Options
The Roger Burdette Collection
Zoins
Posts: 34,529 ✭✭✭✭✭
I was following some of Roger's posts and was pleasantly surprised to see him post a coin of his to share.
RWB said:
Here's a 1-sovereign equivalent disc that I own. Obverse is mostly PL around the inscription and reverse is PL in untextured areas. The "grade" is MS-64, but it's one of the best I've found. I'd love to find an equivalent condition 4-sovereign piece.Yes, I "overpaid" for the disc because I wanted quality and not merely some paper label. The owner of the 1933 DE will fully understand.
Tagged:
22
Comments
How ironic that one of the most anti TPG people in the world has a PCGS graded item.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I don't know that's his inclination. After all, the Burdette-Leidman Collection of Gould and INCO patterns was slabbed when it was sold by Heritage. The RB numbers on the inserts were a nice touch.
I gotta get me one of those.
This was gifted to me by RWB back in the day.
Not really looking for much these days but if I were, it might be a toner.
Ok. So what is that. And where do you find one?
Thanks
Martin
Ok just looked
Up the cert. for 4k and a
Pop of three I think I’m out
Martin
They are Saudi Arabia Sovereign and the Philadelphia mint made these at least partially to satisfy the demands of the Saudi government to be paid in gold for oil rights or deliveries. They are post-WWII, but I am not certain if they are only pre-1950 or were also produced in the 1950s. They have slightly less weight in gold content than a US quarter eagle. Nice ones like the one posted in the OP are likely in the $3-6K range.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
@TomB
Thanks for the info
It is cool looking. I was hoping for more than just a few of them
Around
Thanks again Tom
Martin
There were 121,364 of these minted in 1947 so it's a numismatic loss that there are so few survivors.
Read more in this article by John Paul Koning:
https://www.bullionstar.us/blogs/jp-koning/why-us-mint-once-issued-gold-discs-saudi-arabia/
You mean Half Eagle.
That is one of the nicest I’ve ever seen. It drips quality. One day I will own one.
Not sure it will be as beautiful as his but I will hope to find one as nice!
.
CoinsAreFun Toned Silver Eagle Proof Album
.
Gallery Mint Museum, Ron Landis& Joe Rust, The beginnings of the Golden Dollar
.
More CoinsAreFun Pictorials NGC FOR SALE
Here's a PCGS XF40 large cent I bought from RWB in 2011. Nice coin. Fun denomination SNAFU.
Lance.
These have been discussed often here over the years. I have never owned one, but saw two at coin shows in the Seattle area when I lived there. Cheers, RickO
It is good to have one of those gold coin in collection. I have been trying to get one with good price. Will get one sooner or later.
There are some pretty good fakes of these out there, so be sure to know what you are looking at before buying one uncertified.
Good to call out. Here's some info on the counterfeits. Insider provided some nice close up images in the thread below.
Here's some info on the counterfeits from CoinWeek:
Photo of a counterfeit from Coin World.
That odd because when I wrote an essay about these pieces which came to the same conclusion. Roger disagreed with me.
Here's another counterfeit from ATS where this is listed as the 21st most popular counterfeit coin:
https://www.ngccoin.in/resources/counterfeit-detection/top/world/21/
Here are the two pieces that are in my collection. It was illegal to own these before the gold ownership restrictions were lifted in the 1970s. That didn't stop some dealers from selling them.
These are great looking specimens. Thanks for posting these @BillJones!
Regarding these pieces in the US today for collectors, did they all come back from Saudi Arabia or were some made available to collectors directly from inside the US?
Also, when did the collecting community first learn of these?
It was not legal for U.S. citizens to own these pieces when they were issued. None were sold to Americans at the time of issue.
Is it fair to say that anything in collector hands today went to Saudi Arabia first?
Interesting!!
Here was the explanation of these disks using some research by Roger, in one of the previous threads on these pieces:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/12851467#Comment_12851467
I would say yes, although to be cynical, things can happen when you have the right connections in high places. Still, I doubt that collectors would have been clamoring for these pieces. Their designs were not going to get any awards. You might call them “utilitarian.”
Are counterfeit Aramco gold discs still being struck today?
Official PCGS account of:
www.TallahasseeCoinClub.com
I have not heard of any being made in the last half century or so, but anything in possible when certain countries have state-sanctioned counterfeit mills.
To clear some of the questions....
