Heritage sells coin for $1.74 million today!
pbj
Posts: 93 ✭✭✭
Heritage Auctions just sold a 1792 '$10' Washington Gold Eagle Pattern coin purported to be the "pocket coin" of George Washington today for $1,740,000 (including BP). It was quite exciting to watch the live auction!
2
Comments
The origin is apocryphal. If the origin was verifiable it would have sold for multiples of that.
Latin American Collection
Wow, amazing !!!
It is interesting to listen Bob gave a 5 minute talk during this lot auction
if you can't say something nice...
Not an item I would have much interest in even if I had the money to buy it.
.
What do you disagree with @BarberFanatic ?
Latin American Collection
It is questionable if this was ever even owned by GW.
Was this unique gold coin presented to George Washington, and did he indeed use it as a pocket piece? In his 1975 Coin World article, Eric P. Newman presented a strong argument that the 1792 Washington President gold eagle pattern was at one time owned by George Washington, who carried it in his pocket. However, there is no absolute proof, and there are those who disagree with Eric's hypothesis.
Washingtonia specialist Neil Musante expresses doubt about certain aspects in his recently published, superb reference Medallic Washington:
"It has also been suggested that the gold impression was struck for Washington and that he carried it with him as a pocket piece. There is no documentation to prove this and given Washington's aversion to the use of his likeness on a federal coin, carrying such a piece would seem an odd contradiction. More than likely, the gold coin was Perkins's own piece and the medal sent to Washington, as related in Nicholas Pike's letter, was a copper example."
The first ownership of record was in 1855, some 56 years after the death of Washington. We don't know where the coin was for more than six decades since it was produced. There is no proof that Washington received the gold pattern, and therefore no record that he gave it away prior to his death.
While other coins and medals were recorded in his estate inventory, George Washington did not possess this piece at the time of his death. His estate inventory was lengthy, complex, and extremely detailed, including well-described coins and medals. The unique Washington President gold eagle pattern does not appear in that inventory.
Washington's Pocket Piece
Although images of our first President of the United States are omnipresent on money, Washington refused such homage when proposed, and no depictions of him appeared on U.S.-issued coinage or currency during his lifetime.
"I found a fallible human being made of flesh and blood and spirit-not a statue of marble and wood. And inevitably--for that was the fact--I found a great and good man. In all history few men who possessed unassailable power have used that power so gently and self-effacingly for what their best instincts told them was the welfare of their neighbors and mankind."
-- James Flexner, National Book Award-winning author of Washington: The indispensable Man.
Latin American Collection
@BarberFanatic
You disagreed with a member and he asked you why. I'm very interested in what you MUST know concerning this item. @Boosibri has left us a very compelling argument. May we look forward to a rebuttal from you soon. Or....
To be clear, I copied and pasted from the Heritage write-up... Heritage did a nice job in representing the multiple sides of the debate on ownership.
It is what it is, fascinating but I maintain that if the origin were verifiable to Washington it would have sold for many millions more.
Latin American Collection
This is a great piece, even though it isn't a coin. That being said, this has got to be a record price ever paid for a medal.
I would much rather have this than the 1913 "nickel". According to the way the mint does things, the 1913 'V' nickel is not a coin because it was never issued, just like the 1933 St Gardens $20s.
Mine was cheaper.
topstuf - Really like your piece! Prefer it to the gold version.
<<< There is no documentation to prove this and given Washington's aversion to the use of his likeness on a federal coin, carrying such a piece would seem an odd contradiction. >>>
I agree with ya!
Sort of reminds me a little bit of the old story that there was probably enough wood sold over the centuries, claiming to be a piece from the cross of Jesus Christ, to build a fleet of ships.
I guess I would be coming from a scientific perspective. The hypothesis is that it WAS NOT GW's coin, and then disprove that it was not his (ie provide distinctive and incontrovertible evidence that it indeed was). Until then, should be rejected as such.
Well, just Love coins, period.
DNA.
Distinctive Numismatic Analysis
Great piece.
From personal experience it’s always easier to buy the story then it is to sell the story
m
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......
In your original post, you said "apocryphal". That means false, not questionable. Personally, I would disagree with that assessment as well. It is unverifiable but it is not apocryphal.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Boosibri disagrees with himself. He has moved from "apocryphal" to "questionable".
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
@jmlanzaf ...your bringing your work into the playground...Probably you can’t help it for IQ reasons but if I had you as one of my college professor’s, I would find a way to get you a good bag of smoke before the first mid-term; donated of course...kinda like a shiny, crisp apple but a little sweeter!
Thanks for the lightweight English lesson
Not true. It means doubtful not false. Questionable and doubtful are synonyms in my book.
a·poc·ry·phal
əˈpäkrəfəl/Submit
adjective
(of a story or statement) of doubtful authenticity, although widely circulated as being true.
Of doubtful authenticity, or lacking authority; not regarded as canonical.
Latin American Collection
I like the gold medal.... mainly, I like gold
I have never been a fan of provenances... Old coins and medals all have a history, and, if their history could be told, some would be amazing, some would be embarrassing, most would be common. To me, it has always been, and continues to be, the coin or medal itself. Condition, design, composition. I collect coins. Cheers, RickO
I don't teach English.
That said, I kind of winced at apocryphal myself as I think it overstates the knowledge we have of it. It has nothing to do with work or grammar or anything else.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Personally, I find the Musante objection illogical:
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
https://google.com/search?q=apocryphal&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-1
@jmlanzaf Nor should you teach English.
