JohnZ's YN Essay Competition - Winners announced!!!
JohnZ
Posts: 1,732 ✭
For those of you unfamiliar with this competition, please click here.
I received a total of eight well-written and thoughtful essays. So without further ado, here are the winners:
First Prize: Glory Years: The Numismatic Revolution of 1907-1921, the Men Behind It, and Their Designs. By Brian Rose (brianruns10).
Second Prize: is tie between two competitors! I have therefore decided to add another gold coin to the prizes. (I haven’t decided which one yet.) The two second-prize winners are Jeremy Katz (airplanenut) for his essay entitled Take Your Best Shot, and Dennis (Dennis88) for his essay entitled United States Patterns, A Beginners Guide.
Third Prize: The collection of Byron Reed by Samuel Ernst. Samuel is ten-years-old and posts on the forums under his father’s supervision (Coinhusker).
Everyone else who submitted essays will receive a silver coin of my choice with a retail value of about $20. I would ask all contestants to PM me their mailing address, and I will send out the coins over the next week.
Now, as to the essays…
It will take me some time to reformat them and post them. Some of the essays include a large quantity of photographs which I need to upload and link. Furthermore, the footnotes and bibliographies make frequent use of italics, which have to be tagged individually. So over the course of the next week, I will be posting the essays on this thread as I get them done.
However, I’ve included the main body of the First Prize-winning essay so that you can enjoy it, and see what a high level of scholarship and writing our young numismatists are capable of. I will edit-in the pictures, footnotes, and bibliography later.
Glory Years:
The Numismatic Revolution of 1907-1921, the Men Behind It, and Their Designs.
By Brian Rose, 25 April 2004
Part I
The year was 1905 and coinage in America was stagnating. The cent hadn’t been changed in more than forty years, the double eagle in nearly sixty. Worse still, the eagle, half-eagle and quarter-eagle had remained unchanged for nearly seven decades! In fact, the last time any changes had been made to any U.S. coin was more than ten years earlier, in 1892. Something needed to be done and President Theodore Roosevelt had the power, the desire, and the gumption to take on the challenge. But most of all, he had Augustus Saint-Gaudens, and together, they would start a numismatic revolution that in just fourteen years would see the total redesign of every U.S. coin, from the cent to the double-eagle.
What would become the greatest period in American coinage began, to dust off an old literary cliché, on a cold winter night in 1905. On that night, Theodore Roosevelt was enjoying a dinner with his good friend, the world-renowned sculptor Augustus Saint-Gaudens. Saint-Gaudens had originally been commissioned by Roosevelt in March to design a presidential medal for his recent inauguration, but in the interim had become close friends with the famed artist (Figure 1). Roosevelt, remembered best for the charge on San Juan Hill, and his love of nature, also had an eye for art and culture, and one of the major concerns of his first full term in office was America’s artistic image. As Vice-President, he had used his influence to form the National Arts Commission; now as President, he began to take an interest in the nation’s money.
And so it was on that cold night in November that the two friends began to discuss the state of American coinage. Both felt that the “current” gold and silver coins were timid, old fashioned and ugly. Both also shared a great affinity for ancient high-relief coinage and the Renaissance medals of Pisanello and Sperandio. Their discussion escalated throughout the evening, until Roosevelt arrived at a momentous conclusion. Some years later, Augustus’ son Homer described what happened next. “they both grew enthusiastic over the old high-relief Greek coins,” he said, “until the President declared that he would have the mint stamp a modern version of such coins in spite of itself if my father would design them…the cent, the eagle, and the double eagle.” Saint-Gaudens accepted the challenge, knowing full well that his time was running short; he was dying of cancer.
In a letter sent by Saint-Gaudens to Roosevelt on November 11, 1905, he described his vision for the new coins and what would eventually serve as the designs for the eagle and double-eagle. “I have determined on the composition of one side,” he wrote, “which would contain an eagle very much like the one I placed on your medal…On the other side would be some kind of (possibly winged) figure of liberty striding energetically forward as if on a mountain top…with the word “Liberty” marked across the field, in the…hand perhaps a flaming torch; the drapery would be flowing in the breeze….” It was planned that the eagle and double eagle would be similar to each other, like in the Coronet series, while the cent would bear a Liberty Head and a Flying Eagle, similar to that of the Gobrecht dollars and the small cent of 1857-1858.
Saint-Gaudens made the first models of these concepts in 1906. Though there were echoes of the final products, there were also many differences in his early visions. Originally, the Striding Liberty was adorned with an elaborate Native American headdress and a pair of angelic wings. In her hands, a torch and a shield, inscribed with stars and stripes and the word “Liberty.” Over her head, the date appeared in Roman numerals. As for the cent design, Saint-Gaudens adapted it from his “Head of Nike” sculpture for the Sherman Memorial, which was based primarily on the “Beautiful Head” sculpture made at Pergamon in BCE 165—Saint-Gaudens tribute to ancient art.
For months he labored over the new designs, perpetually altering and re-altering them; at one time, he had as many as twenty-five different Standing Eagle reverses. By the next year, he had replaced the Striding Liberty’s shield with an olive branch, and removed the date to the lower right field, with “Liberty” replacing it at the top. A few months later the wings and the headdress were excised and replaced with streaming rays of light. The “Head of Nike” design would remain unchanged for some time, until Roosevelt viewed the concept and suggested that something be added to the figure to make it more American. Saint-Gaudens obliged and replaced Liberty’s crown of leaves with a Native American headdress.
A major point of frustration during this period of trial-and-error was the location and positioning of the various mottos that had become standard on U.S. coinage. Saint-Gaudens labored for some time over where to place “E Pluribus Unum” and “In God We Trust,” and experimented with numerous configurations. He eventually solved the problem by placing the clutter on a lettered edge in a method unused by the Mint since the Capped Bust half-dollars of the early 1800’s. For the Striding Liberty design, “E Pluribus Unum” was moved to the edge and interspersed with thirteen stars, in addition to the forty-six (forty-eight after 1912) encircling Liberty. For the Indian Liberty design, he had more free space and kept all the lettering on the surface, electing instead to add forty-six stars along the edge. As for “In God We Trust,” he decided to remove it altogether, at the advice of President Roosevelt. Roosevelt was a pious man, and believed that placing God on money trivialized Him and bordered on sacrilege. Besides, though there was a law allowing “In God We Trust” to appear on coins (Act of March 3, 1865), there was no law forbidding its omission; the only rule they were breaking was the law of tradition.
In early 1907, Saint-Gaudens’ designs were in their final stages. In a March 12 letter to Roosevelt, Saint-Gaudens wrote, “I like so much the head with a headdress (and by the way, I am very glad you suggested doing the head in that manner) that I should like to see it tried not only on the cent piece but also on the twenty-dollar gold piece, instead of the figure of Liberty.” Roosevelt obliged, but secretly preferred the Striding Liberty design, and decided to have specimens of both struck. During this period, Saint-Gaudens’ health had begun to deteriorate and he made preparations to hand over what work he had done to his assistant, Henry Haring, for completion. Working from the master models, Haring created the first plasters for the eagle and double-eagle, knowing full well that they would not be practical for the Mint’s purposes. Nonetheless, he preserved the extreme high relief of the models anyways, out of respect for his dying mentor.
When Mint engraver Charles Barber was presented with Haring’s “ultra high relief” plaster for the Striding Liberty, he rejected it without giving much reason. It was no secret that he had a great dislike for Saint-Gaudens’ styles and methods, especially since his pattern for a new double eagle had been recently rejected; now, he seemed eager for any opportunity to sabotage the Saint-Gaudens designs. Haring modified the Striding Liberty and produced a second plaster, this time in a slightly reduced “high relief;” this version too was rejected. Frustrated, he confronted Barber, and after a heated debate, convinced him to allow dies to be made based upon his first, “ultra high relief” plaster.
In mid-March, the dies for the Striding Liberty and Indian Liberty test pieces were ready and the first test strikes were performed. Haring was present for these initial strikings and described what happened: “a circular disk of gold was placed in the die and by hydraulic pressure of 172 tons…we made our stamping, and the impression showed a little more than one-half of the modeling…The coin was again placed on the die for another strike and again it showed a little more of the modeling, and so it went, on and on until the ninth strike, when the coin showed up in every detail.” In addition to this process, the gold planchet had to be annealed between each strike. Though a masterpiece of coinage, the “ultra high relief” was simply unsuitable for mass production and as a result, only an estimated twenty to twenty four specimens of this first variety were struck. Of those, approximately sixteen are still extant, including two with a sans serif lettered edge, one with a plain edge, and two struck on special planchets with a reduced diameter. As for the Profile Liberty pattern that Saint-Gaudens loved so much, just a single specimen was struck.
Due to the failure of the first test strikes, Haring was forced make alterations. On May 11, Saint-Gaudens wrote to Roosevelt and expressed his concern over the future of his designs. “as far as I am concerned,’ he wrote, “I should prefer seeing the head of Liberty in place…on the twenty dollar coin as well as the One cent.” The opinion of those around him differed however, and on the 23rd, Saint-Gaudens conceded defeat. “The majority of the people that I show the work to evidently prefer with you [Roosevelt] the figure of Liberty to the head of Liberty…I shall not consider any further on the Twenty Dollar gold coin.” And so the decision was made to keep the Striding Liberty design on the double-eagle, and move the Indian Liberty to the ten-dollar coin.
