With all the hubub about the 1804$....I got to thinking about Eliasberg..
GaCoinGuy
Posts: 2,784 ✭✭✭✭
Was reading the article about the 1804 and Eliasberg owning one of them at some point and then chased a rabbit down a hole to an article about Eliasberg and his complete set. The article mentioned that some numismatists didn't consider his set fully complete due to the lack of a large number of varieties. Got me to thinking......
Do you think it would ever be possible to have an example of every coin made to include every variety ever found?
1
Comments
No. Infinitely more competition nowadays for the rarities.
Collecting every variety would be nearly impossible, with some of them being 1/1s, and the person who owns it would never sell. I consider Eliasberg a complete collection personally, the only angle you would have on not calling it complete is that the proofs were interchanged with the business strike examples, unlike the D.L. Hansen Collection, which has significantly more coins than Eliasberg but is missing a few significant examples. Such as the 1822 $5 as well as the 1870-S $3, which Eliasberg owned both of.
Wes Brush/CAC Man
Numismatist/Buyer
Main: (800) 776-0560
Direct: (757-617-3207)
Website: www.davidlawrence.com
Mailing: PO Box 9174, Virginia Beach, VA 23450
There isn't even a definitive list of all varieties ever. Major varieties and minor varieties? Based on whose research and opinion? It's a fool's errand.
I think that by type is the only reasonable option to even consider (for what in and of itself is a very ambitious and unreasonable goal).
chopmarkedtradedollars.com
A decent idea but no, I dont see it either for alot of the above reasons
His accomplishment is hard enough to compete against at any level. I don’t think it would be possible to add varieties to a complete set.
Off main topic... but...
This sure would have been a great exhibit to view :
You’d need the one and only legal 1933 Farouk $20. So that coin alone would stop everyone … except maybe the owner of the one and only legal 1933 Farouk $20.
I fnd it interesting and surprising that the 1804 dollar was advertised as merely "the Stickney silver dollar" with no reference to the coin's date. I doubt that a lot of the public would know what that meant.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
He sure did have the stuff !
Pittman had coins that Eliasberg didn't.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
So what? Nearly everyone has had coins that Eliasberg didn’t. 😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
It most certainly was! Spent the summer visiting the Philadelphia mint...........Practically lived there. LOL
@thebeav . Great picture. I'm just about speechless, Can't even imagine what all is in that picture. James
I did see that exhibit at the Philadelphia Mint in 1976. Great exhibit, still remember several of the coins.
As far as a complete variety set of every variety, I don't think that is possible even if you limit the set to just Lincoln cent varieties. For example, there are over 100 repunched mintmarks of some dates.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
>
Mark; Of additional note to me was the reference to the Stickney Dollar being the only example " that can be traced back to the U.S. Mint"
Probably should be a separate thread, but are 2 active already ……but the more I look into the 1804 dollar, the less I am convinced of accepted theories, particularly of striking of some Class I’s in 1834 as diplomatic presentation pieces.
In the interests of brevity following is a cut and paste from Wikipedia (I would be more verbose) as to where that theory arose--Newman & Bressettt and their basis:
“In a letter to the Department of State dated October 8, 1834, Roberts decried the gifts of his previous journey as inadequate and insulting to his hosts in the Orient. In addition to several other items, he requested a set of coins as an appropriate offering to Said bin Sultan:
I am rather at a loss to know what articles will be most acceptable to the Sultan, but I suppose a complete set of new gold & silver & copper coins of the U.S. neatly arranged in a morocco case & then to have an outward covering would be proper to send not only to the sultan, but to other Asiatics.
In a November 11, 1834 letter sent to Mint Director Samuel Moore, Secretary of State John Forsyth approved Roberts' suggestion, writing:
The President [Andrew Jackson] has directed that a complete set of the coins of the United States be sent to the King of Siam, and another to the Sultan of Muscat. You are requested, therefore, to forward to the Department for that purpose, duplicate specimens of each kind now in use, whether of gold, silver, or copper.
He also directed Moore to have two Morocco leather boxes made to house the coins. He stated that one should be yellow in color, and the other crimson, and that funds could be drawn from the Treasury for the value of the boxes and coins. Later, in a letter dated December 2, 1834, Forsyth directed Moore to include "national emblems" (including an eagle and stars) on the exterior of the cases.
In their book The Fantastic 1804 Dollar, numismatic historians Eric P. Newman and Kenneth E. Bressett assert that a problem arose at the Mint as to how to interpret Forsyth's order. As his initial correspondence indicated that the sets were to include coins of every type then in use, Mint officials included both the silver dollar and gold eagle. The moratorium on silver dollar coinage had been lifted in 1831, but none had been coined since those issued in March 1804. Two sets of coins, minted in proof finish, were completed and delivered along with their boxes to Roberts shortly prior to his departure on the USS Peacock on April 27, 1835. The dollars included the sets bore the Draped Bust design, depicting an allegorical representation of Liberty on the obverse and a heraldic eagle on the reverse. A list of diplomatic gifts was also proposed for missions to Japan and Cochin-China (today part of Vietnam), which included two additional sets of coins.”
Believe there is one gap, and one very serious flaw in this theory.
The gap: only a general reference is made to presentation of a set of coins in the Account of the Voyage of the Peacock. No mention is made of the denominations
The serious flaw: The Fact the Coinage Act of 1834 passed Congress and was signed by President Jackson on June 28, 1834. It set/ changed the authorized weight of Eagles to 232 grains of fine gold, a decrease from the 1792 Act’s requirement of of 247.59.
This entire backdating theory depends on an illegal order to strike a backdated issue in violation of the Coinage Act passed months earlier—the Eagle. That is certainly dubious. Jackson had pushed hard to reintroduce gold—it would certainly not the kind of fodder he would provide to advocates of specie he defeated after a hard fought battle won just months before. I do not think that the backdating theory is anything more than a very liberal inference. It is contrary to the monetary battle than being fought--and the law.
The first published reference to the existence of an 1804 dollar was in A Manual of Gold and Silver Coins of All Nations, Struck Within the Past Century, etc., published by Jacob R. Eckfeldt in 1851. Eckfeldt's plate follows:
Stickney was elsewhere said to have obtained the first known example on May 9, 1843, in trade with the Mint for coins, including the Immune Columbia. Believe that is why the Mint’s press release in 1976 references the Stickney example as “the only one that can be traced back to the U.S. Mint.” I believe Mickely was the second to obtain an example, some years later. Bit odd that a proof 1804 was brought to a bank to exchange, and handed to the very Clerk who Mickley had advised in advance was the coin he most desired.....
Think ultimately the 1804 dollars were an Eckfeldt family project—none were struck in 1834. Likely Stickney’s was first and was motivated by a desire to fill the Mint Cabinet. The different classes likely representing different time periods. All were illegal/ fantasy issues. And they violated the Coinage Act of 1834 by re-striking the Eagle.
Much more can be said, but this post is already long. Entire subject I believe is worthy of a fresh look.
Lol. US gold coins that weren't represented in the Eliasberg collection.
Please also troll anyone who says Eliasberg had a "complete set of US coins" since he didn't have all the US coins or there.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, evn when irrefutably accurate.
Eliasberg collecting journey was easy. He bought the Clapp collection en bloc.
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All of Us
ANA LM, LSCC, EAC, FUN