But I also find it dubious to believe that a man who objected to American portrait coinage as "monarchical" would treasure and carry such a coin.
Kind regards,
George
Owned by Washington or not, still more interesting than a 1913 V nickel.
Buy yourself an 1883 v nickel, same difference other than the date.
This Washington gold is cooler & neater than just a date change.
ho objected to American portrait coinage as "monarchical" would treasure and carry such a coin.
see above. A medal is not a coin. Nor is a specific medal commemorating an event at all monarchical.
You will note that he posed for portraits and marble busts. So the idea that Washington rejected the use of imagery is APOCRYPHAL.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Didn't the Nobel medal that Heritage sold a few years ago bring even more?
I wouldn't believe that GW ownership claim without evidence. Speculation on how he would or should have felt towards this particular piece is just that-speculation.
I still think that it's a very interesting and desirable piece. Perhaps someday we'll know more about it.
Fair enough, I withdraw my objection to apocryphal.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
.
heritage link.
obv - rev - edge
like those rev stars. just cuz they're different.
.
If I remember correctly, George Washington did not want to be a "King", and I would think that placing ones image on coinage would be similar to other "monarchies" which did just that, placed their leader on their coinage/currency. I think that G. Washington (and any other President of earlier times) would not have approved of their likeness on any coinage whether it circulated or not. IMO.
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, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Die break under right wing tip? Looks intentional, since it is curved and not jagged like a crack would form along grain boundaries.
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, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
that is what i thought but at the tips of both wings.
.
Washington and others had no problem with commemorative medals. Heck they were military men. Medals for everyone.
Washington clearly had no problem with other iconography.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Well, he'd play hell getting nominated today.
If you want proof that Washington did not object to his image on medals, there is this:
amrevmuseum.org/exhibits/diamond-eagle-society-cincinnati
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
I did not say anything about medals...I said "coinage/currency", which circulates amongst the people. Yes, I have seen several medals of his and other Presidents likeness up to present day.
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, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
The medal Heritage just sold was not ever coinage. In gold, I suppose it could be specie.
I'm also not talking about modern medals. The diamond medal in my link was OWNED BY GEORGE Washington and has his portrait on it.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
This was not intended as a medal. It was a coinage proposal.
Out of curiosity, how many people read the Heritage description in full?
Dealing in Canadian and American coins and historical medals.
-
Dealing in Canadian and American coins and historical medals.
whats the buyers premium for something selling that high in price? i heard at one point it goes to 15 %.
It’s like buy the coin, not the holder. But now it’s buy the coin, not the story.
Yes, but never a coin. I'm not sure the distinction would have mattered to a man with a pocket piece. It just seems odd that someone would strike a pattern and send a bronze to the man you are trying to impress and go to the expense of striking a gold for yourself. We know a medal/pattern/coin/essai was sent to GW. Given the unique gold example, doesn't it seem plausible it was that one?
Obviously, we can never know for sure. I also don't think we can simply dismiss it as impossible.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
What I disagree with is your opinion that if the origin was verifiable that it would have sold for "multiples" of the $1.74M it brought at auction.
Assuming you meant only one multiple (which is clearly not what you meant since you used the plural "multiples"... but I'll use just one multiple to show the absurdity of your assertion), you're saying that it would have brought at least $3.48M. That means you believe that a coin carried around in the pocket of our first President would bring, AT MINIMUM, more money at auction than three of the Top Five highest prices ever paid for ANY pieces of American Presidential memorabilia or personally owned items. That is what I disagree with.
The Top Five highest prices ever paid are as follows:
5. George Washington’s Constitution Letter - $3,218,500
4. Abraham Lincoln’s Letter Regarding Slavery - $3,401,000
3. Abraham Lincoln’s Victory Speech - $3,442,500
2. Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation - $3,778,500
1. George Washington’s Copy of the Constitution - $9,826,500
Each one of those five items is a fundamental, watershed document in our nation's history. And before you think, "Well maybe some of those sold a long time ago and prices have risen substantially since then", think again. All of those prices were realized within the last decade.
And yet you opine that people would pay more for some insignificant-by-comparison coin that Washington carried around in his pocket.
I don't mean any disrespect by this, but this GIF seems appropriate:
Thanks for finally contributing
I would say that if the piece is verifiable, it would bring closer to $5M with a clear and verifiable provenance as the depth of the collector market for coins and medals is much deeper than for historical documents regardless of the fact that those documents are incredibly relevant.
Latin American Collection
I would think that someone who carried a medal/coin with their own likeness on it around long enough to get it into XF condition had to have a very large ego. GW has always been portrayed as altruistic, humble man. So carrying an expensive piece of metal around with his face on it - is this consistent with the the character of the man or not? I don't know and I guess none of us ever will. But my guess is that he did not.
Best, SH
Market value has been set for today! Whether we agree or not, is irrelevant, no?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Did he wear the diamond emblem?
Please note that revered figures like Lincoln or Washington are generally surrounded by mythologies that aren't completely true.
I am also not claiming that he necessarily carried this around that often or at all. It might well have been carried by his heir in that missing 60 year window. But it seems reasonable, if not conclusive, that the sole gold pattern struck would have gone to someone important. Who would have been more important than Washington, especially as the Federal coinage was under consideration? The next most likely recipient would probably have been Hamilton
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.