By late spring, Haring completed a third plaster rendition of the Striding Liberty, which in addition to several minor design changes and a markedly lower relief, had a more traditional Arabic style date rather than Roman numerals. When he presented the new model to Barber, he rejected it, arguing that the new design could not be reduced. Fed up with Barber’s obstinacy, Haring did some investigating and discovered that the reducing press in use by the Mint was old and out-of-date. He requested money to buy a new press but was, not surprisingly, turned down. Ultimately, a dying Saint-Gaudens was forced to appeal directly to President Roosevelt for the needed funds. Roosevelt obliged and a new Janvier reducing press was purchased and installed by early summer. With this new machine, Haring was able to resurrect his second plaster, the “high relief” version, and began the final preparations for production.
Saint-Gaudens’ state worsened as the summer progressed and Roosevelt, realizing his friend had little time left, urged the Mint to begin producing the new double eagles as soon as possible and, “even if it takes the Mint all day to stamp one.” But due to the many design changes and delays, it would not be possible, and on August 3, 1907, Saint-Gaudens died, before a single double eagle had been struck. Until the end, he still labored over his designs; the day before his death, he rallied the last bit of his strength, and was carried to his studio in Cornish to provide final instructions to his cadre of assistants. Due to his hard work, and Roosevelt’s persistence, the Mint successfully produced more than eleven thousand double-eagles, based on Haring’s second “high relief” plaster, and released them before the year was out. Though the result was of some compromise, Haring nonetheless managed to preserve much of Saint-Gaudens’ vision and in the ensuing years, the high relief Striding Liberty would come to be regarded as the finest coin ever produced.
Sadly, in the last months of his life, the work on the one-cent piece gradually fell to the wayside while Haring and the Mint struggled to complete the eagle and double-eagle. After Saint-Gaudens’ death, the Mint, under Barber’s directive, abandoned the cent design altogether in favor of completing the ten-dollar piece. Though the process for striking these coins was much easier due to a lower and less a demanding relief, there were still problems with the design. During the first run, it was discovered by Mint officials that the coins’ wire edges prevented them from being stacked; as a result, production was halted after only five hundred and fifty business strikes and one proof were made. The Mint next tried a rolled edge but found that the resulting coins were poorly struck. To avoid any more embarrassment, all but forty-two of the more than 30,000 pieces originally struck were melted. Chief engraver Barber quickly made several design modifications and by the late fall of 1907, managed to release almost 240,000 coins into circulation.
The reception for the new coins was lukewarm at best; almost everyone, it seemed, had had a problem with them. Bankers complained that the double eagle’s high relief made convenient stacking impossible. The religious community cried foul at the omission of “In God We Trust.” Collectors and scholars complained that the Roman numeral date on the double-eagle took up too much space, that the Indian Liberty had a “Grecian” nose, that her war bonnet was the incorrect style, that the Standing Eagle was not true to real life, that it looked like it was wearing pants…. There was even controversy over the origins of the Indian Liberty design. Commentators alleged that Liberty was based on an Irish waitress, one Mary Cunningham, who supposedly had been in the employ of the late sculptor. The complaints were so many and vociferous that some even called for the coins to be recalled.
Ebenezer Gilbert, noted numismatist and author, was scathing in his review of the ten-dollar coin. “the head…and date are too large for the size of the piece,” he wrote, “and the stars too small…The prominent nose and chin indicate determination…but the effect of overhanging ‘upper jaw’ and lip with open mouth is idiotic…On the reverse, we find a turkey buzzard in pantalets…The coin, both obverse and reverse, is a humiliating disappointment, without one redeeming feature, and is a ‘foozle.’”
There were a few however that recognized the greatness of the Saint-Gaudens coins and what they had achieved. Collector Charles Connick wrote, “The simple beauty and dignity of design here shown on both obverse and reverse, must eventually silence all such noisy objections…we, as a nation do not appreciate the inspiring grace and power of beautiful symbols that we have so many ugly and dispiriting ones all about us.”
In mid-December 1907, the New York Tribune received a letter from a young medallist and recent émigré from Lithuania. His name was Victor D. Brenner. “Much has been said for and against the new $10 and $20 gold pieces designed by our late master, Augustus Saint-Gaudens,” Brenner wrote, “…he was called away before he had time to finish his commendable attempt to bring forward coins that express in their design more than the mere value as a commodity. In his design one sees the embryo of a beautiful conception.” Brenner admitted that the coins had some flaws in their execution, mainly their relief, writing, “Master of the low relief that he was, illness did not allow him the time to investigate certain laws and dictations that separate our methods from the methods the Greeks employed in their coinage.” Ultimately, Brenner believed that the matter would have been resolved if Saint-Gaudens had had more time. “If he [Saint-Gaudens] had the necessary time to make changes, as he was used to do in all his creations, the result would have been no less than any of his masterpieces.”
The praise of a few was not enough to override the complaints of the many however, and the Mint was forced to make changes. With Saint-Gaudens dead, Barber was able to make all the modifications he wanted and resurrected Henry Haring’s third plaster—the same one he had rejected some time earlier on the grounds that it couldn’t be made. In addition to the Arabic style date, the relief of the double-eagle was lowered significantly, much to Mr. Haring’s chagrin. The resulting design, though practical, was a far cry from Saint-Gaudens’ intentions. Numismatic lore would later say that Barber disliked Saint-Gaudens’ design so much that he lowered the double eagle’s relief with the help of a two-by-four. In late December, the Mint released several hundred thousand examples of this third, “flat relief” version. In mid-1908, in spite of Roosevelt’s protestations, the Mint added “In God We Trust” to the eagle and double eagle.
Though the two Saint-Gaudens coins were the result of compromise and disagreement, they still emerged as masterpieces of the art of coinage. It is a testament to the greatness of Augustus Saint-Gaudens that his coins could be altered and interfered with in so many ways, and yet still emerge better than anything made then or since. In his letter to the New York Tribune, Victor D. Brenner’s words about the importance of the Saint-Gaudens coins would prove prophetic. “The precedent that he has set for us will find its echo forever after.”
Part II
With the release of the eagle and double eagle, and due to the enthusiasm of Theodore Roosevelt, a trend of radical redesign was established. Immediately after the release of the ten and twenty-dollar coins, Roosevelt decided it was time to revamp the Coronet half and quarter-eagle, both unchanged since 1839 and 1840, respectively. His friend Dr. William S. Bigelow suggested that the new half and quarter eagles should be incused in design; this, he reasoned, would eliminate the relief difficulties encountered with the eagle and double-eagle, and lessen the amount of wear, thus extending their lifetime. Roosevelt approved of the suggestion, and Dr. Bigelow tapped Bela Lyon Pratt, an associate of Saint-Gaudens, to make the designs.
In contrast with the strong Greek influences upon the Saint-Gaudens coins, Pratt and Bigelow based the new half and quarter-eagles primarily on Middle Eastern and Egyptian art; in fact, Bigelow first struck upon the idea of an incused coin while viewing the Boston Museum of Fine Art’s collection of Egyptian reliefs. Pratt’s incused designs for the eagle and quarter-eagle represented the transition from classical art to modern. For the reverse, he used a nearly identical version of the Standing Eagle Saint-Gaudens used for the ten-dollar coin—a tribute to the late sculptor and to classic Greek art. For the obverse, he created an aged Indian warrior in full headdress, surrounded by thirteen stars. This design marked the beginning of a new age in numismatics: the age of photographic naturalism, and pointed out the way for the work of Victor Brenner and James Earl Fraser.
The reception of these two coins, much like the Saint-Gaudens pieces, was mixed and came with much criticism. S.H. Chapman, a Philadelphia coin dealer, protested that the coins would accumulate dirt more easily, and could potentially convey communicable diseases. Further, he claimed that the coins would be easily counterfeited because their incuse design resembled an engraving. Artistically, he and many others believed the coins to be poorly executed. The reverse eagle, he claimed, was not the American bald eagle, but rather the European gold eagle; as for the Indian, he argued that it looked malnourished and was displeasing to the eye. Pratt and Bigelow countered that the design for the Indian was taken from real life and as proof, they provided photographs of the subject. Critics were also vocal in their opposition to Pratt’s use of Egyptian art, rather than the superior Greek style. “Egyptian art, unlike the Greek,” wrote Chapman, “remained frozen in conventionalism and did not progress to the full free rendering of the round.” There were those who favored Pratt’s design. Writer Chandler Post praised him for his naturalistic depiction of a true native, which he believed was rarely achieved in sculpting. Ultimately, Pratt’s designs would be short-lived; produced intermittently in the coming years and decades (the complete quarter eagle set, for example, has only fifteen years and mintmarks), they were ultimately discontinued in 1929. Now however, they are popular as a unique part of numismatic history, and highly sought after in mint state and proof condition.
The first non-gold coin to be redesigned was the cent. With the centennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln approaching, President Roosevelt decided to commemorate the event by replacing James Longacre’s Indian design with Lincoln’s image. Initially, a commemorative coin was to be made for Lincoln, but Roosevelt was so impressed by a plaquette of Lincoln made by a young Victor D. Brenner, that he decided it would make for an excellent cent design. Brenner had studied in Paris and New York, instructed courses on coin design for the American Numismatic Society, and was a fervent admirer of the work of Saint-Gaudens; Roosevelt liked him from the start.
That Lincoln should grace the cent was a daring move for President Roosevelt and potentially risky for any artist who accepted the challenge. Never before had a U.S. coin borne a portrait of a real individual. It wasn’t illegal per se, but tradition and respect had kept U.S. coinage strictly symbolic. 1st President George Washington had balked at the suggestion of placing his or any living person’s image on the nation’s money, and the Mint had up to then honored those wishes.
