Are any known that are ex-jewelry? I have not seen such. One or two with button loops, such as are on Washington Inaugural buttons, would help establish them as contemporary and American.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Are any known that are ex-jewelry? I have not seen such. One or two with button loops, such as are on Washington Inaugural buttons, would help establish them as contemporary and American.
Were pieces like these only made into jewelry in the US? Or was that also a European practice?
@CaptainBlunt said:
1823-Rhode Island newspaper described a Pewter Continental currency piece in detail...
stated they are becoming exceedingly scarce...only found in the cabinets of the curious...
Do you know the specifics about this citation? I've never heard it before, and it is clearly pretty interesting,.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
@CaptainBlunt said:
1823-Rhode Island newspaper described a Pewter Continental currency piece in detail...
stated they are becoming exceedingly scarce...only found in the cabinets of the curious...
Do you know the specifics about this citation? I've never heard it before, and it is clearly pretty interesting,.
Yes, please. Is a photocopy available?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptainBlunt said:
1823-Rhode Island newspaper described a Pewter Continental currency piece in detail...
stated they are becoming exceedingly scarce...only found in the cabinets of the curious...
Interesting. However, it's very easy to imagine, from the author's language, that he knew of the coin, knew of it's rarity, and only ASSUMED that it had been more common in earlier years.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Considering that the Continental Dollar and Rhode Island Ship Tokens both exist in pewter and brass, and likely were made at about the same time, it's worth looking for a connection between the issues. Here's a little background on the Rhode Island:
@MrEureka said:
Considering that the Continental Dollar and Rhode Island Ship Tokens both exist in pewter and brass, and likely were made at about the same time, it's worth looking for a connection between the issues. Here's a little background on the Rhode Island:
The engraving style is not dissimilar... Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home.
That hypothesis would be consistent with the similarities to the RI Ship token, the British practice of sending counterfeit Continental Currency to the US to be spent, as well as a small number of the coins kicking around the US that are highly circ, while loads of high grade pewter, brass and silver dollars were available in London in the 1780s and after (when they were advertised there for sixpence).
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
I remember a fellow drove over from Tampa to meet me at Durty Nellies on the Intracoastal waterway in Ft Lauderdale to look at and buy Continental Dollar from me for if I recall 15k, it's probably worth 4+ times that now. Wow
Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home.
That hypothesis would be consistent with the similarities to the RI Ship token, the British practice of sending counterfeit Continental Currency to the US to be spent
That seems like a stretch. It seems more probable that both issues were struck unofficially and primarily for profit. Same as the Admiral Vernon medals, and maybe even by some of the same people.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Regulated: The engraving style is not dissimilar... Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home. ... That hypothesis would be consistent with the similarities to the RI Ship token, the British practice of sending counterfeit Continental Currency to the US to be spent, as well as a small number of the coins kicking around the US that are highly circ, while loads of high grade pewter, brass and silver dollars were available in London in the 1780s and after (when they were advertised there for sixpence).
I have been making remarks along such lines in this thread, in my references to Odell and to British Intelligence above. Even so, my belief is that the matter was not so simple. The British were too dismissive of the Declaration of Independence and the newly formed U.S. to really learn about the unique culture of the founding fathers. They may not have thought of such an idea.
Here is my tentative theory in abbreviated form!
A- Someone floated a proposal for Continental Currency coins, with descriptions and pictures.
B- Members of the Continental Congress found this proposal to be too impractical to even bother thinking about. During the 1770s, they did not have the resources for a national coinage.
C- British Intelligence obtained a copy of the proposal, and laughed.
D- British Intelligence started spreading rumors about pewter dollars (and perhaps copper halves) to give the impression that the Continental Congress and the American Revolutionaries could not really produce true coins and could not form a true nation.
E- Someone sensed a business opportunity, perhaps a British military officer or someone associated with a pertinent British military officer, and started making the pieces to be sold at a profit. Just a few were made at first and then more were made with the original dies, years later.
"In order to understand the scarce coins that you own or see, you must learn about coins that you cannot afford." -Me
@Analyst said: Regulated: The engraving style is not dissimilar... Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home. ... That hypothesis would be consistent with the similarities to the RI Ship token, the British practice of sending counterfeit Continental Currency to the US to be spent, as well as a small number of the coins kicking around the US that are highly circ, while loads of high grade pewter, brass and silver dollars were available in London in the 1780s and after (when they were advertised there for sixpence).
I have been making remarks along such lines in this thread, in my references to Odell and to British Intelligence above. Even so, my belief is that the matter was not so simple. The British were too dismissive of the Declaration of Independence and the newly formed U.S. to really learn about the unique culture of the founding fathers. They may not have thought of such an idea.
Here is my tentative theory in abbreviated form!
A- Someone floated a proposal for Continental Currency coins, with descriptions and pictures.
B- Members of the Continental Congress found this proposal to be too impractical to even bother thinking about. During the 1770s, they did not have the resources for a national coinage.
C- British Intelligence obtained a copy of the proposal, and laughed.
D- British Intelligence started spreading rumors about pewter dollars (and perhaps copper halves) to give the impression that the Continental Congress and the American Revolutionaries could not really produce true coins and could not form a true nation.
