After giving this more thought, here’s where I stand.
I believe the J1323 pattern trade dollar shown above was created with 5 fingers (thumb, 3 fingers folded back and index finger extended/pointing along the contour of the olive branch). The area of the design around the hand and branch was cluttered and it’s understandable that the eventual design would be cleaned up a bit. Whether this was accomplished by removing the pointing finger or not is where I’m still on the fence. I see one of two scenarios being likely:
Scenario one (4 fingers -> 5 fingers) When implementing the eventual public issue the engraver/artist cleaned up the design, with a thumb and three fingers wrapped back to the palm. The engraver removed the pointing finger, lengthened the portion of the olive branch just above the hand and added another berry/thorn/growth to balance the design, making it aesthetically pleasing. Then, in 1876 after people noticed the missing finger, a 4th finger was added, folded back against the palm.
This scenario is conceivable, and arguments for it include: - Another finger was added later, so there must have been a missing finger right? - The berry/thorn/growth is somewhat disconnected from the main branch. If it was a finger, one would think it would be more continuous and connected to the hand. - If the berry/thorn/growth really was a finger, why wasn't it removed when the additional finger was added in 1876?
Scenario two (5 fingers -> 6 fingers) When implementing the eventual public issue the engraver/artist cleaned up the design by simplifying the olive branch and running the pointing index finger through the branch instead of contouring it, for 5 fingers total. Despite Liberty already having 5 fingers, the public (or some public official with clout) mistook the pointing index finger for a berry/thorn/growth as so many of us have, so the artist/engraver was pushed to add another finger folded back to the palm into the design in 1876.
This scenario is also conceivable, arguments for it include: - The pattern shows a pointing finger, it makes sense this would be included in the eventual public issue - Sometimes an artist is coerced into making changes they don’t like to satisfy a client. In this case, the public or an important public figure thought a finger was missing, so the design was updated to add another, even though it meant adding an anatomically incorrect 6th finger.
I could see either scenario being true. Based on comments above it seems that people are in both camps with possibly more thinking scenario #2 occurred. Unless we can find some documentation one way or the other, we’ll never know. I think we’ve made some headway in figuring out what happened but there’s certainly still a bit of mystery surrounding this all.
I of course like scenario 2, but I won't claim it to be fact. TD
Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
Wish I could see what's being said here. No posts are visible to me after the Captain's "It's Alive!" post. I don't know if it's just this thread or what, but these bugs have turned from annoyance to having a major impact on the usefulness of this medium.
Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
Here's the pattern trade dollar, J1323 in PCGS PR64+CAM
>>
Looking at the reverse, what is that odd right-angled feature above the arrow feathers? Just a cutaway to highlight the arror feathers? Any chance of a closeup of that area?
And note how the shafts on the arrow heads don't necessarily line up with anything.
TD
Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
@Stealer...thanks. Clearly shows the angle indentation to be a separation between the fletchings and the leg and tail feathers.
Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
<< <i>A small side question...is Miss Liberty sitting on one bale of trade goods standing on end, vertically, or two smaller bales resting horizontally one atop the other? >>
This one won't be seen right away either.
I say 2 as there is a gap between not caused by a rope tie.
And I always thought that was an out stretched finger, too.
Perhaps the "fix" also fixes the "impolite point."
<< <i>A small side question...is Miss Liberty sitting on one bale of trade goods standing on end, vertically, or two smaller bales resting horizontally one atop the other? >>
This one won't be seen right away either.
I say 2 as there is a gap between not caused by a rope tie.
And I always thought that was an out stretched finger, too.
Perhaps the "fix" also fixes the "impolite point." >>
I see it more as pointing the way, a new direction for the country as trade expanded to the west.
Very interesting thread...I would agree with the theory that the index finger was extended...albeit a bit of an anatomical anomaly that the artist ignored.
So, now that we got the system figured out, nobody liked my Uncle Tonoose joke???
Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
So just when I think we've settled on a few good theories, I run into this pattern:
First, I love the imagery with the ship and I wish they would have chosen a Trade Dollar design with a ship in the ocean.
Back to my point, check out the hand on the above pattern. In my opinion there are clearly 4 fingers. Additionally, there are both a short branch as well as an extra berry. This would seem to support scenario one above, that this design started out with 4 fingers, then another was added later.
