Options
How do the TPG's all label "Transitional Errors?"
CaptHenway
Posts: 32,715 ✭✭✭✭✭
If you have, or know of, any of the classical "Transitional Errors" in U.S. Numismatics, such as (hypothetically in some cases) a 1943-PDS Bronze cent, a 1944-PDS Steel Cent, a 1964-PD Clad dime quarter or half, a 1965 90% silver dime, quarter or half, or a 1983-PDS or 2010-PDS Bronze cent, how do the TPG's label them? Specifically, do the labels have the word "TRANSITIONAL" on them?
How do you think such coins should be labeled? Should they have the word "TRANSITIONAL" on them?
Reply on open please.
TD
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.
1
Comments
They are off-metal errors. They do not have any purpose or intent as a "transition" between one metal and another. That some collectors place high values on these is a market factor, not a factual description of the coins.
The current labeling for the '43 Bronze Cents is "Bronze" on the Pedigree Line. Pardon the fancy shot - I was going to post this to my Instagram:
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Not mine, just a quick grab from google.
But for every picture I can find with the word "Transitional" on it, there seem to be 10 pictures with the same types of coins but without that word, ie just "Pre 1983 Cent Planchet" or "Struck on Clad" or "Struck on Silver" or just FS#s in some cases if applicable, Reverse of X, Head of X, Type I/II, etc.
There are also the 1859/1860 Half Dimes, ie:
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
They occurred during a transition from one intended metal or alloy to another. I believe that the term "Transitional Error" as commonly used in the error coin hobby for decades is appropriate to them.
Caveat to the above: In 1944 the Philadelphia Mint used up a supply of leftover steel cent planchets to strike a Two Franc coin for recently liberated Belgium. I can accept the designation of "Struck on a Foreign Planchet" for 1944-P steel cents, but not 1944-D&S.
@Strikeout....Thanks for the pictures.
I must disagree. There was no intentional period of transition. The planchets were simply accidental leftovers. Without there being a meaningful purpose the term "transition" is inappropriate and misleading. US 1944 cents for all mints are simply wrong metal errors, although it is impossible to distinguish Belgian 2-Fr from US. zinc coated steel planchets.
For Belgian 2-Fr pieces, the Philadelphia Mint did not unilaterally decide to use the leftover zinc coated steel planchets. The selection of composition for Belgian coins was made by Belgium's government. It represented a minor compromise in that extant US cent planchets were deliberately made slightly heavy and this happened to meet Belgium's coin specifications. (There are two official weights for 1943 cents.) Having examined the original records (in English and French) and prepared the only modern report on the subject, I feel confident in this description.
As for: "...'Transitional Error' as commonly used in the error coin hobby for decades." This may be the case; but that does not excuse continued misleading terminology.
I think of one of the dies meant for the previous or next year when I hear transitional error.
One of the joys of the English Language is that words can have multiple meanings.
Evidently the term 'transitional' refers to the change of material rather than a period of introduction. For most programs (i.e. copper to steel) it was intended to be an immediate change over. Technically, incorrect material, would be the proper term.... However, colloquialism has supplanted accuracy and 'transitional' has been widely applied. Cheers, RickO
Seems to me that "transitional" has a place here in helping to define the coin.
If you see ONLY "wrong metal", or "silver planchet", or whatever, your first thought might be, "Where did that planchet come from? Foreign coinage? Punched from the wrong strip? Someone playing games at the mint?"
The "transitional" moniker tells you, (or reminds you), that it was during a changeover of metals/planchets. That it was something that just about guaranteed to happen at some point.
Excluding the 1/2 dimes, which are a different beast - if you look at the examples I found pictures of, they call them Transitional, often with other modifiers directly with Transitional or other locations on the label like Off Metal, Wrong Planchet, or more descriptive - Struck on Silver, Struck on CU Plan, Bronze, Silver Clad, etc.
I think in the essence of "Transitional Error" - Error being the key, they fit the bill - a planchet not originally designed for that year.
I don't think anyone would argue they were "Errors".
I guess the bigger question is what would simply the term "Transitional" apply to?
Would it apply when there are no planchet differences, only design changes where they were transitioning?
1837 Large Cent with Head of 1838
Jefferson Nickel Reverses of 38/39/40
'88 Lincolns with '89 Reverse
2008 Silver Eagle with 2007 Reverse
1964 Kennedy Reverses
Washington Quarter Reverse Types
There are plenty of Proof/Circulation die combinations out there too.
Would those types of things just be "Transitional Varieties" or "Transitional Designs"?
Error seems to indicate something not meant to happen. Varieties could be differences that perhaps were done on purpose (Using old/new dies to finish production) etc.
I don't know what the TPGs today would use for the pictured coins, or new ones, seems the term when those were graded weren't standard, yet the viewer gets the message however they worded it.
How do you think they should be labeled?
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
I stick to my guns that a coin struck on a planchet intended for the prior year's coinage or the subsequent year's coinage OF THE SAME DENOMINATION should be called a "Transitional Error." It denotes a planchet that is wrong for the time of the strike but not the denomination. The passage of time is important, with the qualifier that for parts of 1965 and 1966 coins of two different dates and two different compositions. Perhaps the 1964 and 1965 (and 1966 if there are any) "Transitional Errors" need a name of their own. Or perhaps, according to Roger, they are the only true "Transitional Errors."
The entire field is riddled with qualifiers. A 1963 Quarter struck on a Nickel planchet is an "off-metal error," as is a Cent struck on a Dime planchet, but a Franklin Half struck on a silver Quarter planchet is not. It is a "struck on a wrong denomination planchet error," as are the preceding two, but the metal is not off.
Not sure what to call the 1974-D and 1977-D dollars struck on rejected 40% silver planchets shipped from SF to Denver mixed in with rejected copper-nickel Proof planchets. I remember handling the discovery specimen (from a gambling dealer in Las Vegas) while opening mail at Collectors Clearinghouse and studying it for a few minutes when I guy called from Las Vegas to report that he had just discovered a brand-new error, a 1974-D dollar struck on a 40% silver planchet! I said "Another one?" and he said "WHAT?????" He had missed having the discovery coin by less than 15 minutes.
So how would you label the ones above:
The '64 Lincoln struck on a clad dime planchet or the '83 Jefferson struck on a Bronze cent planchet.
They are wrong for both the denomination and the year of the coin's (host planchet's) proper composition.
Doesn't @FredWeinberg have something to say with the verbiage on coins such as these? Be interesting to hear his opinion on both the past labeled ones, and how they would/do label today's submissions.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Multiple errors deserve multiple word descriptions. You could say “wrong denomination transitional error” or put transitional first.