E- Someone sensed a business opportunity, perhaps a British military officer or someone associated with a pertinent British military officer, and started making the pieces to be sold at a profit. Just a few were made at first and then more were made with the original dies, years later.
This sounds like a story Brian Kilmeade and Don Yaeger could turn into a NYTimes Best Seller, like some others they wrote:
These say Continental Currency, not Continental Dollar. The design was copied from a Continental Currency note. Currency is misspelled on some dies. New York is spelled New Yorke. Most are struck in base metal.
Nothing suggests that these were used as money.
Nothing proves that 1776 is the date of manufacture.
Nothing proves that they were struck in the United States.
It is possible that these were made as souvenir medals. Perhaps they were made in some place like Germany.
Sorry, but I have no answers, just thoughts and questions.
These say Continental Currency, not Continental Dollar. The design was copied from a Continental Currency note. Currency is misspelled on some dies. New York is spelled New Yorke. Most are struck in base metal.
Nothing suggests that these were used as money.
Nothing proves that 1776 is the date of manufacture.
Nothing proves that they were struck in the United States.
It is possible that these were made as souvenir medals. Perhaps they were made in some place like Germany.
Sorry, but I have no answers, just thoughts and questions.
They're a fascinating mystery - I just wish that auction catalogues and authoritative references would present them as such, instead of:
"In recognition of the solidarity of the Colonies and their assumption of the right as a sovereign entity to coin their own monies, plans were made to issue a Silver Dollar. Patterns, using designs provided by Benjamin Franklin, were struck in Pewter, Brass, and Silver."
"They were the first silver dollar–sized coins ever proposed for the United States, and may have been intended as a substitute for the paper dollar. One obverse die was engraved by someone whose initials were E.G. (undoubtedly Elisha Gallaudet) and is marked EG FECIT (“EG Made It”). Studies of the coinage show that there may have been two separate emissions made at different mints. The link design on the reverse was suggested by Benjamin Franklin."
"The Continental Dollar was the first pattern struck for the United States of America. Most specimens were minted in pewter, but also known are three in silver and a dozen or so in brass. It is thought that the distinctive designs were suggested by Benjamin Franklin. The reverse design, featuring linked rings, was a plea for insurgent unity, something that the philosopher-scientist constantly brought to people's attention. The obverse sundial motif with its Latin motto ("Fugio") is also characteristic of Franklin.
The design is a rebus, and its component parts may be read as "time flies, so mind your business." This and other pewter specimens were apparently struck for the inspection of members of Congress, who would have to pass enabling legislation before the coinage could proceed.
Elisha Gallaudet, a New York engraver, was the person responsible for translating Franklin's concepts into metal. It is thought that he struck the coins at a makeshift private mint in Freehold, New Jersey. Earlier issues of Continental currency had included a bill worth a dollar.
This practice was suspended in the spring of 1776, apparently because the Congress intended for a new, one-dollar coin to take its place. Based on the Spanish-American piece of eight, the new Continental dollar was to serve as the linchpin of the entire monetary arrangement. The plan failed. The patriots were unable to obtain sufficient silver for the coinage, and by the time the enabling legislation had been passed, the value of Continental currency had begun its descent, emerging as almost worthless only a few years later. Tying a bullion coin to a depreciating currency was obviously a mistake."
Etc., etc.
There are an awful lot of false/misleading statements being made in the above quotes.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Regulated; Capt. Henway; MrEureka Old notation from my files....Providence (RI) Gazette
end of April 1823....that's all sorry- detailed description, comments, etc...
also wrote about other coins...title of the piece was American coin...who knows...
I don't know how accurate the report is....
I remember reading something about these pieces in a German text tens years
after the date of 1776....
April 30th, 1823 - the article describes a pewter Continental Dollar and a 1785 Nova Constellatio Copper, describing both as issues of Congress. Thanks for the citation.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
These say Continental Currency, not Continental Dollar. The design was copied from a Continental Currency note. Currency is misspelled on some dies. New York is spelled New Yorke. Most are struck in base metal.
Nothing suggests that these were used as money.
Nothing proves that 1776 is the date of manufacture.
Nothing proves that they were struck in the United States.
It is possible that these were made as souvenir medals. Perhaps they were made in some place like Germany.
Sorry, but I have no answers, just thoughts and questions.
These say Continental Currency, not Continental Dollar. The design was copied from a Continental Currency note. Currency is misspelled on some dies. New York is spelled New Yorke. Most are struck in base metal.
Nothing suggests that these were used as money.
Nothing proves that 1776 is the date of manufacture.
Nothing proves that they were struck in the United States.
It is possible that these were made as souvenir medals. Perhaps they were made in some place like Germany.
Sorry, but I have no answers, just thoughts and questions.
Interesting point about the use of the word "CURRENCY." Unfortunately, some people use "currency" and "money" and "coin" and other related terms interchangeably.
It's like "engine" and "motor" on an automobile. Unless you are in the trade and know the difference between an "electric motor" and an "internal combustion engine," you don't care.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
These say Continental Currency, not Continental Dollar. The design was copied from a Continental Currency note. Currency is misspelled on some dies. New York is spelled New Yorke. Most are struck in base metal.
Nothing suggests that these were used as money.
Nothing proves that 1776 is the date of manufacture.
Nothing proves that they were struck in the United States.
