Variety vs. Circulation strike - Which is which? *Pick your series as an example and discuss*
MsMorrisine
Posts: 32,203 ✭✭✭✭✭
1909 Lincoln
1909 Lincoln VDB - circulation strike. first, it came first. it came first as a circulation strike before minds and hubs were changed.
1955 Lincoln DDO - variety. not designed that way for circulation.
now what about:
1873 Cent - open 3
1873 Cent - closed 3
?
Likewise for the Shield Nickel of the same years.
1858 Flying Eagle - small and large letters
?
What about the early half cents?
1795 has lettered edge, plain edge and punctuated date and no pole
are each circulation strikes or varieties?
1796 has no pole and with pole
1797 has 5 different __________ (varieties? or types?)
what VAMs are varieties & which are types? Same for Overtons.
and is a 1909 VDB called a "type" coin, and if not a variety nor a type coin then what is it called?
Comments
Wow! Talk about a lot of distinctions without meaning.
Some people do consider 1909 VDB to be a distinct type. Other people do not. Not all "type sets" have the same coins in them.
As for "variety" or not, your distinction seems to be based on whether the design were intentional. Doesn't that imply that any mint error - including using the wrong date or mintmark punch - would be a variety? But that any feature change that was made intentionally would be a "type"?
that's my take, but it does not sound like yours. other people may have different ideas, thus the topic.
do you think the VDBs are a type or variety? why?
To me the 1909-VDB is a minor type. The mint, due to some pressure, decided to remove Brnnner's easily seen initials.
1955 DDO Cent - A die preparation error that created a die variety. The mint know about the error, but was no concerned enough to go through bags of cents to find them.
1873 - Closed and Open 3 coins - The first 3 was closed and looked too much like an 8, especailly since the dates were small on a number coins that year. The Open 3 made it easier to read the date. They are minor die varieties.
1858 Small and Large Letter Cents. - A die cutting difference - minor varieties.
The half cents are all something different.
The plain and lettered edge half cents, except for rare varieties, are a reflection of reduction in the official weight of the coins. The Lettered Edge pieces were made first, then George Washington, with the support of Congress lowered the weight of the copper coins at the end of Decemeber 1795. There were lots of 1795 half cent dies available, and the mint continued use them thought out most of 1796. The 1796 dies were not used until the end of the year which created a rare date.
1795 half cents with the punctuated date - a die scratch that looks like a comma.
1796 - pole and no pole. The No Pole could be called an error. The die sinker forgot to cut it.
1797 - All die varieties so far as I'm concerned. For the Cohen 3 the mint fooled around with plain, gripped and lettered edges. I think they came to the conclusion that messing with the edge was not worth the extra effort on a low value, base metal coins.
In my opinion "Types" are intentional, "Varieties" are not. The VDB was intentionally set that way. The 1909 VDB DDO FS-1101 and 1103 were not intentional. The 1922 1C No D was not intentionally done. The 1955 1C DDO was not intentionally done. The 1972 1C DDO was not intentionally done. etc... The 1960 1C Large and Small Date were intentionally done (or were they?). the 1970 1C Large and Small Date were intentionally done (or were they?).
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
To me, a type is a major design change that is visible to the causal observer.
Flowing Hair Dollar, DB Small Eagle, DB Large Eagle, Seated, Trade, Morgan, Peace, Ike, SBA
Modern complications are the Sac, President dollars, since the design is ever-changing, but I still consider them to be only two different types, now defined by a Congressionally lumped series, for lack of better explanation.
Within the Seated dollars, no motto and with motto I consider to be major hub refinements, not type changes, so I'd put these in the next level down in the hierarchy. Likewise 8TF, 7TF Rev 78, and 7TF Rev. 79 Morgans. For Indian cents, I'd put these at the reverse transition from 59 to 60, the L bust in 64, the feather-AMERICA realignment in 86.
Metal changes (silver to clad, 43 cents, CN to bronze Indians) I'd put at the same level of major hub refinements.
Going down one level further, the 7TF Rev. 79 Morgans can be divided up into four different executions of the reverse hub (C1 through C4). These go at the next level down, or minor hub refinements. Other types have these as well, such as the transition from the 1968 Lincoln obverse to 69.
Date sizes, mint mark styles, and doubling that is all at the individual die level would be at the lowest level and called die varieties. This is where VAMs, Overtons, etc., are cataloged. Note that this does not include 1982 large and small date cents, since that was actually a minor hub refinement.
My categories. This knowledge, together with $3, will get you a $3 cup of coffee. YMMV.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
Thanks for the replies
It seems I got lucky with the half cent selection. No pole is an "error" of the die sink. Does it mean that all others but this one are not varieties in my definition? It seems many would consider all as varieties despite the no pole existing from a mistake. It seems I need a looser definition of variety vs type.