In early 1909, Brenner began work on new cent design; by that summer, he had completed his work and the first dies were cut soon after, with the help of Henry Weil. The truth was, the new dies would have been finished even sooner than that, but recently inaugurated President William Taft insisted that “In God We Trust” be added to the obverse. Released in early June 1909, the Lincoln cent represented a mélange of artistic styles and influences: the work of the Greeks and Saint-Gaudens, the photographic naturalism of Pratt. The greatest influence however was French impressionism. Based upon a photograph of Lincoln, the Brenner’s design was the first to convey light and shadow, which, bolstered by the slight concavity of the field, lent the figure of Lincoln an aura of three-dimensionality, in addition to its photographic detail. The reverse was as precedent setting as anything by Saint-Gaudens or Pratt; in place of the traditional ornate wreath, Brenner instead emblazoned the reverse with the required mottoes and a pair of wheatears—a simple design for the common man.
Though wildly popular (the Mint was forced to limit the number of specimens per person), the Lincoln cent was unable to escape scrutiny. Some felt that a man of Lincoln’s stature deserved to be on a higher denomination. Many others were uncomfortable with a Lincoln being on the cent at all; they felt that it was too “European.” Some collectors spoke out against the new cent because they had become attached to James Longacre’s Indian Head cent, and were displeased with its discontinuation.
Most, and perhaps oddly of all, was the outcry over the apparent prominence of Brenner’s initials, at the base of the reverse. It was not unusual for a sculptor to initial his work—Saint-Gaudens signature was placed in a prominent position below the date on the double-eagle. In mid-August, a few weeks after the Mint began its first run of Lincoln cents, Treasury Secretary William MacVeagh ordered production to be halted so the “VDB” issue could be resolved. Originally, a B was to have been placed in a less conspicuous area, but Chief Engraver Barber protested, arguing that he already was using that initial. Instead, the “VDB” was excised from the cent altogether and would not be restored for nearly a decade.
On August 9th, 1909, the American Numismatic Association held its annual convention, in Montreal, Canada. On August 12th, Thomas Elder, chairman of the ANA’s Coinage Improvement Committee, announced that he had sent a letter to President Taft concerning the state of the remaining unaltered U.S. coins. A representative of the Treasury responded to Elder, and noted that although the five-cent piece was old enough to be changed, “At the present time it is not possible to state whether any legislation by Congress may be expected in the near future.”
That appeared to be the end of it; President Taft, unlike Roosevelt, had little interest in coins, and Congress…tended to be a bit slow. However, the seed had been planted and in 1912, the decision was made to replace the Liberty head nickel. For the job, they enlisted James Earle Fraser, a renowned medallist and a former pupil of Saint-Gaudens. Arguably the most skilled of Saint-Gaudens many protégées, he based his style largely on the works of Pisanello and Sperandio, favorites of both Saint-Gaudens and Roosevelt. For the obverse, Fraser used three Native Americans, named Iron Tail (or Trail as some believe), Two Moons, and John Big Tree (who also modeled for Fraser’s “The End of the Trail”) and formed a composite image. The famed buffalo on the reverse was based on a bison at the New York Zoological Gardens named Black Diamond.
Considered one of the great achievements in coinage, Fraser’s Buffalo nickel was the synthesis of the work of Saint-Gaudens, Pratt and Brenner and represented traditional, idealistic and realistic styles. The obverse Indian and reverse buffalo were the peak of photographic naturalism, yet had an air of idealistic sentiment—in the ensuing years, the coin would become a true piece of Americana, a symbol of the prairie tradition. Perhaps Fraser’s greatest achievement was in his total use of the field; almost not space is left unused, and yet the coin feels balanced and unencumbered by the lettering. However, Fraser’s higher relief design had a sad flaw. With little to protect its lettering and devices, the Buffalo nickel wore quickly in a relatively short amount of time, making some years and mintmarks exceptionally difficult to find in Mint State.
1916 was a banner year for numismatics. The U.S. was teetering on the brink of war, and the Treasury department decided it was time to redesign the dime, quarter and half dollar, as a morale booster and an international political statement. Based on the success of the Buffalo nickel and Lincoln cent, the Mint sought out new artists for the job, and held an open design competition. Adolph Weinman, another pupil of Augustus Saint-Gaudens, won the competition for both the dime and half-dollar. Using Elsie Stevens, the wife of poet Wallace Stevens, as the model, Weinman created a pair of designs that would become some of the most admired and collected coins in numismatic history.
Where the four gold coins, the cent and the nickel represented radical departures from the classical design, Weinman’s Liberty Head and Walking Liberty designs embraced it and fused it with Roman design and the art nouveau. In contrast with the stern, matronly Libertys of old (even the Saint-Gaudens Striding Liberty was a deemed a little homely and slimmed up for the new gold bullion pieces), Weinman’s designs emphasized beauty and the natural curves of the face and human form.
For the dime, Weinman utilized contrasting imagery to convey his message. On the obverse, the now famous Liberty, wearing a winged cap. Much confusion was caused over the meaning of the wings on Liberty’s cap. Many mistook her for the Roman god Mercury (a moniker that has since stuck), who did have wings, but on his feet, not his head. Rather, Weinman explained that the winged cap represented freedom of thought. The reverse then, symbolized the price of freedom of thought: eternal vigilance and respect for the laws of freedom. Based on several patterns by Anthony C. Pacquet, the reverse of the Winged Liberty dime contained a fasces-an ax bound by rods. In Roman times, the fasces was used as punishment, whether it be beating or beheading, for breaking the law, and soon came to symbolize the Empire and its power.
Weinman’s Walking Liberty design is truly a companion piece to the Winged Liberty dime and bore many aesthetic similarities to the former. Based on Oscar Roty’s “Sower,” the Walking Liberty, striding towards the left with the sun rising behind her, symbolized optimism and hope, and neatly summed up the ideals of Manifest Destiny and western expansion. Contrasting with this sunny obverse, the reverse depicted an eagle atop barren rock near a withered tree branch. Whereas Liberty looks forward to the future with open arms, the eagle is wary and on the defensive.
The reverse eagle was based on one of the test moldings Saint-Gaudens created in 1906 for what eventually serve as the reverse of the ten-dollar coin. Weinman had worked closely with Saint-Gaudens, helping him to execute many of his finest designs. Weinman’s eagle, in all its exquisite detail and finery, was a tribute to Saint Gaudens and his design for what would become the double eagle. So many of the redesigned coins of this era resulted more or less out of tribute for him, that it could be argued that Saint-Gaudens is the most memorialized figure on our coinage. As a whole, Weinman’s design half-dollar design was the first truly great sculptural ensemble. For the first time, a planchet ceased to be merely a hunk of 90% silver bonded to a core of 10% copper struck under high pressure, and became a surface, much like stone, marble or bronze. It combined naturalism and classicism and created design that was well balanced and discovered a new way to render what are essential traditional poses.
For the quarter dollar, the Mint selected the design by Herman MacNeil, who had previously gained recognition for his medal for the 1901 Pan-American Exposition. The resulting design was both arguably the most daring coin since the Saint-Gaudens pieces, and the most politically charged. Heretofore, Liberty had been depicted as a beauty—soft, fragile, peaceful. MacNeil’s Amazonian interpretation had more in common with the goddess Athena than Liberty, at least in depiction. The reverse design in contrast, was more traditional, featuring an eagle based largely on the Gobrecht design, surrounded by stars; this eagle, along with the Weinman design, would last truly naturalistic eagles on America’s coinage until the Sacagawea dollar.
Like Saint-Gaudens, MacNeil was heavily influenced by Greek art and the design for the Standing Liberty quarter was based largely upon sculpture from the Pheidias to Praxiteles periods of BCE 450-350. A shield in her left hand, an olive branch in her right, she stood positioned between two stone columns. MacNeil said this “symbolized the nation’s awareness and preparedness for battle and its equal readiness to proffer peace.” The Standing Liberty quarter was arguably the most politically charged American coin; the radically different appearance of Liberty was a message to other nations (i.e. Germany) that America was ultimately ready and willing to defend itself and its freedom.
It seemed that every new coin made by the Mint caused controversy in one public sector or another. MacNeil’s design immediately caused a stir over Liberty’s partly exposed right breast. It was a boldly artistic move to emblazon the quarter with a semi-nude human form, and the Mint was brave for going along with it; however, 1916 was simply not the right time, when it was still shocking for a lady to reveal her legs. After a year and a half, in mid-1917, the quarter was modified and Liberty’s exposed breast was covered by a vest of chain mail. But was the public outcry against the quarter as great as history has made it seem? Evidence now shows that the driving force behind the movement to cover up Liberty was the Treasury itself. By early 1917, Treasury Secretary William G. McAdoo was considering a run for the Presidency in 1920, so some believe he decided to modify MacNeil’s design in order to save face and make him seem more moral and family-friendly.
Whereas the dime, quarter and half represented pre-war vigilance, the coin that would be the last alteration and the end of the numismatic revolution emphasized peace and hope. Henry Morgan’s design for the dollar coin, not minted since 1904, was resurrected in 1921 and then, at the urging of noted collector Farran Zerbe, replaced in favor of something new. Continuing the trend of using new artists, the Mint enlisted Anthony de Francisci, a former pupil of both Weinman and Fraser. De Francisci’s design, referred to as the Peace dollar, was both a tribute to Saint-Gaudens, and his mentor, Adolph Weinman.
