Options
1795 "9 leaves" eagle: 16+ specimens and price graph
yosclimber
Posts: 5,035 ✭✭✭✭✭
Continuing the fun of trying to identify a moderate number of unique specimens for semi-famous rarities, I looked at the 1795 "9 leaves" eagle.
Using online photos mostly linked from the excellent resource
http://www.pcgs.com/auctionprices/details.aspx?r=8551&v=9+leaves&dv=1795&pf=ms&c=63&g=0
I believe I have identified at least 16 different specimens. Several links were established by comparing online photos.
Much more work could be done, by using auction catalogs from 2002 and earlier, since many of those photos are not online.
I graphed available prices for the identified specimens. (The ~MS64 Bass specimen is notably missing since I don't know its original purchase price at present).
(screen shot of first 36 of 56 rows)
My current data table is just an expanded version of the PCGS Auction Records table.
It includes similar reference links and is available as an Excel file which includes the graph.
My prior similar project was the 1802 half dime:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/937249/1802-half-dime-provenance-top-9-specimens
Here are some of the questions still to be answered:
1 Bass specimen - what evidence might link it to the 1970 Pradeau specimen?
2 Bass specimen - what did he pay in 1971?
3 Clifton Wild registry set (PCGS MS63) - does this link to other known specimens? Photo?
4 Bonham's 2013 specimen - was this slabbed? (description is vague but mentions "details")
5 Magnolia - does anyone have a better photo?
6 Magnolia - was it ever recovered after being lost in transit?
7 Bowers & Merena AU58 1/05 - does this link to Husky?
8 2002 & earlier - many specimens might link to list, but most photos are not online. Anyone with catalogs who can help?
9 Black & Bielenda planchet voids - planchets created with dies vs. struck-through debris? (See 8/26 posts)
Using online photos mostly linked from the excellent resource
http://www.pcgs.com/auctionprices/details.aspx?r=8551&v=9+leaves&dv=1795&pf=ms&c=63&g=0
I believe I have identified at least 16 different specimens. Several links were established by comparing online photos.
Much more work could be done, by using auction catalogs from 2002 and earlier, since many of those photos are not online.
I graphed available prices for the identified specimens. (The ~MS64 Bass specimen is notably missing since I don't know its original purchase price at present).
(screen shot of first 36 of 56 rows)
My current data table is just an expanded version of the PCGS Auction Records table.
It includes similar reference links and is available as an Excel file which includes the graph.
My prior similar project was the 1802 half dime:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/937249/1802-half-dime-provenance-top-9-specimens
Here are some of the questions still to be answered:
1 Bass specimen - what evidence might link it to the 1970 Pradeau specimen?
2 Bass specimen - what did he pay in 1971?
3 Clifton Wild registry set (PCGS MS63) - does this link to other known specimens? Photo?
4 Bonham's 2013 specimen - was this slabbed? (description is vague but mentions "details")
5 Magnolia - does anyone have a better photo?
6 Magnolia - was it ever recovered after being lost in transit?
7 Bowers & Merena AU58 1/05 - does this link to Husky?
8 2002 & earlier - many specimens might link to list, but most photos are not online. Anyone with catalogs who can help?
9 Black & Bielenda planchet voids - planchets created with dies vs. struck-through debris? (See 8/26 posts)
1
Comments
My mentor in the coin business -- dealer Jim McGuigan -- always said that he thought there were a few more 9 leaf specimens out there waiting to be found, because in olden times the 9 leaf wasn't a big deal to most collectors and dealers, and so they never noted it.
Jim's theory might be correct, but they are still pretty darn scarce. And nearly all were struck on pockmarked, inferior planchets.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>The chart may be a bit clearer if scaled linearly rather than logarithmically, but I think this is a great way to view the relative pricing data. >>
The linear scale helps a person figure out the price value at a point not near a gridline.
(But if viewing the graph in Excel, you can hover your mouse at the point and it will show the price value).
I like the log scale, because if prices are growing roughly at a percentage-change trend over time, the log graph yields a straight line, while linear is a curve.
In these data, often there are only 2 prices observed, so the line looks straight either way!
The exception is the MS60 Black specimen, which does show a curved growth line over time (in its last 4 appearances).