It is possible that these were made as souvenir medals. Perhaps they were made in some place like Germany.
Sorry, but I have no answers, just thoughts and questions.
Interesting point about the use of the word "CURRENCY." Unfortunately, some people use "currency" and "money" and "coin" and other related terms interchangeably.
It's like "engine" and "motor" on an automobile. Unless you are in the trade and know the difference between an "electric motor" and an "internal combustion engine," you don't care.
Is currency used on any other contemporary coin or discussions for minting coins?
It seems a certainty that currency was copied from the paper note given the similarity, but it would be interesting to know how common the term was used for coins, perhaps in discussion of the paper notes.
@CaptainBlunt said:
Regulated thanks! April 30th, 1823: January 6th, 1823 "New Times" London based newspaper...
may be the original source? for the passage....
That would certainly be consistent with all of the other early references to the pieces originating in Europe. Looking for the "New Times" now...
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Although I have no reason to think it's likely, I wonder if some enterprising individual might have purchased a quantity of Continental Dollars in Europe and passed them as real money in the States.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Funny I actually missed this thread the first time. I remember being fascinated with the orgin of this piece but couldnt remember where. It was actually from a JK archive.
1776 Continental Currency dollar. Newman 1-C. CURENCY. EF Details, Environmental Damage (PCGS). One of the most avidly sought items in the entire early American numismatic canon, the Continental dollar is the only American coin bearing the date 1776 that was struck in that year. Aside from the fact that these coins exist, little else is known. Most of them are Mint State, which suggests a few things. First, they didn't see much use as spending money, perhaps because their pewter composition was deemed to be even junkier than paper, or perhaps because these coin-like objects were hoarded while paper Continental Currency was spent. Second, their survival suggests that many were saved as souvenirs, perhaps by the British troops that ran roughshod over the New York / New Jersey theatre where these are presumed to have been struck. Also, unlike Continental paper, which had built in distribution systems via the pay structure of the Continental Army, these do not seem to have enjoyed the same wide distribution. The upshot of this is that any Continental Currency dollar is quite scarce, but that ones that saw use (thereby increasing their historicity while reducing their market value) are very, very rare. There are no mintage records, so we have no idea how many were struck, how many were melted into bullets, or how many were redeemed alongside the paper issues that these dollars imitate. They were clearly meant to fit into the February 1776 paper money emission that bears the same devices (or, perhaps more accurately, the July 22, 1776 issue that lacks a paper $1 denomination). It's perhaps useful to think of this coin as pewter paper money, with an edge imitative of an 8 reales (popular called a dollar) and obverse and reverse designs that imitate the most numerous issue of Continental Currency.
This example was clearly lost soon after its production and spent some time in the ground. Earthen encrustation clings in areas over the dusky deep pewter gray surfaces. The sharpness is superb, losing some definition in the northwest quadrant of the obverse where the roughness is most severe, else quite crisp. Unlike the pockmarks of powdery corrosion sometimes seen bubbling up and then falling away from even high grade specimens, this piece shows no such gaps and appears entirely stable. Some little marks are seen, none serious. There is some scattered granularity and a minor edge flaw, but the eye appeal is remains very good. The scuffs seen in the reverse image near center are on the slab, not the coin.
Finding a Continental dollar below the $20,000 threshold generally requires settling for a heavily damaged coin, one with pieces of the design missing from corrosion or some kind of other major defect. Evenly worn coins in grades like Very Good and Fine are so rare that most collectors give up before they find one. While most numismatists would love to be able to spend six figures on a pretty Continental dollar, most cannot. A coin like this offers an unusual opportunity to own a specimen of this showcase rarity without requiring a second mortgage.
mark
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@MrEureka said:
Although I have no reason to think it's likely, I wonder if some enterprising individual might have purchased a quantity of Continental Dollars in Europe and passed them as real money in the States.
Without a proclamation from the Continental Congress declaring them to be money, would anybody have taken one as money?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
The engraving style is not dissimilar... Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home.
That hypothesis would be consistent with the similarities to the RI Ship token, the British practice of sending counterfeit Continental Currency to the US to be spent, as well as a small number of the coins kicking around the US that are highly circ, while loads of high grade pewter, brass and silver dollars were available in London in the 1780s and after (when they were advertised there for sixpence).
This was exactly my thoughts--especially given the crown's program of counterfeit paper currency. I'm not saying it happened, just wondering to myself: if the British had the ability and were engaged in such a program already, floating a psychological operations program that is just a minor extension of it wouldn't be too big of a stretch.
If anything, I think that would make these pieces more interesting. "Romantic" might not be the best word, but it doesn't seem wrong either.
We are like children who look at print and see a serpent in the last letter but one, and a sword in the last. --Severian the Lame
@MrEureka said:
Although I have no reason to think it's likely, I wonder if some enterprising individual might have purchased a quantity of Continental Dollars in Europe and passed them as real money in the States.
Without a proclamation from the Continental Congress declaring them to be money, would anybody have taken one as money?
There are enough circulated coins out there to say that people used them as money. However, it's hard to believe that anyone thought they could be passed on a large scale, if they were not money. Therefore, I think that if the coins were not an official issue, they were not made to circulate, and were only passed on a small scale by individuals looking to turn a profit.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
@MrEureka said:
Although I have no reason to think it's likely, I wonder if some enterprising individual might have purchased a quantity of Continental Dollars in Europe and passed them as real money in the States.