This pattern is dated 1875. Does anyone know if that date corresponds with the creation of this pattern, or was it created earlier?
Comments
I believe the J1323 pattern trade dollar shown above was created with 5 fingers (thumb, 3 fingers folded back and index finger extended/pointing along the contour of the olive branch). The area of the design around the hand and branch was cluttered and it’s understandable that the eventual design would be cleaned up a bit. Whether this was accomplished by removing the pointing finger or not is where I’m still on the fence. I see one of two scenarios being likely:
Scenario one (4 fingers -> 5 fingers)
When implementing the eventual public issue the engraver/artist cleaned up the design, with a thumb and three fingers wrapped back to the palm. The engraver removed the pointing finger, lengthened the portion of the olive branch just above the hand and added another berry/thorn/growth to balance the design, making it aesthetically pleasing. Then, in 1876 after people noticed the missing finger, a 4th finger was added, folded back against the palm.
This scenario is conceivable, and arguments for it include:
- Another finger was added later, so there must have been a missing finger right?
- The berry/thorn/growth is somewhat disconnected from the main branch. If it was a finger, one would think it would be more continuous and connected to the hand.
- If the berry/thorn/growth really was a finger, why wasn't it removed when the additional finger was added in 1876?
Scenario two (5 fingers -> 6 fingers)
When implementing the eventual public issue the engraver/artist cleaned up the design by simplifying the olive branch and running the pointing index finger through the branch instead of contouring it, for 5 fingers total. Despite Liberty already having 5 fingers, the public (or some public official with clout) mistook the pointing index finger for a berry/thorn/growth as so many of us have, so the artist/engraver was pushed to add another finger folded back to the palm into the design in 1876.
This scenario is also conceivable, arguments for it include:
- The pattern shows a pointing finger, it makes sense this would be included in the eventual public issue
- Sometimes an artist is coerced into making changes they don’t like to satisfy a client. In this case, the public or an important public figure thought a finger was missing, so the design was updated to add another, even though it meant adding an anatomically incorrect 6th finger.
I could see either scenario being true. Based on comments above it seems that people are in both camps with possibly more thinking scenario #2 occurred. Unless we can find some documentation one way or the other, we’ll never know. I think we’ve made some headway in figuring out what happened but there’s certainly still a bit of mystery surrounding this all.
TD
<< <i>
Here's the pattern trade dollar, J1323 in PCGS PR64+CAM
>>
Looking at the reverse, what is that odd right-angled feature above the arrow feathers? Just a cutaway to highlight the arror feathers? Any chance of a closeup of that area?
And note how the shafts on the arrow heads don't necessarily line up with anything.
TD
Link
And to answer your question Capt, it is the fletchings of an arrow, and like you pointed out it does not match up with any of the arrowheads.
<< <i>Hallelujah. Once the thread turned the corner to page 2 I can now see all the posts. >>
And this one will be at the top of page 4 and won't be seen right away
<< <i>A small side question...is Miss Liberty sitting on one bale of trade goods standing on end, vertically, or two smaller bales resting horizontally one atop the other? >>
This one won't be seen right away either.
I say 2 as there is a gap between not caused by a rope tie.
And I always thought that was an out stretched finger, too.
Perhaps the "fix" also fixes the "impolite point."
<< <i>
<< <i>A small side question...is Miss Liberty sitting on one bale of trade goods standing on end, vertically, or two smaller bales resting horizontally one atop the other? >>
This one won't be seen right away either.
I say 2 as there is a gap between not caused by a rope tie.
And I always thought that was an out stretched finger, too.
Perhaps the "fix" also fixes the "impolite point." >>
I see it more as pointing the way, a new direction for the country as trade expanded to the west.
Cheers, RickO
First, I love the imagery with the ship and I wish they would have chosen a Trade Dollar design with a ship in the ocean.
Back to my point, check out the hand on the above pattern. In my opinion there are clearly 4 fingers. Additionally, there are both a short branch as well as an extra berry. This would seem to support scenario one above, that this design started out with 4 fingers, then another was added later.
This pattern is dated 1875. Does anyone know if that date corresponds with the creation of this pattern, or was it created earlier?