Numismatic Terminology --- Type vs Variety
Dug13
Posts: 336 ✭✭✭✭
Concerning Seated Quarters, I thought the 1853 Arrows & Rays is considered a Variety of the main design.
On our host's price guide, it is listed as Type 4 (of 6 Types).
How do most collectors refer to '53 Arrows & Rays. A Type or a Variety?
Wall of HONOR transaction list:WonderCoin, CoinFlip, Masscrew, Travintiques, lordmarcovan, Jinx86, Gerard, ElKevvo, PROMETHIUSS88.
0
Comments
I'd say it's a type, with a different design than all other Seated Quarters.
A variety refers to coins struck from a particular pair of dies. For instance VAM numbers for Morgans (and Peace dollars) or Overton numbers for Capped Bust Half Dollars. Subtle (or not so subtle) die chips, gouges, areas of die polish, clash marks, date locations, and such can identify a certain pair of dies.
Here's an example of a variety of a Flowing Hair Dollar, one of the 2-leaf major varieties:
This particular coin demonstrates strong clash marks and is designated as variety B-9 BB-13 Die State 2.
Interestingly, the obverse die used to strike this coin was also used for die varieties BB-11, BB-12, and BB-13. The reverse die was used to strike die varieties BB-13 and BB-14. Presumably, die pair BB-13 was the last use of the heavily damaged obverse die. By studying varieties, it's often possible to determine the sequence of dies used and even the progression of wear, die cracks, and such on individual coins as the dies aged.
Another way to look at it is that types can be distinguished by your non-numismatic Aunt Sally. Varieties often require careful scrutiny, use of a loupe, reference books, and an exceptionally high nerd-quotient.
I’ve always thought of it as a Type is an intended design for a particular period of time and a variety is a discovered subset within that type.
Franklin Halves are the type, Bugs Bunny is a variety. It probably works better with non-die clash examples, like the leaves above, but you get the point.
The Guide Book uses "variety" to describe Seated coinage w/rays, w/o rays, w/arrows & rays, etc., which doesn't work for me at all. I think of them as "types." Over the last generation we've seen so much work on Liberty Seated die varieties that the word "variety" really means die marriage. The Guide Book does the same thing for Bust coinage.
There is no universally accepted style guide in numismatics although individual publishers will have their own internal guidelines.
Perhaps Dentuck can explain all this to us.
I've always looked at it this way:
A die marriage (or die pairing) is a subset of a variety. There are many 1827 square 2 die marriages. The square 2, encompassing all of them, is the variety.
The 1827 square 2 is a capped bust half dollar. That is a type, different from a flowing hair or draped bust half dollar.
Obviously others think differently, or are casual with the terms. But this makes sense to me.
1827 Square 2 Overton 126. Die marriage.
1827 Square 2. Variety.
1827 Capped bust. Bust half type.
Lance.
We need three different terms. Using your example above:
I would say:
US and British coin collector, and creator of The Ultimate Chuck E. Cheese's and Showbiz Pizza Place Token & Ticket Guide
I just realized I went in the opposite order you did.
From specific to general you could have:
US and British coin collector, and creator of The Ultimate Chuck E. Cheese's and Showbiz Pizza Place Token & Ticket Guide
To me a type is a completely new design whereas a variety is a modification of a type. Examples would be the Variety One and Variety Two Buffalo nickels and Standing Liberty quarters. The mound and different placement of the stars is a modification of the existing design, thus a variety, not a type.
To me, it's a type or sub-type.
I think of it this way:
just want to say, as a relative newb, threads like this are super helpful / informative - thanks, op and responding forums members 🙌
This is what I was thinking as I was coming up with a definition. I think varieties go beyond this definition too. I'd consider privy marks like the V75 to be a variety, even though it was intentional.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
What definition of variety are you using to classify the V75 privy mark as a variety? Would you also classify the Arrows and Rays quarter as a variety?
I think definitions are important to ensure things are classified consistently.
I'd classify the V75 as a sub-type using the following definitions:
@koynekwest I've always seen/heard the Buffs referred to as Type I and Type II. Same with the Standing Liberty Quarters. I also thought each one was needed for type collectors.
Do others call them Variety 1 and 2? I don't get out as much as many of you and I'm genuinely curious. The Buffs and SLCs are largely what shaped my concept of what a Type is (especially within a general design).
The Guide Book also still lists Mott Tokens in the colonials section, although the accompanying text has changed over the years. Inertia of terminology and the fact that you can't unprint a book likely comes into play with respect to the Guide Book.
Regarding types and varieties, for me, an intentional composition change or design change upwind of creating a master hub (or equivalent for earlier coinage) is a type, while an unintentional result of creating dies and using them in production is a variety. Differences between types may be major (Indian vs Lincoln cent) or minor (8TF vs 7TF Morgan dollars). Where varieties and die marriages are considered interchangeable, the design type is usually just a starting point in determining the variety. Where it becomes complicated is where variety and type have been interchangeable. Here, a variety is a manifestation of a minor change of type. Buffalo nickel (major type) collectors will have a Type 1 and Type 2 (minor type) reverse for 1913. This is two varieties of the 1913 nickels, each with a different type for the reverse.
I do not consider each state's coin in the assorted series as a different type, because the type intended for there to be a different design for each state. Had the mint refined the Washington portrait during production of one of these series, perhaps further spaghettifying it, I'd consider that a minor type change, which means you could have something like 2005 West Virginia Head of '05 and Head of '06 varieties.
The Seated stuff is trickier, since the arrows of the 1854-55 coinage falls isn't something that was part of the design of the hub or change of composition. It was punched with the date and eventually dropped in 1856 with no other design or composition change, so I'm not sure I'd consider the 1854-55 coinage to be a different type from the 1856-73 coinage. I'll leave it to LSCC folks to either try me for or defend me from charges of heresy.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I need another cup of coffee before I tackle this thread.
How did you decide what Elder pieces to assign number to and what not to
It would be nice to have some designation for composition, e.g. copper, brass, silver, white metal, etc.
To me every die pair was a numbered listing. Fortunately design variances were not an issue.
I did not want to do sub-listings for compositions as I knew that my lists of compositions were presumably incomplete. I suppose in hindsight that I could have made a list of all compositions and given them a letter designation that could be tacked onto the numerical listings, so that DeLorey-999a was gold and DeLorey-999b was silver, etc., but I did not think to do that. And of course you have the question of what do you do with 18kt gold vs. 14kt gold vs. 10 kt gold, sterling silver vs. coin silver, etc.
The Redbook does, as does ANACS.
For me it's similar in nature to a mint mark or mint master's initials, but we exempt mint marks and dates from being sub-types, even though they meet your criteria.
The Krause catalogs will list coins with different initials or mints from the same year under the same coin number. They'll also list coins made with different finishes that way too. I would expect to see that coin treated the same.
IG: DeCourcyCoinsEbay: neilrobertson
"Numismatic categorizations, if left unconstrained, will increase spontaneously over time." -me
I actually consider date and mint marks to be "issues", along with compositions for medals.
The thing about a date and mint marks and medallic compositions is that they are often designed / known at the beginning of creation. For example, in 1909, the date and mint mark changes were already known for 1910, 1911, 1912, etc. What wasn't known was the change to the Memorial and Shield reverses much later.