Without a proclamation from the Continental Congress declaring them to be money, would anybody have taken one as money?
There are enough circulated coins out there to say that people used them as money. However, it's hard to believe that anyone thought they could be passed on a large scale, if they were not money. Therefore, I think that if the coins were not an official issue, they were not made to circulate, and we're only passed on a small scale by individuals looking to turn a profit.
I honestly do not know if the "circulated" ones actually circulated as money or if they were pocket pieces. Have seen some seriously dreadful pieces.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@MrEureka said:
Although I have no reason to think it's likely, I wonder if some enterprising individual might have purchased a quantity of Continental Dollars in Europe and passed them as real money in the States.
Without a proclamation from the Continental Congress declaring them to be money, would anybody have taken one as money?
There are enough circulated coins out there to say that people used them as money. However, it's hard to believe that anyone thought they could be passed on a large scale, if they were not money. Therefore, I think that if the coins were not an official issue, they were not made to circulate, and we're only passed on a small scale by individuals looking to turn a profit.
I honestly do not know if the "circulated" ones actually circulated as money or if they were pocket pieces. Have seen some seriously dreadful pieces.
I've seen enough heavily circulated white metal Betts Medals to believe anything.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
As noted in part above, the $1 continental currency emission stops with the July, 1776 issue, and does not resume until 1779. All of the 1775 and 1776 emissions until July 1776 included the $1 note. And then it stops. Why??
And how about how the rings overlap properly on the note, but run into each other on the coin?
I would guess that the coin was engraved from a description of the note, not from the note itself.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@Coinosaurus said:
As noted in part above, the $1 continental currency emission stops with the July, 1776 issue, and does not resume until 1779. All of the 1775 and 1776 emissions until July 1776 included the $1 note. And then it stops. Why??
In the spring of 1776, newspapers began to report widespread depreciation of Continental Currency. They didn't just do away with the paper dollar in June of 1776, they killed all the fractionals, as well. That being the case, replacing the low-value paper issues with a coin or token that would have been more expensive to produce makes absolutely no sense.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
@Coinosaurus said:
As noted in part above, the $1 continental currency emission stops with the July, 1776 issue, and does not resume until 1779. All of the 1775 and 1776 emissions until July 1776 included the $1 note. And then it stops. Why??
In the spring of 1776, newspapers began to report widespread depreciation of Continental Currency. They didn't just do away with the paper dollar in June of 1776, they killed all the fractionals, as well. That being the case, replacing the low-value paper issues with a coin or token that would have been more expensive to produce makes absolutely no sense.
By the end of the War the paper dollars had depreciated to the rate of 90 paper dollars to one silver eight reales. Would not the value of the pewter dollars have depreciated at the same rate?
If so, and a pewter dollar was worth just over a hypothetical cent in Spanish dollar terms, maybe it was worthwhile to melt the pewter dollars for their metal.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@Coinosaurus said:
As noted in part above, the $1 continental currency emission stops with the July, 1776 issue, and does not resume until 1779. All of the 1775 and 1776 emissions until July 1776 included the $1 note. And then it stops. Why??
In the spring of 1776, newspapers began to report widespread depreciation of Continental Currency. They didn't just do away with the paper dollar in June of 1776, they killed all the fractionals, as well. That being the case, replacing the low-value paper issues with a coin or token that would have been more expensive to produce makes absolutely no sense.
By the end of the War the paper dollars had depreciated to the rate of 90 paper dollars to one silver eight reales. Would not the value of the pewter dollars have depreciated at the same rate?
If so, and a pewter dollar was worth just over a hypothetical cent in Spanish dollar terms, maybe it was worthwhile to melt the pewter dollars for their metal.
It certainly would be.
However, this still doesn't address the herd of elephants in the room:
1) There's never been evidence that Congress had anything to do with a mint or with striking coins during the War. The failed proposal to establish a mint that went before Congress in 1777 seems to indicate that they hadn't established one in 1776.
2) The claim that Elisha Gallaudet engraved the plates for the June, 1776 emission of Continental Currency is merely a hypothesis. Newman acknowledged a complete lack of evidence for this theory when he first advanced it, and I have yet to see any documentary evidence of Congress paying Gallaudet for this work. Furthermore, Gallaudet was in New York City at the time the plates were engraved (this is according to Newman, 2008), yet Congress was in Philadelphia, as were Hall & Sellers, who printed the notes. The only reason Gallaudet was considered as a possible engraver of the plates for the June, 1776 emission was that Newman reasoned that the same person who engraved the dies for the coin must have been the person who engraved the plates for the paper money, and Gallaudet was the only engraver with the initials "EG" that Newman could locate at the time.
3) The conjecture that the Continental Dollars were struck in the US because the "EG" of EG Fecit fame was Gallaudet, who engraved the plates for the paper money is an example of circular logic.
4) There are no contemporary accounts of Continental Dollars in the United States. The best we can do are references to things that may or may not have even existed, that may (or may not) have vaguely resembled a Continental Dollar.
