Options
Rusted Die 1901 Proof $5???
CaptHenway
Posts: 33,970 ✭✭✭✭✭
Can somebody please explain this coin to me?
From Stack's June 21-21 Prestera Auction, Lot 1822.
TD
From Stack's June 21-21 Prestera Auction, Lot 1822.
TD
Numismatist. 54 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Also won the PNG's Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
0
Comments
Linky2
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
<< <i>I think that it is a poor photo. >>
I don't think those bubbles are in the plastic. They seem to throw shadows just as the coin does.
TD
<< <i>I think that it is a poor photo. >>
I disagree, I think it is on/in the coin
(And, you can find the coin discussed here also. Note how yellow it looks at present.)
Ed. S.
(EJS)
1901 $20 $10 $5 $2.50
Mar 48 38 45 235
Jun 13 11 16 32
Sep 4 3 5 17
Dec 31 33 74 39
Total 96 85 140 323
<< <i>Production of gold proofs, 1901, by quarter. (I don’t have the exact dates.)
1901 $20 $10 $5 $2.50
Mar 48 38 45 235
Jun 13 11 16 32
Sep 4 3 5 17
Dec 31 33 74 39
Total 96 85 140 323 >>
Maybe they stored the dies on the back porch between usages.
<< <i>You can find a couple of other rusted die 1901 proofs in the Heritage archives. I didn't bother doing any comparisons to see if it's a different die from the non-rusted ones or a later die state.
(And, you can find the coin discussed here also. Note how yellow it looks at present.) >>
I see the one from Jan. 11, 2005 from an earlier die state of the rusted die (not as badly rusted as the Stacks coin), but not any others, and I do not see the Stacks coin listed. Can you cite sale dates?
TD
<< <i>
<< <i>You can find a couple of other rusted die 1901 proofs in the Heritage archives. I didn't bother doing any comparisons to see if it's a different die from the non-rusted ones or a later die state.
(And, you can find the coin discussed here also. Note how yellow it looks at present.) >>
I see the one from Jan. 11, 2005 from an earlier die state of the rusted die (not as badly rusted as the Stacks coin), but not any others, and I do not see the Stacks coin listed. Can you cite sale dates?
TD >>
Take a look at the November 2003: 7596 specimen.
Ed. S.
(EJS)
Interesting, either way.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>If the same coin, I wonder if it's really die rust or if the surface may be bubbling up for some reason. >>
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>You can find a couple of other rusted die 1901 proofs in the Heritage archives. I didn't bother doing any comparisons to see if it's a different die from the non-rusted ones or a later die state.
(And, you can find the coin discussed here also. Note how yellow it looks at present.) >>
I see the one from Jan. 11, 2005 from an earlier die state of the rusted die (not as badly rusted as the Stacks coin), but not any others, and I do not see the Stacks coin listed. Can you cite sale dates?
TD >>
Take a look at the November 2003: 7596 specimen. >>
I think you're right. Same coin. Note the tiny pit in the field above star #1 and to the right of star #2. The copper spot at 12 o'clock on the reverse has been carefully removed.
I originally thought that it was a different coin because the rust pits were much less obvious in the 2003 photo, but that must have been due to the lighting.
Sure funny how none of the cataloguers mention the die rust.
How can a coin struck from such a die get a star ranking?
MOO
TD
So, do we know of only one coin struck from the die after it rusted; and, if so, how do we account for it? Or, as MrEureka suggests, is the "bubbling" on this coin the result of some post-mint process?
<< <i>-- "I originally thought that it was a different coin because the rust pits were much less obvious in the 2003 photo, but that must have been due to the lighting." --
So, do we know of only one coin struck from the die after it rusted; and, if so, how do we account for it? Or, as MrEureka suggests, is the "bubbling" on this coin the result of some post-mint process? >>
No, I think that the Jan. 11, 2005 coin shows that the die was indeed rusted.
TD
maybe the dies were exposed during this timeframe?
Text
<< <i>I wonder if it's really die rust or if the surface may be bubbling up for some reason. >>
I cannot imagine a process, intentional or otherwise, that would lead to this given the planchet is supposed to be a solid solution alloy.
<< <i>
<< <i>I wonder if it's really die rust or if the surface may be bubbling up for some reason. >>
I cannot imagine a process, intentional or otherwise, that would lead to this given the planchet is supposed to be a solid solution alloy. >>
I took the comment to mean that the "bubbling" might have occurred in the past (not that it is ongoing) as a result of heating the metal to molten state. I agree with Tom that the coin looks to have been struck from a rusted die, and I accept his view. But I'd still like to know if agressive work with a laser (or other heat treatment) can affect the surface of a coin in the way suggested by MrEureka.