<< <i>Good luck figuring out what 50 years worth of data means at this level, other than price is going up. Except for that stinker blue X. Dang him! >>
:-)
I agree, it gets interesting when the "lines cross"! (Ghostbuster: "Don't cross the streams!")
This could be due to a price drop (either earlier price too high, later price too low, or some of both?)
The lines can also cross if a lower graded specimen gets bid up, and gets temporarily above the trend line of a better specimen.
In this situation, it's important to have the natural scale of the graph set so that we have straight lines if normal price growth is on a percent increase basis.
For example, see the Black vs. Hilt specimen in the above 2 graphs.
In the log scale graph, Black is mostly above Hilt.
In the linear scale graph, Black is mostly below Hilt.
(Of course valuing a MS60 vs. AU58 specimen will always be subjective).
<< <i>My mentor in the coin business -- dealer Jim McGuigan -- always said that he thought there were a few more 9 leaf specimens out there waiting to be found, because in olden times the 9 leaf wasn't a big deal to most collectors and dealers, and so they never noted it.
Jim's theory might be correct, but they are still pretty darn scarce. >>
Yes. Apparently Newcomer noticed the difference and paid $100 for the Granberg/Woodin VF example in 1926, which was a premium over a normal price.
After being mentioned in a 1934 Numismatist article, apparently the variety was largely forgotten until the 1960 New Netherlands "Cicero" auction when Breen resurrected it.
<< <i>And nearly all were struck on pockmarked, inferior planchets. >>
Judging from the photos and descriptions, the following 4-5 specimens have planchet voids (or possible struck through debris?):
- AU55 Essex Palm / CSNS Chicago "planchet voids" - upper left field and chin, rev under left leaves
- EF Cicero / Kagin (Breen 3) "severe planchet defects" - might possible be the same example as above, but I don't have photos of it
- MS60 Black - in lower left field and at star 13
- AU50 Bielenda - in lower left field - partly matches the above, which makes me wonder about struck-through debris?
- AU50 ANR - in left field
- maybe some on AU58 Hilt, but I'm not sure from the photos
Could these be planchet defects created by some die?
Or do you think it is struck-through debris?
<< <i>Dave,
<< <i>My mentor in the coin business -- dealer Jim McGuigan -- always said that he thought there were a few more 9 leaf specimens out there waiting to be found, because in olden times the 9 leaf wasn't a big deal to most collectors and dealers, and so they never noted it.
Jim's theory might be correct, but they are still pretty darn scarce. >>
Yes. Apparently Newcomer noticed the difference and paid $100 for the Granberg/Woodin VF example in 1926, which was a premium over a normal price.
After being mentioned in a 1934 Numismatist article, apparently the variety was largely forgotten until the 1960 New Netherlands "Cicero" auction when Breen resurrected it.
<< <i>And nearly all were struck on pockmarked, inferior planchets. >>
Judging from the photos and descriptions, the following 4-5 specimens have planchet voids (or possible struck through debris?):
- AU55 Essex Palm / CSNS Chicago "planchet voids" - upper left field and chin, rev under left leaves
- EF Cicero / Kagin (Breen 3) "severe planchet defects" - might possible be the same example as above, but I don't have photos of it
- MS60 Black - in lower left field and at star 13
- AU50 Bielenda - in lower left field - partly matches the above, which makes me wonder about struck-through debris?
- AU50 ANR - in left field
- maybe some on AU58 Hilt, but I'm not sure from the photos
Could these be planchet defects created by some die?
Or do you think it is struck-through debris? >>
I hadn't actually considered that it would be material that was adhering to the die.
Those photos are intriguing!
thanks for sharing
raja
<< <i>Can't afford them anyway so I will leave.
:-)
Buying an actual specimen is out of my price range, too.
But collecting the photos is free!
Dave: <<I hadn't actually considered that it would be material that was adhering to the die.
... Those photos are intriguing! >>
The notion of a 'strike-through' refers to both loose material that somehow ends up resting on a die or planchet AND to foreign matter that is adhering to a die. Heavily polished dies were often sticky. In an era before vacuum cleaners, various pieces of lint or cloth were about the work area. Many Proof coins from the late 1850s are characterized by strike-throughs. So called lint marks on dozens or hundreds of 19th century Proof gold coins are relevant.
There are strike-throughs on Proof 1802 silver dollars.
Thank you for sharing your detailed research with the situation of very similar indentations in the Lee and Norweb specimens of 1802 proof novodels.