The obverse and reverse of his design were based largely upon the respective sides of Saint-Gaudens design for the ten-dollar piece. Like the Weinman eagle, de Francisci’s eagle perched atop a barren rocky formation. Rays of sunlight stream out from the distance, and the eagle calmly looks toward it, symbolizing both the hardship of the past several years, and the hope of a new decade. Liberty, a crown of rays about her head, represented enlightenment, and the face both resembled the classic Greek statuaries, and also the art nouveau style of his mentor, Adolph Weinman. The entire coin was given a worn, tired appearance, symbolizing the long and arduous journey America had been through.
If the Saint-Gaudens coins were the alpha of the Numismatic Revolution, then the Peace dollar was the omega and it is ironic that de Francisci’s design would also encounter problems with its relief. In 1921, after a little more than a million pieces were released, the Mint found that the relief was too bold. In 1922, approximately thirty thousand dollars dated 1922 were struck in the relief of 1921 before the design was modified; the remaining mintage for that year was in the new relief. Many considered de Francisci’s design to be the weakest coin of the Numismatic Revolution. Some thought the Liberty looked windswept, that her slightly parted lips made her look “vapid.” And there is some validity to that argument; it is a difficult task to try and create something that can top the Morgan dollar, but the Peace dollar has found its place among collectors, and is prized in Mint State.
Never before, and never since was art so well used in coinage. In fourteen years, the Mint, by embracing new ideas, techniques, and bold new artists, set a new standard for numismatic art and design. The creations that resulted from this unprecedented period of artistic growth and evolution have become prized by collectors and investors for their outstanding quality, beauty and detail. So exquisite are these masterful works, that some collectors believe that to collect them in anything less than Mint State does not do them justice. Perhaps the most amazing thing is that all this was the result of two men, one with power, the other with artistic talent, and both with vision, foresight, and a hell of a lot of guts
I received a total of eight well-written and thoughtful essays. So without further ado, here are the winners:
First Prize: Glory Years: The Numismatic Revolution of 1907-1921, the Men Behind It, and Their Designs. By Brian Rose (brianruns10).
Second Prize: is tie between two competitors! I have therefore decided to add another gold coin to the prizes. (I haven’t decided which one yet.) The two second-prize winners are Jeremy Katz (airplanenut) for his essay entitled Take Your Best Shot, and Dennis (Dennis88) for his essay entitled United States Patterns, A Beginners Guide.
Third Prize: The collection of Byron Reed by Samuel Ernst. Samuel is ten-years-old and posts on the forums under his father’s supervision (Coinhusker).
Everyone else who submitted essays will receive a silver coin of my choice with a retail value of about $20. I would ask all contestants to PM me their mailing address, and I will send out the coins over the next week.
Now, as to the essays…
It will take me some time to reformat them and post them. Some of the essays include a large quantity of photographs which I need to upload and link. Furthermore, the footnotes and bibliographies make frequent use of italics, which have to be tagged individually. So over the course of the next week, I will be posting the essays on this thread as I get them done.
However, I’ve included the main body of the First Prize-winning essay so that you can enjoy it, and see what a high level of scholarship and writing our young numismatists are capable of. I will edit-in the pictures, footnotes, and bibliography later.
Glory Years:
The Numismatic Revolution of 1907-1921, the Men Behind It, and Their Designs.
By Brian Rose, 25 April 2004
Part I
The year was 1905 and coinage in America was stagnating. The cent hadn’t been changed in more than forty years, the double eagle in nearly sixty. Worse still, the eagle, half-eagle and quarter-eagle had remained unchanged for nearly seven decades! In fact, the last time any changes had been made to any U.S. coin was more than ten years earlier, in 1892. Something needed to be done and President Theodore Roosevelt had the power, the desire, and the gumption to take on the challenge. But most of all, he had Augustus Saint-Gaudens, and together, they would start a numismatic revolution that in just fourteen years would see the total redesign of every U.S. coin, from the cent to the double-eagle.
What would become the greatest period in American coinage began, to dust off an old literary cliché, on a cold winter night in 1905. On that night, Theodore Roosevelt was enjoying a dinner with his good friend, the world-renowned sculptor Augustus Saint-Gaudens. Saint-Gaudens had originally been commissioned by Roosevelt in March to design a presidential medal for his recent inauguration, but in the interim had become close friends with the famed artist (Figure 1). Roosevelt, remembered best for the charge on San Juan Hill, and his love of nature, also had an eye for art and culture, and one of the major concerns of his first full term in office was America’s artistic image. As Vice-President, he had used his influence to form the National Arts Commission; now as President, he began to take an interest in the nation’s money.
And so it was on that cold night in November that the two friends began to discuss the state of American coinage. Both felt that the “current” gold and silver coins were timid, old fashioned and ugly. Both also shared a great affinity for ancient high-relief coinage and the Renaissance medals of Pisanello and Sperandio. Their discussion escalated throughout the evening, until Roosevelt arrived at a momentous conclusion. Some years later, Augustus’ son Homer described what happened next. “they both grew enthusiastic over the old high-relief Greek coins,” he said, “until the President declared that he would have the mint stamp a modern version of such coins in spite of itself if my father would design them…the cent, the eagle, and the double eagle.” Saint-Gaudens accepted the challenge, knowing full well that his time was running short; he was dying of cancer.
In a letter sent by Saint-Gaudens to Roosevelt on November 11, 1905, he described his vision for the new coins and what would eventually serve as the designs for the eagle and double-eagle. “I have determined on the composition of one side,” he wrote, “which would contain an eagle very much like the one I placed on your medal…On the other side would be some kind of (possibly winged) figure of liberty striding energetically forward as if on a mountain top…with the word “Liberty” marked across the field, in the…hand perhaps a flaming torch; the drapery would be flowing in the breeze….” It was planned that the eagle and double eagle would be similar to each other, like in the Coronet series, while the cent would bear a Liberty Head and a Flying Eagle, similar to that of the Gobrecht dollars and the small cent of 1857-1858.
Saint-Gaudens made the first models of these concepts in 1906. Though there were echoes of the final products, there were also many differences in his early visions. Originally, the Striding Liberty was adorned with an elaborate Native American headdress and a pair of angelic wings. In her hands, a torch and a shield, inscribed with stars and stripes and the word “Liberty.” Over her head, the date appeared in Roman numerals. As for the cent design, Saint-Gaudens adapted it from his “Head of Nike” sculpture for the Sherman Memorial, which was based primarily on the “Beautiful Head” sculpture made at Pergamon in BCE 165—Saint-Gaudens tribute to ancient art.
For months he labored over the new designs, perpetually altering and re-altering them; at one time, he had as many as twenty-five different Standing Eagle reverses. By the next year, he had replaced the Striding Liberty’s shield with an olive branch, and removed the date to the lower right field, with “Liberty” replacing it at the top. A few months later the wings and the headdress were excised and replaced with streaming rays of light. The “Head of Nike” design would remain unchanged for some time, until Roosevelt viewed the concept and suggested that something be added to the figure to make it more American. Saint-Gaudens obliged and replaced Liberty’s crown of leaves with a Native American headdress.
A major point of frustration during this period of trial-and-error was the location and positioning of the various mottos that had become standard on U.S. coinage. Saint-Gaudens labored for some time over where to place “E Pluribus Unum” and “In God We Trust,” and experimented with numerous configurations. He eventually solved the problem by placing the clutter on a lettered edge in a method unused by the Mint since the Capped Bust half-dollars of the early 1800’s. For the Striding Liberty design, “E Pluribus Unum” was moved to the edge and interspersed with thirteen stars, in addition to the forty-six (forty-eight after 1912) encircling Liberty. For the Indian Liberty design, he had more free space and kept all the lettering on the surface, electing instead to add forty-six stars along the edge. As for “In God We Trust,” he decided to remove it altogether, at the advice of President Roosevelt. Roosevelt was a pious man, and believed that placing God on money trivialized Him and bordered on sacrilege. Besides, though there was a law allowing “In God We Trust” to appear on coins (Act of March 3, 1865), there was no law forbidding its omission; the only rule they were breaking was the law of tradition.
In early 1907, Saint-Gaudens’ designs were in their final stages. In a March 12 letter to Roosevelt, Saint-Gaudens wrote, “I like so much the head with a headdress (and by the way, I am very glad you suggested doing the head in that manner) that I should like to see it tried not only on the cent piece but also on the twenty-dollar gold piece, instead of the figure of Liberty.” Roosevelt obliged, but secretly preferred the Striding Liberty design, and decided to have specimens of both struck. During this period, Saint-Gaudens’ health had begun to deteriorate and he made preparations to hand over what work he had done to his assistant, Henry Haring, for completion. Working from the master models, Haring created the first plasters for the eagle and double-eagle, knowing full well that they would not be practical for the Mint’s purposes. Nonetheless, he preserved the extreme high relief of the models anyways, out of respect for his dying mentor.
When Mint engraver Charles Barber was presented with Haring’s “ultra high relief” plaster for the Striding Liberty, he rejected it without giving much reason. It was no secret that he had a great dislike for Saint-Gaudens’ styles and methods, especially since his pattern for a new double eagle had been recently rejected; now, he seemed eager for any opportunity to sabotage the Saint-Gaudens designs. Haring modified the Striding Liberty and produced a second plaster, this time in a slightly reduced “high relief;” this version too was rejected. Frustrated, he confronted Barber, and after a heated debate, convinced him to allow dies to be made based upon his first, “ultra high relief” plaster.