5) There are European accounts of coins/medals that are much more readily identifiable as Continental Dollars starting in December of 1783. The first of these is the German publication that identifies them as being "in the form of a coin" copying the design of "Pennsylvania" currency. A British advertisement (published prior to 1790) identifies them as medals "representing the paper currency of a dollar". Sarah Sophia Banks, an active collector of modern coins in the late 1700s identifies them as, "never current, struck on speculation in Europe for sale in America." Her example is now in the collection of the British Museum or the Royal Mint Museum.
6) Is there a direct connection with the 1783-dated Betts-614 medal, which shares the reverse design, edge type and composition with the Continental Dollar? Despite being identified as an American product, most of the Betts-614s that I've been able to trace into the 19th Century came out of British Collections.
7) The Continental Dollar appears to be almost completely unknown in the US prior to 1860 - the reference in a newspaper account from 1823 in Providence seems to have originated with a London newspaper. The Mint Cabinet didn't get one until 1897, and no mention of the coins is made in Snowden's 1860 book. Dickeson is unsure about what they are when he publishes in 1859. The two silver examples with provenance prior to 1900 both came from Britain. The first brass example seen also came from Great Britain, as about half of the earliest examples I was able to trace in auctions from the 1860s.
I suspect that there is more information out there, waiting to be discovered. The question is, where is it going to point?
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
The 1823 US Rhode Island newspaper reference referring to these pieces as being "now
exceeding scarce, and only to be met with in the Cabinets of the Curious..."
came from the Derby Mercury March 1786.
Postscript LONDON
starts off with news items from Halifax Nova Scotia
The (firft) first money struck by the (Congrefs) Congress in America is now
become exceedingly (fcarce) scarce, and only to be met with in the Cabinets of the
Curious. They coined (feveral) several Pieces of Pewter of about an Inch and a Half in Diameter,
and of 240 Grains in Weight; on one Side of which were (infcribed) inscribed , in a circular Ring
near the Edge, the words Continental Currency, 1776-and within the Ring a (rifing) rising Sun,
(fhining) shining upon a Dial, with the Word fugio at the Side of it; under which were the Words mind your
(bufinefs) business.-On the (reverfe) reverse, were Thirteen (fmall) small Circles, joined
together like the Rings of a Chain, on each of which was (infcribed) inscribed the Name of (fome) one of
the Thirteen States. On another circular Ring, within (thefe) these, was inscribed-American (Congrefs)
Congress-and in the central Space-We are one.
How it ended up being repeated in an 1823 RI newspaper I have no idea..
@CaptainBlunt said:
7. The 1823 US Rhode Island newspaper reference referring to these pieces as being "now
exceeding scarce, and only to be met with in the Cabinets of the Curious..."
came from the Derby Mercury March 1786.
Postscript LONDON
starts off with news items from Halifax Nova Scotia
The (firft) first money struck by the (Congrefs) Congress in America is now
become exceedingly (fcarce) scarce, and only to be met with in the Cabinets of the
Curious. They coined (feveral) several Pieces of Pewter of about an Inch and a Half in Diameter,
and of 240 Grains in Weight; on one Side of which were (infcribed) inscribed , in a circular Ring
near the Edge, the words Continental Currency, 1776-and within the Ring a (rifing) rising Sun,
(fhining) shining upon a Dial, with the Word fugio at the Side of it; under which were the Words mind your
(bufinefs) business.-On the (reverfe) reverse, were Thirteen (fmall) small Circles, joined
together like the Rings of a Chain, on each of which was (infcribed) inscribed the Name of (fome) one of
the Thirteen States. On another circular Ring, within (thefe) these, was inscribed-American (Congrefs)
Congress-and in the central Space-We are one.
How it ended up being repeated in an 1823 RI newspaper I have no idea..
Interesting.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
So was the original in the European Magazine & London Review? That might explain the identification of the 1785 Constellatio Nova as having been produced by Congress.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
@Regulated said:
So was the original in the European Magazine & London Review? That might explain the identification of the 1785 Constellation Nova as having been produced by Congress.
Just edited/updated my post with links. Yes, the original is on page 214 of the European Magazine & London Review,
vol IX, 1786.
Learn about our world's shared history told through the first millennium of coinage: Colosseo Collection
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Comments
Another piece to the puzzle.
Are any known that are ex-jewelry? I have not seen such. One or two with button loops, such as are on Washington Inaugural buttons, would help establish them as contemporary and American.
Were pieces like these only made into jewelry in the US? Or was that also a European practice?
Do you know the specifics about this citation? I've never heard it before, and it is clearly pretty interesting,.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Yes, please. Is a photocopy available?
Interesting. However, it's very easy to imagine, from the author's language, that he knew of the coin, knew of it's rarity, and only ASSUMED that it had been more common in earlier years.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Considering that the Continental Dollar and Rhode Island Ship Tokens both exist in pewter and brass, and likely were made at about the same time, it's worth looking for a connection between the issues. Here's a little background on the Rhode Island:
coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/RIShip.intro.html
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
See below
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
The engraving style is not dissimilar... Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home.
That hypothesis would be consistent with the similarities to the RI Ship token, the British practice of sending counterfeit Continental Currency to the US to be spent, as well as a small number of the coins kicking around the US that are highly circ, while loads of high grade pewter, brass and silver dollars were available in London in the 1780s and after (when they were advertised there for sixpence).
