Type with Varieties Defined?
oldabeintx
Posts: 2,855 ✭✭✭✭✭
As a type collector who has expanded my type sets to include interesting INTENTIONAL varieties, one of my (impossible) wishes is that a US set with “major” intentional varieties could be defined and agreed upon. Call it the “US Type Set on Steroids”. Total agreement would be impossible as even the composition of a basic type set isn’t universally agreed-upon, but it would be a guide of sorts for type collectors like me who are bored and need an excuse to buy more coins (and maybe learn something). So, what are must-haves for such a set to take it beyond the traditional type sets?
0
Comments
Assume you are referring to die varieties?
55 DDO cent
42/1 Merc
Bugs Bunny Franklin
1854/3 Seated Quarter
18/7 S SLQ
3 leg Buffalo
Tough one, because as you say, even basic type is hard to define. I think the varieties are much easier to define WITHIN a type.
But, here's a try for 10c through 50c, through Capped Bust ... where I tend to play the most.
10c Draped Bust, Small Eagle
10c Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle
10c Capped Bust, Large Size
10c Capped Bust, Reduced Size
25c Draped Bust, Small Eagle
25c Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle
25c Capped Bust, Large Size
25c Capped Bust, Reduced Size
50c Flowing Hair
50c Draped Bust, Small Eagle
50c Draped Bust, Heraldic Eagle
50c Capped Bust, original Portrait and Reverse ('07 and '08)
50c Capped Bust, modified Portrait and Reverse
50c Capped Bust, 1834 to 1836 modified Designs
50c Capped Bust, Reeded Edge, "50 Cents" Reverse
50c Capped Bust, Reeded Edge, "Half Dol." Reverse
I could have went farther with Capped Bust Halves especially (I tend to agree with Edgar Souders in his assertation that there are 10 distinctly different sub-designs of just the Lettered Edge CBH's), but I think my list above would represent the Basic Type and Variety for these.
Hopefully others will chime in.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
By this do you mean stuff like minor design revisions?
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Perhaps. There is minor and and then there is trivial. Up to you of course where you might draw the line. An example of one that I added was the 1854 $3, which also fits in my FY type set. If the design change doesn’t sort of hit me in the eyes I pass and leave those to the variety folks.
Obviously I misunderstood your query. One's that hit you in the eyes? That'd be a long list with overdates and the like! Probably could do most of a Redbook Set for the CBH's alone!!
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Really only mean to include design changes in my expanded set, not overdates, doubling or other unintended “varieties”. No mistakes or corrections of mistakes if you will.
By “hit me in the eyes” I exclude a lot of lettering changes that are subtle, for example. No disagreement if anyone thinks a more or less expansive approach suits them better, just fishing for ideas outside of the traditional “types”.
(I also include varieties that may be of historical interest that are otherwise pretty trivial, such as the 1918 re-addition of VDB’s initials. And I include changes in metal composition, which are not design changes, some of which are already part of traditional type sets, but not all.)
For the half dime, I would include the 1859 (Philadelphia, but not New Orleans) as such a major variety, because it used a different obverse hub created by Anthony Paquet.
It has "hollow stars", taller letters on LIBERTY on the shield, the shield is more curved on top. and Ms. Liberty's arms and fingers look a bit different.
Compare with the 1859-O:
Is this the type of "major variety" that you had in mind?
This Paquet obverse was also used on the 1859 and 1860 "Transitional" patterns, aka the "Coin without a country" (also dimes like this):
I suppose that could potentially be in your set, but probably you exclude patterns.
If you like transitional mules, there is the 1840-o V-6 which has the old "No extra drapery" obverse, but the new reverse with 3 leaves left of DIME.
1840-o Old "No extra drapery" obverse, old reverse with 4 leaves left of dime
1840-o V-6 Old "No extra drapery" obverse, new reverse with 3 leaves left of DIME
1840-o New "extra drapery" obverse, new reverse with 3 leaves left of DIME
There was also a hub change in 1857 which is quite subtle, and probably would not reach your threshold.
Does the 2c 1864 Small Motto meet your threshold?
It is a different hub. Not just the letters, but the leaves are different.
For Bronze Indian Cents, you could include:
1864 no L on ribbon. Also has rounded bust tip above 1
1864-1886 with L, last feather points between IC; has pointed bust tip above 1
1886-1909 with L, last feather points between CA
Probably the last 2 would meet your "hits me in the eyes" threshold.
Maybe the 1864 no L with rounded bust tip does as well.
You have captured the spirit of my post perfectly. I would include, or at least consider, all these suggestions, other than a pattern , generally. I do have a few transitional patterns of interest to illustrate the evolution of adopted designs, but that’s a bit of a rabbit hole I think. (I couldn’t resist at least one 1858 IHC and a “God Our Trust” example.)
BTW since the “traditional” type set (e.g. PCGS Registry) includes both the wire edge and rolled edge 07 Indian, damn near anything is fair game. IMO.
May be far afield, but coins of historical/numismatic interest can be inserted into one’s type set. Such as: Feuchtwanger cent
HT token
CW token
Chopped Trade Dollar
Three ‘61 O half dollars
Sea Salvaged coin
Toner Morgan
DMPL Morgan
Error illustrative (process) examples
Encased postage
At least one coin from each mint
Ok I’m a type nut.
Here's another such variety in a series I don't collect - the 1795 eagle "9 leaves". It's rather expensive, though, as only about 16 are known. And a thread about a roster for it that I created more than 10 years ago.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/949678/1795-9-leaves-eagle-16-specimens-and-price-graph
Certainly a distinct type. I won’t be putting it on my own want list soon however. A proper expanded type list, if ever compiled, will undoubtedly include a number of coins that are unobtainable for the vast majority of collectors. 18th century especially, perhaps.