In mid-March, the dies for the Striding Liberty and Indian Liberty test pieces were ready and the first test strikes were performed. Haring was present for these initial strikings and described what happened: “a circular disk of gold was placed in the die and by hydraulic pressure of 172 tons…we made our stamping, and the impression showed a little more than one-half of the modeling…The coin was again placed on the die for another strike and again it showed a little more of the modeling, and so it went, on and on until the ninth strike, when the coin showed up in every detail.” In addition to this process, the gold planchet had to be annealed between each strike. Though a masterpiece of coinage, the “ultra high relief” was simply unsuitable for mass production and as a result, only an estimated twenty to twenty four specimens of this first variety were struck. Of those, approximately sixteen are still extant, including two with a sans serif lettered edge, one with a plain edge, and two struck on special planchets with a reduced diameter. As for the Profile Liberty pattern that Saint-Gaudens loved so much, just a single specimen was struck.
Due to the failure of the first test strikes, Haring was forced make alterations. On May 11, Saint-Gaudens wrote to Roosevelt and expressed his concern over the future of his designs. “as far as I am concerned,’ he wrote, “I should prefer seeing the head of Liberty in place…on the twenty dollar coin as well as the One cent.” The opinion of those around him differed however, and on the 23rd, Saint-Gaudens conceded defeat. “The majority of the people that I show the work to evidently prefer with you [Roosevelt] the figure of Liberty to the head of Liberty…I shall not consider any further on the Twenty Dollar gold coin.” And so the decision was made to keep the Striding Liberty design on the double-eagle, and move the Indian Liberty to the ten-dollar coin.
By late spring, Haring completed a third plaster rendition of the Striding Liberty, which in addition to several minor design changes and a markedly lower relief, had a more traditional Arabic style date rather than Roman numerals. When he presented the new model to Barber, he rejected it, arguing that the new design could not be reduced. Fed up with Barber’s obstinacy, Haring did some investigating and discovered that the reducing press in use by the Mint was old and out-of-date. He requested money to buy a new press but was, not surprisingly, turned down. Ultimately, a dying Saint-Gaudens was forced to appeal directly to President Roosevelt for the needed funds. Roosevelt obliged and a new Janvier reducing press was purchased and installed by early summer. With this new machine, Haring was able to resurrect his second plaster, the “high relief” version, and began the final preparations for production.
Saint-Gaudens’ state worsened as the summer progressed and Roosevelt, realizing his friend had little time left, urged the Mint to begin producing the new double eagles as soon as possible and, “even if it takes the Mint all day to stamp one.” But due to the many design changes and delays, it would not be possible, and on August 3, 1907, Saint-Gaudens died, before a single double eagle had been struck. Until the end, he still labored over his designs; the day before his death, he rallied the last bit of his strength, and was carried to his studio in Cornish to provide final instructions to his cadre of assistants. Due to his hard work, and Roosevelt’s persistence, the Mint successfully produced more than eleven thousand double-eagles, based on Haring’s second “high relief” plaster, and released them before the year was out. Though the result was of some compromise, Haring nonetheless managed to preserve much of Saint-Gaudens’ vision and in the ensuing years, the high relief Striding Liberty would come to be regarded as the finest coin ever produced.
Sadly, in the last months of his life, the work on the one-cent piece gradually fell to the wayside while Haring and the Mint struggled to complete the eagle and double-eagle. After Saint-Gaudens’ death, the Mint, under Barber’s directive, abandoned the cent design altogether in favor of completing the ten-dollar piece. Though the process for striking these coins was much easier due to a lower and less a demanding relief, there were still problems with the design. During the first run, it was discovered by Mint officials that the coins’ wire edges prevented them from being stacked; as a result, production was halted after only five hundred and fifty business strikes and one proof were made. The Mint next tried a rolled edge but found that the resulting coins were poorly struck. To avoid any more embarrassment, all but forty-two of the more than 30,000 pieces originally struck were melted. Chief engraver Barber quickly made several design modifications and by the late fall of 1907, managed to release almost 240,000 coins into circulation.
The reception for the new coins was lukewarm at best; almost everyone, it seemed, had had a problem with them. Bankers complained that the double eagle’s high relief made convenient stacking impossible. The religious community cried foul at the omission of “In God We Trust.” Collectors and scholars complained that the Roman numeral date on the double-eagle took up too much space, that the Indian Liberty had a “Grecian” nose, that her war bonnet was the incorrect style, that the Standing Eagle was not true to real life, that it looked like it was wearing pants…. There was even controversy over the origins of the Indian Liberty design. Commentators alleged that Liberty was based on an Irish waitress, one Mary Cunningham, who supposedly had been in the employ of the late sculptor. The complaints were so many and vociferous that some even called for the coins to be recalled.
Ebenezer Gilbert, noted numismatist and author, was scathing in his review of the ten-dollar coin. “the head…and date are too large for the size of the piece,” he wrote, “and the stars too small…The prominent nose and chin indicate determination…but the effect of overhanging ‘upper jaw’ and lip with open mouth is idiotic…On the reverse, we find a turkey buzzard in pantalets…The coin, both obverse and reverse, is a humiliating disappointment, without one redeeming feature, and is a ‘foozle.’”
There were a few however that recognized the greatness of the Saint-Gaudens coins and what they had achieved. Collector Charles Connick wrote, “The simple beauty and dignity of design here shown on both obverse and reverse, must eventually silence all such noisy objections…we, as a nation do not appreciate the inspiring grace and power of beautiful symbols that we have so many ugly and dispiriting ones all about us.”
In mid-December 1907, the New York Tribune received a letter from a young medallist and recent émigré from Lithuania. His name was Victor D. Brenner. “Much has been said for and against the new $10 and $20 gold pieces designed by our late master, Augustus Saint-Gaudens,” Brenner wrote, “…he was called away before he had time to finish his commendable attempt to bring forward coins that express in their design more than the mere value as a commodity. In his design one sees the embryo of a beautiful conception.” Brenner admitted that the coins had some flaws in their execution, mainly their relief, writing, “Master of the low relief that he was, illness did not allow him the time to investigate certain laws and dictations that separate our methods from the methods the Greeks employed in their coinage.” Ultimately, Brenner believed that the matter would have been resolved if Saint-Gaudens had had more time. “If he [Saint-Gaudens] had the necessary time to make changes, as he was used to do in all his creations, the result would have been no less than any of his masterpieces.”
The praise of a few was not enough to override the complaints of the many however, and the Mint was forced to make changes. With Saint-Gaudens dead, Barber was able to make all the modifications he wanted and resurrected Henry Haring’s third plaster—the same one he had rejected some time earlier on the grounds that it couldn’t be made. In addition to the Arabic style date, the relief of the double-eagle was lowered significantly, much to Mr. Haring’s chagrin. The resulting design, though practical, was a far cry from Saint-Gaudens’ intentions. Numismatic lore would later say that Barber disliked Saint-Gaudens’ design so much that he lowered the double eagle’s relief with the help of a two-by-four. In late December, the Mint released several hundred thousand examples of this third, “flat relief” version. In mid-1908, in spite of Roosevelt’s protestations, the Mint added “In God We Trust” to the eagle and double eagle.
Though the two Saint-Gaudens coins were the result of compromise and disagreement, they still emerged as masterpieces of the art of coinage. It is a testament to the greatness of Augustus Saint-Gaudens that his coins could be altered and interfered with in so many ways, and yet still emerge better than anything made then or since. In his letter to the New York Tribune, Victor D. Brenner’s words about the importance of the Saint-Gaudens coins would prove prophetic. “The precedent that he has set for us will find its echo forever after.”
Part II
With the release of the eagle and double eagle, and due to the enthusiasm of Theodore Roosevelt, a trend of radical redesign was established. Immediately after the release of the ten and twenty-dollar coins, Roosevelt decided it was time to revamp the Coronet half and quarter-eagle, both unchanged since 1839 and 1840, respectively. His friend Dr. William S. Bigelow suggested that the new half and quarter eagles should be incused in design; this, he reasoned, would eliminate the relief difficulties encountered with the eagle and double-eagle, and lessen the amount of wear, thus extending their lifetime. Roosevelt approved of the suggestion, and Dr. Bigelow tapped Bela Lyon Pratt, an associate of Saint-Gaudens, to make the designs.
In contrast with the strong Greek influences upon the Saint-Gaudens coins, Pratt and Bigelow based the new half and quarter-eagles primarily on Middle Eastern and Egyptian art; in fact, Bigelow first struck upon the idea of an incused coin while viewing the Boston Museum of Fine Art’s collection of Egyptian reliefs. Pratt’s incused designs for the eagle and quarter-eagle represented the transition from classical art to modern. For the reverse, he used a nearly identical version of the Standing Eagle Saint-Gaudens used for the ten-dollar coin—a tribute to the late sculptor and to classic Greek art. For the obverse, he created an aged Indian warrior in full headdress, surrounded by thirteen stars. This design marked the beginning of a new age in numismatics: the age of photographic naturalism, and pointed out the way for the work of Victor Brenner and James Earl Fraser.
The reception of these two coins, much like the Saint-Gaudens pieces, was mixed and came with much criticism. S.H. Chapman, a Philadelphia coin dealer, protested that the coins would accumulate dirt more easily, and could potentially convey communicable diseases. Further, he claimed that the coins would be easily counterfeited because their incuse design resembled an engraving. Artistically, he and many others believed the coins to be poorly executed. The reverse eagle, he claimed, was not the American bald eagle, but rather the European gold eagle; as for the Indian, he argued that it looked malnourished and was displeasing to the eye. Pratt and Bigelow countered that the design for the Indian was taken from real life and as proof, they provided photographs of the subject. Critics were also vocal in their opposition to Pratt’s use of Egyptian art, rather than the superior Greek style. “Egyptian art, unlike the Greek,” wrote Chapman, “remained frozen in conventionalism and did not progress to the full free rendering of the round.” There were those who favored Pratt’s design. Writer Chandler Post praised him for his naturalistic depiction of a true native, which he believed was rarely achieved in sculpting. Ultimately, Pratt’s designs would be short-lived; produced intermittently in the coming years and decades (the complete quarter eagle set, for example, has only fifteen years and mintmarks), they were ultimately discontinued in 1929. Now however, they are popular as a unique part of numismatic history, and highly sought after in mint state and proof condition.