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
I remember a fellow drove over from Tampa to meet me at Durty Nellies on the Intracoastal waterway in Ft Lauderdale to look at and buy Continental Dollar from me for if I recall 15k, it's probably worth 4+ times that now. Wow
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
Imagine the Continental Dollar as a black op: pewter dollars sent to the US to undermine the credit of the United Colonies/US at home.
That seems like a stretch. It seems more probable that both issues were struck unofficially and primarily for profit. Same as the Admiral Vernon medals, and maybe even by some of the same people.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Same as the Admiral Vernon medals, and maybe even by some of the same people.
The Admiral Vernon Medals were struck from 1739-41 or so - similar style, but different generation.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Regulated:
I have been making remarks along such lines in this thread, in my references to Odell and to British Intelligence above. Even so, my belief is that the matter was not so simple. The British were too dismissive of the Declaration of Independence and the newly formed U.S. to really learn about the unique culture of the founding fathers. They may not have thought of such an idea.
Here is my tentative theory in abbreviated form!
A- Someone floated a proposal for Continental Currency coins, with descriptions and pictures.
B- Members of the Continental Congress found this proposal to be too impractical to even bother thinking about. During the 1770s, they did not have the resources for a national coinage.
C- British Intelligence obtained a copy of the proposal, and laughed.
D- British Intelligence started spreading rumors about pewter dollars (and perhaps copper halves) to give the impression that the Continental Congress and the American Revolutionaries could not really produce true coins and could not form a true nation.
E- Someone sensed a business opportunity, perhaps a British military officer or someone associated with a pertinent British military officer, and started making the pieces to be sold at a profit. Just a few were made at first and then more were made with the original dies, years later.
This sounds like a story Brian Kilmeade and Don Yaeger could turn into a NYTimes Best Seller, like some others they wrote:
I know I would read it
Some things to consider:
These say Continental Currency, not Continental Dollar. The design was copied from a Continental Currency note. Currency is misspelled on some dies. New York is spelled New Yorke. Most are struck in base metal.
Nothing suggests that these were used as money.
Nothing proves that 1776 is the date of manufacture.
Nothing proves that they were struck in the United States.
It is possible that these were made as souvenir medals. Perhaps they were made in some place like Germany.
Sorry, but I have no answers, just thoughts and questions.
They're a fascinating mystery - I just wish that auction catalogues and authoritative references would present them as such, instead of:
"In recognition of the solidarity of the Colonies and their assumption of the right as a sovereign entity to coin their own monies, plans were made to issue a Silver Dollar. Patterns, using designs provided by Benjamin Franklin, were struck in Pewter, Brass, and Silver."
"They were the first silver dollar–sized coins ever proposed for the United States, and may have been intended as a substitute for the paper dollar. One obverse die was engraved by someone whose initials were E.G. (undoubtedly Elisha Gallaudet) and is marked EG FECIT (“EG Made It”). Studies of the coinage show that there may have been two separate emissions made at different mints. The link design on the reverse was suggested by Benjamin Franklin."
"The Continental Dollar was the first pattern struck for the United States of America. Most specimens were minted in pewter, but also known are three in silver and a dozen or so in brass. It is thought that the distinctive designs were suggested by Benjamin Franklin. The reverse design, featuring linked rings, was a plea for insurgent unity, something that the philosopher-scientist constantly brought to people's attention. The obverse sundial motif with its Latin motto ("Fugio") is also characteristic of Franklin.
The design is a rebus, and its component parts may be read as "time flies, so mind your business." This and other pewter specimens were apparently struck for the inspection of members of Congress, who would have to pass enabling legislation before the coinage could proceed.
Elisha Gallaudet, a New York engraver, was the person responsible for translating Franklin's concepts into metal. It is thought that he struck the coins at a makeshift private mint in Freehold, New Jersey. Earlier issues of Continental currency had included a bill worth a dollar.
This practice was suspended in the spring of 1776, apparently because the Congress intended for a new, one-dollar coin to take its place. Based on the Spanish-American piece of eight, the new Continental dollar was to serve as the linchpin of the entire monetary arrangement. The plan failed. The patriots were unable to obtain sufficient silver for the coinage, and by the time the enabling legislation had been passed, the value of Continental currency had begun its descent, emerging as almost worthless only a few years later. Tying a bullion coin to a depreciating currency was obviously a mistake."
Etc., etc.
There are an awful lot of false/misleading statements being made in the above quotes.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Regulated; Capt. Henway; MrEureka Old notation from my files....Providence (RI) Gazette
end of April 1823....that's all sorry- detailed description, comments, etc...
also wrote about other coins...title of the piece was American coin...who knows...
I don't know how accurate the report is....
I remember reading something about these pieces in a German text tens years
after the date of 1776....
April 30th, 1823 - the article describes a pewter Continental Dollar and a 1785 Nova Constellatio Copper, describing both as issues of Congress. Thanks for the citation.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Pinchbeck, the maker of the Vernon medals, remained in the business until 1783.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
D'oh!
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
This has been a great thread to follow
Latin American Collection
Regulated thanks! April 30th, 1823: January 6th, 1823 "New Times" London based newspaper...
may be the original source? for the passage....
Very well said.