All of the coins and metal discs made for other countries were property of the recipient country, and not sold by the U.S. Mints. Occasionally, national representatives donated pieces to the Philadelphia Mint Cabinet and the Smithsonian. Hawai'ian proof sets were donated to the Mint Cabinet, and the Bureau of Insular Affairs under the War Dept. did likewise with Philippine coins on an annual program, in addition to selling to the public.
The Saudi gold discs were not coins by any definition, and were never part of Oil Concession payments. See the ANS Magazine for this quarter to read a somewhat simplified and updated article about the discs. (Roger W Burdette, "GOLD DISCS FOR THE KINGDOM of Saudi Arabia" ANS Magazine.) The original detailed article is in my book, Saudi Gold and other Tales from the Mint. (All previous stories are inventions of their respective authors, and completely false.) A few 1-pound and 4-pound modern fakes are known (such as the 'fuzzy' piece shown in another post, but the limited market for original discs means there is little profit incentive for counterfeiting.
As for counterfeiting. There was very little - these discs were not coins and did not look like coins. They were used internally to the Saudi Treasury and regional banks to make an "end run" around a glut of British sovereigns that had depressed their price. The two weights of discs were designed to boost the Saudi economy - which was based on silver riyals - by over-valuing gold to buy depressed value silver, which were struck into further debased coins.
When the Saudis had their first legal tender gold pound struck (British standard), they were quickly counterfeited and this caused the government immense problems. (See the article: Yousef, Dr. Ahmed Mohamed. “Saudi Gold Pound Issues: Motives and Path 1370-1377 AH / 1952-1958 AD.” Gulf Cooperation Council States Society for History and Archaeology Conference. 24–25 Safar 1446 AH / 28-29 August 2024 CE. Published 2025. Dr Yousef is Professor of Islamic Numismatics, Faculty of Archaeology, Cairo University. English translation by Roger W. Burdette.)
Hope this helps.
Thanks for the info @RogerB !
What does "very little" mean here regarding to counterfeiting? ATS indicates this is number 21 on their list of "Top 25 Most Commonly Counterfeited World Coins" here:
https://www.ngccoin.in/resources/counterfeit-detection/top/world/
It,may be technically correct to say that a tit for tat payment for a specific concessions was not expressly made via slugs. But that misapprehends the nature of relations which was not grounded on altruism. Rather the US moved in to forestall hostile powers, as the British Empire was in its twilight. Putatively, the slugs were expressly struck to help the King out of a "budget shortfall.
US's opening gambit in area:
The Minister in Egypt (Fish) to the Secretary of State
Alexandria, June 21, 1939—9 a.m.
[Received 1 p.m.]
The Department’s telegram No. 36, June 13, noon. It is my considered opinion that the American Minister to Egypt Should also be accredited to Saudi Arabia;
American financial interests in Saudi Arabia have recently materially increased.
Fish
Slugs:
Slugs themselves were approved to help tide King over from "budgetary shortfalls." As to their delivery/ discontinuation
The Acting Secretary of State to the Minister in Saudi Arabia (Eddy)
Washington, May 19, 1945—8 p.m.
142. From Treasury. With reference to the request of the Saudi Government for an additional 2 million dollars worth of gold slugs, transmitted through the Legation on April 25, 1945,13 Treasury is prepared to facilitate the sale. It is suggested that the Government of Saudi Arabia place an order directly with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York authorizing them to purchase and ship this gold on behalf of the Government of Saudi Arabia.14 [Treasury.]
Grew
The Minister in Saudi Arabia (Eddy) to the Secretary of State
Jidda, April 25, 1945—9 a.m.
[Received 5:53 p.m.]
183. ReDept’s 105, April 7, 7 p.m.86 Saudi Government requests purchase in 1945 of 2 million additional dollars worth of gold slugs similar in every respect to the one million dollars worth now being minted for them.
In view of time required by mint this request is made now in hope that this order of gold can be delivered by United States Army airplane earliest possible date.
Comment: I recommend granting this request to purchase gold which fits in with means for balancing Saudi budget suggested by Department in number 82, March 22, 3 p.m.
