feel that my humble collection is now somewhat 'tainted' having read that. Talk about taking the fun out of something. I guess collecting issues commemorating John Lennon from obsure islands that he never even visited have far greater historical importance to numismatics. Actually, I shouldn't say that. I'm a firm believer that people should collect whatever brings them pleasure and enjoyment whether its a circulating issue, a NCLT coin, or souvenir trinkets of the Confederacy produced by a drunk (so it is alleged). Go fot it people and have fun!!

Zoins

<< <i>Bashlow, to his credit, donated the original Lovett dies to the Smithsonian after he was done working with them, c. 1961/62. >>



50 years later, the Smithsonian added to the history of these pieces by producing a set in platinum, gold, silver and copper. I just ran across these but it's been interesting to see the Smithsonian get active in minting historical pieces.

These look like they are from brand new dies, so it's interesting they don't need COPY per the HPA. I'm guessing adding the "SI" initials under the T in CENT is good enough.

From auction sales, it also looks like there's some interest in these so it's another set to be aware of. Here are some photos from a Great Collections auction where the set went for $1,250 ($1.375 with fees) on April 29, 2012.

SullivanNumismatics

It's funny how many copies of this issue have been made. The Haseltine restrikes, the Bashlow restrikes, and now the Smithsonian has come out with their own set.

NumisOxide

I like that Bashlow did these and other so-called restrikes.

SullivanNumismatics

<< <i>I like that Bashlow did these and other so-called restrikes.

>>

I agree, those are interesting hub impressions. The one I have is in copper.