Interesting point about the use of the word "CURRENCY." Unfortunately, some people use "currency" and "money" and "coin" and other related terms interchangeably.
It's like "engine" and "motor" on an automobile. Unless you are in the trade and know the difference between an "electric motor" and an "internal combustion engine," you don't care.
Is currency used on any other contemporary coin or discussions for minting coins?
It seems a certainty that currency was copied from the paper note given the similarity, but it would be interesting to know how common the term was used for coins, perhaps in discussion of the paper notes.
That would certainly be consistent with all of the other early references to the pieces originating in Europe. Looking for the "New Times" now...
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Although I have no reason to think it's likely, I wonder if some enterprising individual might have purchased a quantity of Continental Dollars in Europe and passed them as real money in the States.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Funny I actually missed this thread the first time. I remember being fascinated with the orgin of this piece but couldnt remember where. It was actually from a JK archive.
http://www.jkamericana.com/archive/1776-continental-dollar-pewter-pcgs-ef-details#.WXbJL4UpCaM
1776 Continental Currency dollar. Newman 1-C. CURENCY. EF Details, Environmental Damage (PCGS). One of the most avidly sought items in the entire early American numismatic canon, the Continental dollar is the only American coin bearing the date 1776 that was struck in that year. Aside from the fact that these coins exist, little else is known. Most of them are Mint State, which suggests a few things. First, they didn't see much use as spending money, perhaps because their pewter composition was deemed to be even junkier than paper, or perhaps because these coin-like objects were hoarded while paper Continental Currency was spent. Second, their survival suggests that many were saved as souvenirs, perhaps by the British troops that ran roughshod over the New York / New Jersey theatre where these are presumed to have been struck. Also, unlike Continental paper, which had built in distribution systems via the pay structure of the Continental Army, these do not seem to have enjoyed the same wide distribution. The upshot of this is that any Continental Currency dollar is quite scarce, but that ones that saw use (thereby increasing their historicity while reducing their market value) are very, very rare. There are no mintage records, so we have no idea how many were struck, how many were melted into bullets, or how many were redeemed alongside the paper issues that these dollars imitate. They were clearly meant to fit into the February 1776 paper money emission that bears the same devices (or, perhaps more accurately, the July 22, 1776 issue that lacks a paper $1 denomination). It's perhaps useful to think of this coin as pewter paper money, with an edge imitative of an 8 reales (popular called a dollar) and obverse and reverse designs that imitate the most numerous issue of Continental Currency.
This example was clearly lost soon after its production and spent some time in the ground. Earthen encrustation clings in areas over the dusky deep pewter gray surfaces. The sharpness is superb, losing some definition in the northwest quadrant of the obverse where the roughness is most severe, else quite crisp. Unlike the pockmarks of powdery corrosion sometimes seen bubbling up and then falling away from even high grade specimens, this piece shows no such gaps and appears entirely stable. Some little marks are seen, none serious. There is some scattered granularity and a minor edge flaw, but the eye appeal is remains very good. The scuffs seen in the reverse image near center are on the slab, not the coin.
Finding a Continental dollar below the $20,000 threshold generally requires settling for a heavily damaged coin, one with pieces of the design missing from corrosion or some kind of other major defect. Evenly worn coins in grades like Very Good and Fine are so rare that most collectors give up before they find one. While most numismatists would love to be able to spend six figures on a pretty Continental dollar, most cannot. A coin like this offers an unusual opportunity to own a specimen of this showcase rarity without requiring a second mortgage.
mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Without a proclamation from the Continental Congress declaring them to be money, would anybody have taken one as money?
This was exactly my thoughts--especially given the crown's program of counterfeit paper currency. I'm not saying it happened, just wondering to myself: if the British had the ability and were engaged in such a program already, floating a psychological operations program that is just a minor extension of it wouldn't be too big of a stretch.
If anything, I think that would make these pieces more interesting. "Romantic" might not be the best word, but it doesn't seem wrong either.
--Severian the Lame
There are enough circulated coins out there to say that people used them as money. However, it's hard to believe that anyone thought they could be passed on a large scale, if they were not money. Therefore, I think that if the coins were not an official issue, they were not made to circulate, and were only passed on a small scale by individuals looking to turn a profit.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Keep in mind that it probably never paid to melt them, so the survival rate on Continental Dollars could be surprisingly high.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
I honestly do not know if the "circulated" ones actually circulated as money or if they were pocket pieces. Have seen some seriously dreadful pieces.
I've seen enough heavily circulated white metal Betts Medals to believe anything.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Good point.
Apropos the concern over the spelling of "N. YORKE," how about the spelling of "CONNECIt" and PENNSILV?"
I suspect that spelling was much more casual in those days. Here is a map of "PENSILVANIA" that also spells it with two N's and a Y in the label.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania#/media/File:A_mapp_of_ye_improved_part_of_Pensilvania_in_America,_divided_into_countyes_townships_and_lotts.png
It's interesting to note that John Harris, who produced the map was in London. Not that the aforementioned fact suggests anything at all.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
It's a good point that Connecticut and Pennsylvania are also spelled differently:
Paper Currency:
Coin/Medal
Of note, the following difference is also interesting:
The EG Fecit reverse is a closer approximation of the paper money, although it maintains the N. YORKE and PENNSILV spellings.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
C$1 or C€1? Anyone?