The first non-gold coin to be redesigned was the cent. With the centennial of the birth of Abraham Lincoln approaching, President Roosevelt decided to commemorate the event by replacing James Longacre’s Indian design with Lincoln’s image. Initially, a commemorative coin was to be made for Lincoln, but Roosevelt was so impressed by a plaquette of Lincoln made by a young Victor D. Brenner, that he decided it would make for an excellent cent design. Brenner had studied in Paris and New York, instructed courses on coin design for the American Numismatic Society, and was a fervent admirer of the work of Saint-Gaudens; Roosevelt liked him from the start.
That Lincoln should grace the cent was a daring move for President Roosevelt and potentially risky for any artist who accepted the challenge. Never before had a U.S. coin borne a portrait of a real individual. It wasn’t illegal per se, but tradition and respect had kept U.S. coinage strictly symbolic. 1st President George Washington had balked at the suggestion of placing his or any living person’s image on the nation’s money, and the Mint had up to then honored those wishes.
In early 1909, Brenner began work on new cent design; by that summer, he had completed his work and the first dies were cut soon after, with the help of Henry Weil. The truth was, the new dies would have been finished even sooner than that, but recently inaugurated President William Taft insisted that “In God We Trust” be added to the obverse. Released in early June 1909, the Lincoln cent represented a mélange of artistic styles and influences: the work of the Greeks and Saint-Gaudens, the photographic naturalism of Pratt. The greatest influence however was French impressionism. Based upon a photograph of Lincoln, the Brenner’s design was the first to convey light and shadow, which, bolstered by the slight concavity of the field, lent the figure of Lincoln an aura of three-dimensionality, in addition to its photographic detail. The reverse was as precedent setting as anything by Saint-Gaudens or Pratt; in place of the traditional ornate wreath, Brenner instead emblazoned the reverse with the required mottoes and a pair of wheatears—a simple design for the common man.
Though wildly popular (the Mint was forced to limit the number of specimens per person), the Lincoln cent was unable to escape scrutiny. Some felt that a man of Lincoln’s stature deserved to be on a higher denomination. Many others were uncomfortable with a Lincoln being on the cent at all; they felt that it was too “European.” Some collectors spoke out against the new cent because they had become attached to James Longacre’s Indian Head cent, and were displeased with its discontinuation.
Most, and perhaps oddly of all, was the outcry over the apparent prominence of Brenner’s initials, at the base of the reverse. It was not unusual for a sculptor to initial his work—Saint-Gaudens signature was placed in a prominent position below the date on the double-eagle. In mid-August, a few weeks after the Mint began its first run of Lincoln cents, Treasury Secretary William MacVeagh ordered production to be halted so the “VDB” issue could be resolved. Originally, a B was to have been placed in a less conspicuous area, but Chief Engraver Barber protested, arguing that he already was using that initial. Instead, the “VDB” was excised from the cent altogether and would not be restored for nearly a decade.
On August 9th, 1909, the American Numismatic Association held its annual convention, in Montreal, Canada. On August 12th, Thomas Elder, chairman of the ANA’s Coinage Improvement Committee, announced that he had sent a letter to President Taft concerning the state of the remaining unaltered U.S. coins. A representative of the Treasury responded to Elder, and noted that although the five-cent piece was old enough to be changed, “At the present time it is not possible to state whether any legislation by Congress may be expected in the near future.”
That appeared to be the end of it; President Taft, unlike Roosevelt, had little interest in coins, and Congress…tended to be a bit slow. However, the seed had been planted and in 1912, the decision was made to replace the Liberty head nickel. For the job, they enlisted James Earle Fraser, a renowned medallist and a former pupil of Saint-Gaudens. Arguably the most skilled of Saint-Gaudens many protégées, he based his style largely on the works of Pisanello and Sperandio, favorites of both Saint-Gaudens and Roosevelt. For the obverse, Fraser used three Native Americans, named Iron Tail (or Trail as some believe), Two Moons, and John Big Tree (who also modeled for Fraser’s “The End of the Trail”) and formed a composite image. The famed buffalo on the reverse was based on a bison at the New York Zoological Gardens named Black Diamond.
Considered one of the great achievements in coinage, Fraser’s Buffalo nickel was the synthesis of the work of Saint-Gaudens, Pratt and Brenner and represented traditional, idealistic and realistic styles. The obverse Indian and reverse buffalo were the peak of photographic naturalism, yet had an air of idealistic sentiment—in the ensuing years, the coin would become a true piece of Americana, a symbol of the prairie tradition. Perhaps Fraser’s greatest achievement was in his total use of the field; almost not space is left unused, and yet the coin feels balanced and unencumbered by the lettering. However, Fraser’s higher relief design had a sad flaw. With little to protect its lettering and devices, the Buffalo nickel wore quickly in a relatively short amount of time, making some years and mintmarks exceptionally difficult to find in Mint State.
1916 was a banner year for numismatics. The U.S. was teetering on the brink of war, and the Treasury department decided it was time to redesign the dime, quarter and half dollar, as a morale booster and an international political statement. Based on the success of the Buffalo nickel and Lincoln cent, the Mint sought out new artists for the job, and held an open design competition. Adolph Weinman, another pupil of Augustus Saint-Gaudens, won the competition for both the dime and half-dollar. Using Elsie Stevens, the wife of poet Wallace Stevens, as the model, Weinman created a pair of designs that would become some of the most admired and collected coins in numismatic history.
Where the four gold coins, the cent and the nickel represented radical departures from the classical design, Weinman’s Liberty Head and Walking Liberty designs embraced it and fused it with Roman design and the art nouveau. In contrast with the stern, matronly Libertys of old (even the Saint-Gaudens Striding Liberty was a deemed a little homely and slimmed up for the new gold bullion pieces), Weinman’s designs emphasized beauty and the natural curves of the face and human form.
For the dime, Weinman utilized contrasting imagery to convey his message. On the obverse, the now famous Liberty, wearing a winged cap. Much confusion was caused over the meaning of the wings on Liberty’s cap. Many mistook her for the Roman god Mercury (a moniker that has since stuck), who did have wings, but on his feet, not his head. Rather, Weinman explained that the winged cap represented freedom of thought. The reverse then, symbolized the price of freedom of thought: eternal vigilance and respect for the laws of freedom. Based on several patterns by Anthony C. Pacquet, the reverse of the Winged Liberty dime contained a fasces-an ax bound by rods. In Roman times, the fasces was used as punishment, whether it be beating or beheading, for breaking the law, and soon came to symbolize the Empire and its power.
Weinman’s Walking Liberty design is truly a companion piece to the Winged Liberty dime and bore many aesthetic similarities to the former. Based on Oscar Roty’s “Sower,” the Walking Liberty, striding towards the left with the sun rising behind her, symbolized optimism and hope, and neatly summed up the ideals of Manifest Destiny and western expansion. Contrasting with this sunny obverse, the reverse depicted an eagle atop barren rock near a withered tree branch. Whereas Liberty looks forward to the future with open arms, the eagle is wary and on the defensive.
The reverse eagle was based on one of the test moldings Saint-Gaudens created in 1906 for what eventually serve as the reverse of the ten-dollar coin. Weinman had worked closely with Saint-Gaudens, helping him to execute many of his finest designs. Weinman’s eagle, in all its exquisite detail and finery, was a tribute to Saint Gaudens and his design for what would become the double eagle. So many of the redesigned coins of this era resulted more or less out of tribute for him, that it could be argued that Saint-Gaudens is the most memorialized figure on our coinage. As a whole, Weinman’s design half-dollar design was the first truly great sculptural ensemble. For the first time, a planchet ceased to be merely a hunk of 90% silver bonded to a core of 10% copper struck under high pressure, and became a surface, much like stone, marble or bronze. It combined naturalism and classicism and created design that was well balanced and discovered a new way to render what are essential traditional poses.
For the quarter dollar, the Mint selected the design by Herman MacNeil, who had previously gained recognition for his medal for the 1901 Pan-American Exposition. The resulting design was both arguably the most daring coin since the Saint-Gaudens pieces, and the most politically charged. Heretofore, Liberty had been depicted as a beauty—soft, fragile, peaceful. MacNeil’s Amazonian interpretation had more in common with the goddess Athena than Liberty, at least in depiction. The reverse design in contrast, was more traditional, featuring an eagle based largely on the Gobrecht design, surrounded by stars; this eagle, along with the Weinman design, would last truly naturalistic eagles on America’s coinage until the Sacagawea dollar.
Like Saint-Gaudens, MacNeil was heavily influenced by Greek art and the design for the Standing Liberty quarter was based largely upon sculpture from the Pheidias to Praxiteles periods of BCE 450-350. A shield in her left hand, an olive branch in her right, she stood positioned between two stone columns. MacNeil said this “symbolized the nation’s awareness and preparedness for battle and its equal readiness to proffer peace.” The Standing Liberty quarter was arguably the most politically charged American coin; the radically different appearance of Liberty was a message to other nations (i.e. Germany) that America was ultimately ready and willing to defend itself and its freedom.
