Options
Judd-unlisted, Pollock-unlisted 1876 Sailor Head pattern hub trial
jonathanb
Posts: 3,421 ✭✭✭✭✭
There was a thread recently about collecting for condition versus collecting for rarity. I think this one is pretty comfortably in the "collecting for rarity" side of things. There are only two known by type, and the other is in the Smithsonian. How's that? :-)
The "Sailor Head" patterns by Charles Barber were produced in 1875 through 1877 in a variety of denominations. They're rare individually, typically in the R-7 range (4-12 known) for most types. In addition to the "normal patterns" (add that one to your list of numismatic oxymorons), Judd and Pollock list a single hub trial in their respective appendixes -- Judd A1877-9/Pollock 3443. That single piece was in the Chase Manhattan Bank collection, and is now in the Smithsonian.
Unless someone can prove me wrong, I think I now have a second hub trial, new to the numismatic community.
The obverse of the 1876 piece has significant damage (Mint cancellations?), but it's clear that the design is very similar to the listed 1877 hub trial. The designs are not identical. Besides the obvious presence/absence of a date, there are other minor variations including the positioning of the crown relative to stars 6 and 7. The reverse legends appear to be hand-punched on both specimens, with strange letter misalignments in several places including M-E-R of AMERICA.
Both the listed 1877 piece and the new 1876 piece are noteworthy in that they represent failed designs. Of the known dollar-sized patterns, some have no stars and some have stars to either side with IN GOD WE TRUST above the bust. None of the known struck patterns has a complete arc of stars over the head.
The 1876 piece is slightly out of round, with diameter from 43.7 to 44.8 mm. That's basically a dead-on match to the 1877 piece (1.728 inches = 43.9 mm).
The 1876 piece weighs 30.48 grams (470.4 grains), which is significantly less than the 1877 specimen (755.9 grains = 48.98 grams). I'm not entirely sure I believe that weight for the 1877 piece, since it would require a disk that was nearly 4 mm thick, which is thick enough that it's surprising that neither Judd nor Pollock commented on the thickness.
The "Sailor Head" patterns by Charles Barber were produced in 1875 through 1877 in a variety of denominations. They're rare individually, typically in the R-7 range (4-12 known) for most types. In addition to the "normal patterns" (add that one to your list of numismatic oxymorons), Judd and Pollock list a single hub trial in their respective appendixes -- Judd A1877-9/Pollock 3443. That single piece was in the Chase Manhattan Bank collection, and is now in the Smithsonian.
Unless someone can prove me wrong, I think I now have a second hub trial, new to the numismatic community.
The obverse of the 1876 piece has significant damage (Mint cancellations?), but it's clear that the design is very similar to the listed 1877 hub trial. The designs are not identical. Besides the obvious presence/absence of a date, there are other minor variations including the positioning of the crown relative to stars 6 and 7. The reverse legends appear to be hand-punched on both specimens, with strange letter misalignments in several places including M-E-R of AMERICA.
Both the listed 1877 piece and the new 1876 piece are noteworthy in that they represent failed designs. Of the known dollar-sized patterns, some have no stars and some have stars to either side with IN GOD WE TRUST above the bust. None of the known struck patterns has a complete arc of stars over the head.
The 1876 piece is slightly out of round, with diameter from 43.7 to 44.8 mm. That's basically a dead-on match to the 1877 piece (1.728 inches = 43.9 mm).
The 1876 piece weighs 30.48 grams (470.4 grains), which is significantly less than the 1877 specimen (755.9 grains = 48.98 grams). I'm not entirely sure I believe that weight for the 1877 piece, since it would require a disk that was nearly 4 mm thick, which is thick enough that it's surprising that neither Judd nor Pollock commented on the thickness.
0
Comments
What a way to cancel a die. Covered the eyes with two passes, close enough on the nose and chin and a few more passes for good measure.
Too bad, might have been a nice Liberty by Barber.
The b/w Liberty depiction of Liberty has an un-natural relationship between the jaw line and the chin. Strange.
A related question is what I truly should have paid for it. Beats me on that one. The only other on is in the Smithsonian. Before that it was in the Chase Manhattan Bank collection. No auction records. At all. I'm pretty sure that it's worth more than $100 and less than $100,000. Gee, isn't that helpful.
I'm not planning on selling it, so I guess we won't find out.
Freddie
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Very cool jonathanb! Thank you for sharing!!
That is a really big difference in weight. I wonder if a request can be sent to the Smithsonian to confirm the weight (or thickness) of their example?
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Is this now, or will this be in the future, listed in Judd or Pollock?
Neat piece. Best of luck on authenticating it.
<< <i>I only have one question.... where was Daniel Carr when this was minted!
Does Dan's process even use hubs? If Dan was around I'm not sure this piece would even exist
I like it as it is, and that's fine enough for me. :-)