(a small part of the evidence in the linked 2012 article).
It's always great to receive observations from an experienced numismatist on potentially complex questions like this.
Latin American Collection
I have now thought much more about 1795 '9 Leaves' Eagles since this thread originated. Does anyone in this forum care about my thoughts in this regard?
1) The assigned "MS-63+" grade does not reveal that the Pogue piece is a very dynamic coin. It is semi-prooflike and is very lively. It might be worth multiples of others that have been auctioned over the last two years.
2) Do any members of this forum have a clear recollection of the Bass piece? Is it semi-prooflike? Does it have any substantial problems? How would experts grade it in 2015?
3) I explored the mystique of the 1795 '9 Leaves'! Historically, it has been considered to be much more than just another die variety. People who collect Bust Eagles 'by date' tend to demand both a '13 Leaves' coin and a '9 Leaves' coin. Does this make sense to the members of this forum? Should the '9 Leaves' Eagle be deemed a separate date? I am not expressing an opinion here. I am asking a question.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Collection, Part 7: The Mystique of the 1795 Nine Leaves $10 Gold Coin
insightful10@gmail.com
> 2) Do any members of this forum have a clear recollection of the Bass piece? Is it semi-prooflike? Does it have any substantial problems? How would experts grade it in 2015?
I don't have a direct observation to answer this, but I recall an auction description or possible an article which estimated the Bass specimen might likely grade MS64.
Perhaps Andy Lustig has seen it in person?
There was certainly strong interest in the Pogue specimen, likely confirming your observations:
In my view, the Pogue 1795-‘9 leaves’ eagle is a very exciting coin and possibly more dynamic than any other Bust $10 coin that has been graded below MS-65.
<< <i>
> 2) Do any members of this forum have a clear recollection of the Bass piece? Is it semi-prooflike? Does it have any substantial problems? How would experts grade it in 2015?
I don't have a direct observation to answer this, but I recall an auction description or possible an article which estimated the Bass specimen might likely grade MS64.
Perhaps Andy Lustig has seen it in person? >>
There are pictures of it on the harrybassfoundation.org site. That site was redesigned in the last couple of years and seems to have different pictures than before. It doesn't appear to have any obvious problems nor the appearance of being semi-PL. But that is just going by the photo.
http://www.harrybassfoundation.org/coin-collection/coin/hbcc-3171/
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
YosClimber: <<Thanks for sharing your observations on the top specimens!>>
It was my pleasure.
YosClimber: <<There was certainly strong interest in the Pogue specimen, likely confirming your observations ... >>
Yes, deservedly so, the previous auction record for a 1795-'9 Leaves' ten was $379,600, and that was considered a strong price for a PCGS graded MS-61 coin. There were multiple collectors interested in the Pogue coin. The auction was exciting overall and the eagles fared well. Even before the auction, it was considered extremely likely that this coin would reach 800k. Bidding opened at 329 (=280*17.5%) and soared to over a million! In my review, I tried to capture the spirit of the event, in addition to discussing specific coins.
The Marvelous Pogue Family Coin Collection, Part 9 – US Gold Coin Rarities Bring Strong Prices
Richard Burdick says that the bust halves "set the tone"!
The Pogue Family Coin Collection, Part 10 – Gem Capped Bust Half Dollars
WinLoseWin: <<There are pictures of it on the harrybassfoundation.org site. That site was redesigned in the last couple of years and seems to have different pictures than before.>>
Win, I know, I talk about the Bass coin in my article. Nevertheless, I am glad that Win made readers of this thread aware of the re-designed site of the Harry Bass Foundation. Bass built an incredible collection of early gold. Many of the rarities remain in the "Core Collection."
WinLoseWin: <<It doesn't appear to have any obvious problems nor the appearance of being semi-PL. But that is just going by the photo.>>
People should absolutely NEVER conclusively grade coins from photos or other images. I have seen coins that look great in photos and turn out to have been extensively doctored or have other serious problems. Conversely, there are coins that look mediocre or awful in pictures and turn out to be very attractive gems when seen in reality.
In our lifetimes, photos of coins will not be accurate. There are just too many variables: photographer, equipment, lighting, camera settings, angle, depth of field, etc., and there are limitations to the amount of 'information' that even the best of cameras can capture, especially in regard to 3-D objects.