Eddy
As to depreciated Sovereigns-they regained their value post war:
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1947, The Near East and Africa, Volume V
Editorial Note
In two separate notes of October 7, 1947, to the Department, the Saudi Arabian Minister requested that the United States Mint manufacture $2,000,000 worth of gold discs and 5,000,000 riyal coins for the account of his Government. (890F.515/10–747). The Acting Secretary of State advised the Minister by note on December 19 that the Mint was prepared to undertake production of both the riyal coins and the gold discs (890F.515/12–1147).
In a note of December 24, the Minister requested that the minting of the gold slugs be suspended and that immediate steps be taken to supply as a substitute $2,000,000 worth of British gold sovereigns. The Secretary of State transmitted the note to the Secretary of the Treasury on January 8, 1948, with a request that the Saudi Arabian Legation be notified when the sovereigns would be available for shipment. The shipment was actually made on January 17, 1948 (890F.515/12–2447).
Good info. FRUS was a primary source.
The King was more comfortable with Americans than Brits, primarily because Americans did not routinely meddle in local affairs. Brits kept trying to control things beyond business. The US wanted a base for the anticipated invasion of Japan and Treasury and State had been working on that for a long time.
Return of sovereign market values after the war did not help the immediate situation and Congress was slow to understand the situation.
Counterfeiting has been based on the old Bullowa anecdotes, and these ignore legitimate die varieties. Weight and alloy are critical data, with color and sharpness key to visual discrimination. TPG data is very limited. I've examined several hundred raw pieces and found only a couple fakes - all easily detected visually and confirmed by testing. Still, the TPGs seem to be OK with sorting out fakes and I found none in legitimate slabs.
Weirdly enough, I am zero-for-three on attempts to get my gold discs certified. All of them were rejected as not-genuine and I bought them about twenty years ago out of a collection that can very reliably be traced to the early 1970s. For what it's worth.... and welcome back, Roger!
Official PCGS account of:
www.TallahasseeCoinClub.com
Here are a couple of mine I bought in the seventies. They are #2 in the registry for these.
If you still have them, perhaps @RogerB can help authenticate them now with his new info?
TallahasseeCoinClub: Send me a PM so we can correspond via email. I can try to match your images against my varieties inventory. Did the rejected pieces have any comments with them?
There are many transfer die counterfeits out there and they likely have been produced since the 60s, like many similar gold transfer die counterfeits. Die-matching will not help, because they are transfers from genuine coins.
Gobrecht's Engraved Mature Head Large Cent Model
https://www.instagram.com/rexrarities/?hl=en
RE: "There are many transfer die counterfeits out there and they likely have been produced since the 60s, like many similar gold transfer die counterfeits. Die-matching will not help, because they are transfers from genuine coins."
Your sources are ?
Would need large control and suspect groups. How practical that would be with the slugs is unknown.
Christian has done some recent good work which address sample size, among other considerations. A large control group is needed as transfer die counterfeits are exposed as their cloned nature creates an unnaturally compressed statistical spike with a variance approaching zero.
Joel B. Christian, Population Identification Strategies for Counterfeit Coin Detection, 67 J. Forensic Sci. 1989 (2022)
Joel B. Christian, Model Verification for Population Detection of Counterfeits, 68 J. Forensic Sci. 2169 (2023)
Is considerable recent scholarship on counterfeit detection, particularly using AI models. Cites above are far from exhaustive.
I'm asking member Rexford for the sources of his information.
jch22 mentions some useful 'next-step' strategies, although very difficult to manage for Saudi discs that were never intended to have a use-life similar to circulation coins. No specific method of counterfeit production is assumed.
Christian's counterfeit detection models do not depend on coins being circulated. Joel B. Christian, Model Verification for Population Detection of Counterfeits, 68 J. Forensic Sci. 2169, 2169 (2023).
Traditional non AI models likewise are highly dependent on sample size. See,
• Warren W. Esty, Estimation of the Size of a Coinage: A Survey and Comparison of Methods, 146 Numismatic Chron. 185 (1986).
• Warren W. Esty, The Geometric Model for Estimating the Number of Dies, in Quantifying Monetary Supplies in Greco-Roman Times 43 (François de Callataÿ ed., 2011).
C = 1 - (s / n)
Dr. Esty's mathematical formula demonstrated a small sample size cannot detect high-quality transfer dies because the number of unique singletons (s) will automatically equal the total coin count (n), driving sample coverage to zero. For the math to work the sample size must expand until the singletons drop toward zero, forcing matching "die-duplicates" to appear and revealing the exact, repeating micro-flaws.