It seemed that every new coin made by the Mint caused controversy in one public sector or another. MacNeil’s design immediately caused a stir over Liberty’s partly exposed right breast. It was a boldly artistic move to emblazon the quarter with a semi-nude human form, and the Mint was brave for going along with it; however, 1916 was simply not the right time, when it was still shocking for a lady to reveal her legs. After a year and a half, in mid-1917, the quarter was modified and Liberty’s exposed breast was covered by a vest of chain mail. But was the public outcry against the quarter as great as history has made it seem? Evidence now shows that the driving force behind the movement to cover up Liberty was the Treasury itself. By early 1917, Treasury Secretary William G. McAdoo was considering a run for the Presidency in 1920, so some believe he decided to modify MacNeil’s design in order to save face and make him seem more moral and family-friendly.
Whereas the dime, quarter and half represented pre-war vigilance, the coin that would be the last alteration and the end of the numismatic revolution emphasized peace and hope. Henry Morgan’s design for the dollar coin, not minted since 1904, was resurrected in 1921 and then, at the urging of noted collector Farran Zerbe, replaced in favor of something new. Continuing the trend of using new artists, the Mint enlisted Anthony de Francisci, a former pupil of both Weinman and Fraser. De Francisci’s design, referred to as the Peace dollar, was both a tribute to Saint-Gaudens, and his mentor, Adolph Weinman.
The obverse and reverse of his design were based largely upon the respective sides of Saint-Gaudens design for the ten-dollar piece. Like the Weinman eagle, de Francisci’s eagle perched atop a barren rocky formation. Rays of sunlight stream out from the distance, and the eagle calmly looks toward it, symbolizing both the hardship of the past several years, and the hope of a new decade. Liberty, a crown of rays about her head, represented enlightenment, and the face both resembled the classic Greek statuaries, and also the art nouveau style of his mentor, Adolph Weinman. The entire coin was given a worn, tired appearance, symbolizing the long and arduous journey America had been through.
If the Saint-Gaudens coins were the alpha of the Numismatic Revolution, then the Peace dollar was the omega and it is ironic that de Francisci’s design would also encounter problems with its relief. In 1921, after a little more than a million pieces were released, the Mint found that the relief was too bold. In 1922, approximately thirty thousand dollars dated 1922 were struck in the relief of 1921 before the design was modified; the remaining mintage for that year was in the new relief. Many considered de Francisci’s design to be the weakest coin of the Numismatic Revolution. Some thought the Liberty looked windswept, that her slightly parted lips made her look “vapid.” And there is some validity to that argument; it is a difficult task to try and create something that can top the Morgan dollar, but the Peace dollar has found its place among collectors, and is prized in Mint State.
Never before, and never since was art so well used in coinage. In fourteen years, the Mint, by embracing new ideas, techniques, and bold new artists, set a new standard for numismatic art and design. The creations that resulted from this unprecedented period of artistic growth and evolution have become prized by collectors and investors for their outstanding quality, beauty and detail. So exquisite are these masterful works, that some collectors believe that to collect them in anything less than Mint State does not do them justice. Perhaps the most amazing thing is that all this was the result of two men, one with power, the other with artistic talent, and both with vision, foresight, and a hell of a lot of guts
We ARE watching you.
0
Comments
Nice of you to sponsor such a competition. Congratulations to you, too.
Robert
Specializing in 1854 and 1855 large FE patterns
<
Cameron Kiefer
Too lazy to hit the "Caps Lock" key?
Damn, and here I thought I was lazy!
We ARE watching you.
6PM EST.
We ARE watching you.
...now this is a good way to go into my AP English exam tomorrow
Jeremy
You still have to take the exam, dork.
Walking in and telling them you won a competition aint gonna get you a hall pass.
We ARE watching you.
<< <i>You still have to take the exam, dork.
Walking in and telling them you won a competition aint gonna get you a hall pass. >>
I know... but it can't hurt my morale
Samuel Ernst
________________________________________
ThanksJohnZ.
I've got one excited 10 year old on my hands. This was a wonderful thing you did and a geat investment in the future. My thanks to you too!
Samuel's Dad, Mitch
PM on it's way.
A contest that promotes writing, thinking, and an appreciation of numismatics is a good thing.
I applaud all the entrants, and I commend the generosity of spirit that JohnZ represents.
Clankeye
Congrats to all who won! I lost, so did 4 others. I'm real happy you're giving even the losers a prize. You send you'd send me that mexican coin, you mentioned it was larger than a US dollar. Do you know what date it is? I couldn't tell on the picture you PM'd me with.
Thanks again!
Best Regards to you, JohnZ,
KEVIN. OOPS, sorry too lazy to hit the CAPS LOCK key.
Don
U.S. Nickels Complete Set with Major Varieties, Circulation Strikes
U.S. Dimes Complete Set with Major Varieties, Circulation Strikes
It is a two-year type coin.
I hope you like it!
P.S. the coin is much much nicer than my lousy scan admits.
Cheers,
John
We ARE watching you.
Thanks for the effort JohnZ and all the contestants.
So how old is Brian Rose, the first prize winner?
Brian Rose is 19.
We ARE watching you.
Kudo's to you for helping make this place what it is.
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
Mine barely exceded the 1,000 minimum...
<< <i>Oh geez... I bet I came in last.
Mine barely exceded the 1,000 minimum... >>
Heh, mine was shorter than yours ....
JohnZ said mine was the shortest of them all, and if your barely exceeded 1,000 words, mine might've not exceeded it.
Didn't I say everyone was a winner?
1234567890 PM me your address, and I will send you very nice coin.
We ARE watching you.
There are a few considerations here:
1. Some of the language and vocabulary has been coached, but you will recall that I encouraged YN's to consult their parents and teachers on the subject of writing a research paper.
2. The author did more than look things up in a book. He visited a "museum" and wrote about his personal experience.
3. Yes, most of it is a first-person narrative, but what else would you expect from a 10-year-old?
4. The footnotes are very good (more coaching from parents and teachers which is a good thing).
5. The entire essay was submitted to me by PM, and it's in a form in which I can just "copy and paste" onto the forums - talk about following the letter of the law...
6. Am I being hoodwinked by a con artist? I really don't think so. I've read a number of CoinHusker's posts, and I sense nothing but honesty and integrity.
7. Should I require Jpegs of birth certificates in the future? OK. I will concede that point.
Now, here's a great essay by a good kid...
My name is Samuel Ernst and I am ten years old. I live in Omaha, Nebraska and I like to collect coins. I am going to write this essay about a man named Byron Reed. He started the first real estate company in Nebraska in 1856.(1)
In the late 1800's, Byron Reed started to collect coins. He also colleced a lot of other things too like autographs, books, maps and currency but I'm just going to write about his coin collection. When he died in 1891, he gave his collections to the City of Omaha. He also gave the city money to build a public library to put his coins in so people could see them. In the 1970's the city of Omaha decided to lock the collections up in a vault because parts of it were being stolen. In 1996, the City of Omaha sold over 5,000 pieces of the collection and made over five million dollars so that Omaha's old train station could be turned into a museum. It's called the Durham Western Heritage Museum and Byron Reed's collection is on display there.(2)
I went with my family to the museum to learn more about Byron Reed and his collection for my essay. The room where his collection is, is supposed to look like Byron Reed's library in his home where he spent many hours looking at his coins. Larry Wilson, a historian and numismatic researcher for ICG, the Independent Coin Grading Company of Englewood, Colorado, said this about the Byron Reed exhibit, "The exhibit is an environmental museum where the visitors walk through a replication of the original Byron Reed Library. The coins are displayed in beautiful dark wooden cases that give the visitors the sense they are part of the exhibit. It gave me the feeling I was back in the 1880's sitting in Bryon Reed's library examining his coins with him. The exhibit includes an abundance of historical information on Byron Reed and the times. I know visitors will be impressed with the quality of the exhibit and the magnificence of the coins displayed."(3) I know that's how I felt.
Byron Reed's father, Alexander, started the family collection by collecting "Hard Times Tokens". That's kind of how I started collecting too. My Dad picks state quarters out of his change and we put them in a state quarters map. Now I also have a small case almost full of different coins. Someday I hope to have a coin collection as good as Byron Reed's.
The Byron Reed collection has about 60 different "Hard Times Tokens".(4) I learned that "Hard Times Tokens" were "private tokens issued during the presidential administrations of Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren. The hard times were brought on by Jackson's economic policies and culminated in the panic of 1837. 'Hard Times Tokens' contain satirical commentary regarding Jackson's and Van Buren's actions at the United States Bank."(5) Byron Reed also collected Sutler Tokens, Civil War Tokens, and Merchant Tokens.
The display of Byron Reed's collection is really big and it took us a long time to look at everything and read all about it. Byron Reed collected Colonial coins, Federal issue coins and Territorial gold. But the biggest display was of 19th century "Pattern" coins. His collection of Pattern coins is considered one of the very best in the country. A sign in the museum said, "A Pattern or Trial coin, is an experimental piece that either proposes a new design or illustrates change in a coin's metallic composition, size or shape. More than 2,000 different pattern varities have been produced since the beginning of the U.S. Mint in 1792. The general public rarely sees most pattern designs as they do not reach the public in the form of circulating coins."(6) Mr. Reed collected over 300 Pattern coins. One of the Pattern coins I saw was called a "Fugio" cent designed by Benjamin Franklin. It was the first coin issued under the authority of the United States. It showed a picture of the sun shining down on a sundial with "Fugio" written on it. It was neat to learn that "Fugio" means "Time flies". My Dad thought that sounded like someting Benjamin Franklin would say. Too bad they can't put stuff like that on coins today.