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
As noted in part above, the $1 continental currency emission stops with the July, 1776 issue, and does not resume until 1779. All of the 1775 and 1776 emissions until July 1776 included the $1 note. And then it stops. Why??
"CAROLIN" vs. "CAROLa"
And how about how the rings overlap properly on the note, but run into each other on the coin?
I would guess that the coin was engraved from a description of the note, not from the note itself.
In the spring of 1776, newspapers began to report widespread depreciation of Continental Currency. They didn't just do away with the paper dollar in June of 1776, they killed all the fractionals, as well. That being the case, replacing the low-value paper issues with a coin or token that would have been more expensive to produce makes absolutely no sense.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
By the end of the War the paper dollars had depreciated to the rate of 90 paper dollars to one silver eight reales. Would not the value of the pewter dollars have depreciated at the same rate?
If so, and a pewter dollar was worth just over a hypothetical cent in Spanish dollar terms, maybe it was worthwhile to melt the pewter dollars for their metal.
It certainly would be.
However, this still doesn't address the herd of elephants in the room:
1) There's never been evidence that Congress had anything to do with a mint or with striking coins during the War. The failed proposal to establish a mint that went before Congress in 1777 seems to indicate that they hadn't established one in 1776.
2) The claim that Elisha Gallaudet engraved the plates for the June, 1776 emission of Continental Currency is merely a hypothesis. Newman acknowledged a complete lack of evidence for this theory when he first advanced it, and I have yet to see any documentary evidence of Congress paying Gallaudet for this work. Furthermore, Gallaudet was in New York City at the time the plates were engraved (this is according to Newman, 2008), yet Congress was in Philadelphia, as were Hall & Sellers, who printed the notes. The only reason Gallaudet was considered as a possible engraver of the plates for the June, 1776 emission was that Newman reasoned that the same person who engraved the dies for the coin must have been the person who engraved the plates for the paper money, and Gallaudet was the only engraver with the initials "EG" that Newman could locate at the time.
3) The conjecture that the Continental Dollars were struck in the US because the "EG" of EG Fecit fame was Gallaudet, who engraved the plates for the paper money is an example of circular logic.
4) There are no contemporary accounts of Continental Dollars in the United States. The best we can do are references to things that may or may not have even existed, that may (or may not) have vaguely resembled a Continental Dollar.
5) There are European accounts of coins/medals that are much more readily identifiable as Continental Dollars starting in December of 1783. The first of these is the German publication that identifies them as being "in the form of a coin" copying the design of "Pennsylvania" currency. A British advertisement (published prior to 1790) identifies them as medals "representing the paper currency of a dollar". Sarah Sophia Banks, an active collector of modern coins in the late 1700s identifies them as, "never current, struck on speculation in Europe for sale in America." Her example is now in the collection of the British Museum or the Royal Mint Museum.
6) Is there a direct connection with the 1783-dated Betts-614 medal, which shares the reverse design, edge type and composition with the Continental Dollar? Despite being identified as an American product, most of the Betts-614s that I've been able to trace into the 19th Century came out of British Collections.
7) The Continental Dollar appears to be almost completely unknown in the US prior to 1860 - the reference in a newspaper account from 1823 in Providence seems to have originated with a London newspaper. The Mint Cabinet didn't get one until 1897, and no mention of the coins is made in Snowden's 1860 book. Dickeson is unsure about what they are when he publishes in 1859. The two silver examples with provenance prior to 1900 both came from Britain. The first brass example seen also came from Great Britain, as about half of the earliest examples I was able to trace in auctions from the 1860s.
I suspect that there is more information out there, waiting to be discovered. The question is, where is it going to point?
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
exceeding scarce, and only to be met with in the Cabinets of the Curious..."
came from the Derby Mercury March 1786.
Postscript LONDON
starts off with news items from Halifax Nova Scotia
The (firft) first money struck by the (Congrefs) Congress in America is now
become exceedingly (fcarce) scarce, and only to be met with in the Cabinets of the
Curious. They coined (feveral) several Pieces of Pewter of about an Inch and a Half in Diameter,
and of 240 Grains in Weight; on one Side of which were (infcribed) inscribed , in a circular Ring
near the Edge, the words Continental Currency, 1776-and within the Ring a (rifing) rising Sun,
(fhining) shining upon a Dial, with the Word fugio at the Side of it; under which were the Words mind your
(bufinefs) business.-On the (reverfe) reverse, were Thirteen (fmall) small Circles, joined
together like the Rings of a Chain, on each of which was (infcribed) inscribed the Name of (fome) one of
the Thirteen States. On another circular Ring, within (thefe) these, was inscribed-American (Congrefs)
Congress-and in the central Space-We are one.
How it ended up being repeated in an 1823 RI newspaper I have no idea..
Interesting.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
A bit more context from "The C4 Newsletter, Winter 2003, vol. 11, no. 4":
And this looks to be the original:
Here's an image of the cover. There's a digital version linked here with the pertinent content starting on page 214.
So was the original in the European Magazine & London Review? That might explain the identification of the 1785 Constellatio Nova as having been produced by Congress.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Just edited/updated my post with links. Yes, the original is on page 214 of the European Magazine & London Review,
vol IX, 1786.
Fascinating!