While I was reading about the "Pattern" coins at the exhibit, I also learned that another man from Omaha made a big contribution to the study of "Pattern" coins. An eye doctor named, J. Hewitt Judd had published a book called "The United States Pattern, Trial and Experimental Pieces". It was neat to see that people from the city I live in were so important in the hobby of coin collecting.
The five best coins were in a dsiplay case by themselves. The first one was a New England Shilling. It was graded EF-45. The sign said, "The Massachusetts Shilling represented the first silver coins minted in North America. The obverse features only the letters "NE" for New England. Reed's superb example of the NE Shilling is the plate coin from the Parmelee sale and as such is one of the finest known. The reverse of the Massachusetts silver coinage features the denomination. In this case, a Roman numeral XII pence or one shilling. Silver for early American coins generally came from the West Indies. John Hall, the Mint Master, who produced the New England Shilling supposedly furnished his daughter's dowry in shillings equal to her weight."(7) I thought it looked kind of plain. I would never guess it was so valuable. I had heard of a shilling in a Hardy Boy's book I just read called, "The Melted Coins". In the story it talked about a Pine Tree Shilling and they had one at the museum in a different case. I thought it was so neat to see a real Pine Tree Shilling like the one I just read about.
The next coin was a 1797 Capped Bust / Small Eagle $10 gold piece. this coin was graded ICG AU-58. The sign describing this coin said, "Both the obverse and reverse images for the Capped Bust / Small Eagle $10 coin were borrowed from an early Roman onyx cameo. The 1797 $10 eagle represents the earliest design for Federal issue gold coins. Only 3,615 of these coins were minted. Many of which have long since been melted for bullion. It is estimated that fewer than forty 1797 eagle's still survive."(8) The thing I noticed about this coin is how the stars and the year 1797 run into each other at the bottom of the obverse. It made me wonder why they didn't fix that before they minted it?
The third coin in the big display case was an 1804 Dollar. The first thing the description said about it was that it is the "King of American Coins" but I didn't think it looked all that special. Then I read about how rare it is. There are only fifteen known 1804 Dollars. The coin I saw in the Byron Reed collection is a Class 1, and there are only 8 of those known to exist. I found this on the internet about the Byron Reed 1804 Dollar. "The pedigree of this 1804 Dollar can be traced back to the 1840's, when an unknown woman reportedly prchased it from the U.S. Mint for face value. It then became the cornerstone of the Lorin G. Parmelee collection from 1874 to 1890. Byron Reed purchased the coin from the Parmelee Collection sale in 1890 for $570."(9)
The sign for this coin said, "The King of American Coins actually features a rather busty woman. Miss Ann Willing Bingham posed as Lady Liberty in 1795. Reed's specimen of this maufactured rarity is one of only 8 Class 1 dollars in existence. He purchased it for $570 from the Parmelee sale of 1890. The Class 1 dollars were made as part of a presentation set of all American coinage that was to be given to foreign dignitarties beginning in 1834. Based upon inaccurate Mint records the Dollar coin in the set was struck with the date 1804 even though no Dollars of that date were minted in that year."(10) Back in 1999, the Western Heritage Museum chose ICG, the Independent Coin Grading Company, to grade the coin. "A grade of Proof-64 was assigned to this Original Specimen of the 1804 Dollar, with an estimated value of 1.5 to 2 million dollars."(11)
The fourth coin in the display case was an 1856 DUBOSQ $5 gold piece. It was smaller than the other coins that were displayed in this case. It looked like the size of a dime. It was graded ICG EF-40. The sign about this coin said, "From the booming gold fields of California came the ultra rare DUBOSQ $5 gold piece. One of only three known and the only one available for public display. The coin's rarity is a function of the amount of gold it contained. The coin is so under weight that miners melted them almost as soon as they were minted. The dies for the DUBOSQ coins may have been illegally engraved by the U.S. Mint engraver James B. Longacre. Like most privately issued territorial gold pieces, the coin is supposed to look just like a standard issue $5 gold coin. The only difference is the word 'DUBOSQ' on Liberty's headband."(12) I could hardly believe I was actually looking at the only coin like this on public display. That was pretty neat. I felt pretty special to know that I saw a coin, in person, that most people will never, ever see. I wanted to put a picture of it in my essay, but we have web tv and can't send pictures. I wondered what Byron Reed thought when he would look at it in his library? I bet he felt pretty special too.
The last coin in the center display was an 1877 $50 Half Union. It was the biggest of all the coins in this case. It was a copper coin and the design on the face of the coin looked a lot like the design on a Morgan silver dollar to me. I was surprised to see that a copper coin ever had a face value of $50. I guess I take pennies for granted. It was graded ICG PR-65. The sign describing this coin said, "The crowning piece in Reed's fabulous Pattern Collection is a $50 Half Union coin. First proposed in 1877 the idea was to have a large denomination piece that banks could count quickly and efficiently. Charles Barber designed the head of Liberty. The reverse was similar to the 1877 Double Eagle $20. While the proposed $100 coin, called the Union, was never struck, eight copper and one gold Half Union of this design were made. Concerns over the potential for counterfeiting, led to the abandonment of minting such large coins."(13)
After looking at the five special coins in this display case I felt pretty special too. I wondered what it must have been like to find coins like that and then collect them? Then I remembered how neat I feel when I find a special coin or have one given to me for a birthday or Christmas and want to keep it forever and show them to all my friends and family. That must have been how Byron Reed felt too because he took such good care of his collection. I thought the Byron Reed collection was really cool and I hope more people can come to Omaha and see it for themselves.
__________________________________________________________
Footnotes:
(1) From page one of the TransEquity, Inc. website about the history of the Byron Reed Company. www.transequity.com/TE/history1.html
(2) From "The History of the Byron Reed Collection" plaque on display in the Byron Reed Collection at the Durham Western Heritage Museum, 801 Tenth Street, Omaha, NE 68108.
(3) ICG Press Release dated May, 28, 1999. Taken from www.icgcoin.com/p990528.htm
(4) From "The Beginning of the Collection" plaque on display at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(5) From the "Hard Times Tokens" plaque on display at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(6) From the "Patterns" plaque on display in the Byron Reed Collection at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(7) From a plaque describing the obverse and reverse of the "New England Shilling" on display from the Byron Reed Collection at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(8) From a plaque describing the obverse and reverse of the 1797 Capped Bust/Small eagle $10 gold piece on display from the Bryon Reed Collection at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(9) From an article entitled, "ICG is chosen to grade Parmelee/Reed Specimen of the 1804 Silver Dollar - Original (class ) for Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE" from the ICG website. www.icgcoin.com/p990528.htm
(10) From a plaque describing the 1804 Dollar in the Byron Reed collection at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(11) From an article entitled, "ICG is chosen to grade Parmelee/Reed Specimen of the 1804 Silver Dollar - Original (class ) for Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE" from the ICG website. www.icgcoin.com/p990528.htm
(12) From a plaque describing the DUBOSQ $5 gold piece in the Byron Reed Collection at the Durham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
(13) From a plaque describing the $50 Half Union coin in the Byron Reed collection at the Duham Western Heritage Museum in Omaha, NE.
We ARE watching you.
<< <i>Thanks for posting the two essays. I've enjoyed reading both of them so far and look forward to seeing more. I'm especially interested in reading the essay on the subject of problems with the early U.S. mint. I have just obtained two books which I have started reading on the history of the U.S. Mint. The one is by Frank Stewart titled, History of the First United States Mint from 1924 and the other is titled, Illustrated History of the United States Mint published by George Evans in 1897. I am particularly interested in following the history surrounding the minting of the 1792 half disme, a coin I recently acquired. >>
I wrote a short essay to JohnZ about early gold coinage in the US mint
I cannot wait untill he posts it. Hope you like it!
Like VOC Numismatics on facebook
Best,
BR
the 1st Pr. winner made for great reading on a night I badly needed a wind down
I'm using the 2nd Pr. to buy myself a camera!!!!
kudos to the really YN and 3rd Pr. winner-very nice essay young man!
designset
Treasury Seals Type Set
<< <i>Did I miss it or were the rest of the essays posted elsewhere? >>
JohnZ said,
<< <i>It will take me some time to reformat them and post them. Some of the essays include a large quantity of photographs which I need to upload and link. Furthermore, the footnotes and bibliographies make frequent use of italics, which have to be tagged individually. So over the course of the next week, I will be posting the essays on this thread as I get them done. >>
But I think he is a teacher so he might have gotten bogged down with end of year things. I can't imagine the work to reformat them all so it may take a while. Hope he can do it.
After re-reading it I am confident that everything will work out, the prizes will be delivered and the controversy ended.
It's hard to imagine JohnZ going through all of the trouble, hassle and work to run this contest, read the essay's, post 2 of the winning ones, quelch a controversy, etc., to not follow through.
Something has obviously happened to JohnZ and sooner or later we will find out what that exactly is. Until then, the winners (of which, one is my 10 year old son) will have to find reward itself in knowing the great jobs and the hard work they put into some great essay's. Not much solice, it's not a gold coin, but it's something no one can take from you!!! CONGRATULATIONS to each and every one of you. Well done!
There's a saying , "No good deed goes unpunished" and sadly is seems as if both JohnZ and the winners of his contest are finding it to be true.
Here's to everything working out!!
myEbay
DPOTD 3