A couple of firsts (with one stone to my wallet)...Fugio Cent NewP
Dawg144
Posts: 670 ✭✭✭
First off, let me say that I know next to nothing about colonials. The little I do know comes from reading archived posts, and a lot of CRO's information (by the way, thanks everyone!). There's a lot of incredible history behind these coins, but until now, I've never really had the patience or resources to find a decent-looking, but affordable coin.
Enter the topic of this post, an NGC VG-8 Fugio Cent I found on Heritage. Since I like to learn something about my coins before and after I buy them, I looked through auction archives and Newman variety webpages. Relative to other series, this was really hard. Problem-free, or at least non-problem-holdered coins, seem to be pretty uncommon at this grade level. There's a good chance that I'm mistaken, but my semi-educated guess as to the variety of this coin is 13-R. I hope my attribution wasn't just wishful thinking.
I think the weakness of strike on the sun and the lower rings may be due to a planchet flaw. Or, they may have resulted from the off-center strike. There also looks to be a little bit of verdigris/patina in the depressed areas. Whatever other collectors may think of these "issues", I think the coin is a charming piece of early American history, and I look forward to seeing it in hand.
Enter the topic of this post, an NGC VG-8 Fugio Cent I found on Heritage. Since I like to learn something about my coins before and after I buy them, I looked through auction archives and Newman variety webpages. Relative to other series, this was really hard. Problem-free, or at least non-problem-holdered coins, seem to be pretty uncommon at this grade level. There's a good chance that I'm mistaken, but my semi-educated guess as to the variety of this coin is 13-R. I hope my attribution wasn't just wishful thinking.
I think the weakness of strike on the sun and the lower rings may be due to a planchet flaw. Or, they may have resulted from the off-center strike. There also looks to be a little bit of verdigris/patina in the depressed areas. Whatever other collectors may think of these "issues", I think the coin is a charming piece of early American history, and I look forward to seeing it in hand.
0
Comments
<< <i>I think the weakness of strike on the sun and the lower rings may be due to a planchet flaw. >>
Nice coin dawg!! Rather than a planchet flaw, I think the pattern of poor strike on one side of the obverse and reverse is more likely due to misalligned dies. If the die faces are not completely paralell to each other, but are instead at a slight angle while striking the planchet, one side of the coin will be well struck and the other will be less well struck. Looks like that's what you've got to me. But that just adds character to the coin.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
In fact, I think the total population of all Fugios is less than around 400,000 coins, based on what was originally minted. The extant pieces of many relatively "common" varieties number in the hundreds or less. I always thought one could make a telling comparison to the 484,000 examples of 1909-S VDB Lincoln Cents that were minted to show the reality of the rarity of popularly collected key dates.
Congrats on the Fugio Dawg.
<< <i>Fugios are some of my favorite colonials... >>
Why do people insist on calling Fugio coppers "colonials" when they were struck in 1787 after we gained our independence?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Fugios are some of my favorite colonials... >>
Why do people insist on calling Fugio coppers "colonials" when they were struck in 1787 after we gained our independence? >>
This issue has come up before, but what the heck, let's rehash the whole thing one more time. This is what I wrote on our site some time ago:
I think the most relevant definition of Colonial (with a capital 'C') in this context is something like “Pertaining to the 13 British colonies that became the United States of America, or to their period.”
The term 'colonial coin', on the other hand, is generally used among collectors and specialists in this area as convenient shorthand for a much broader group of coins and tokens which the Redbook happens to list in 12(!) distinct categories:
1. Spanish Colonial Issues
2. British New World Issues
3. Coinage Authorized by British Royal Patent
4. Early American and Related Tokens
5. French New World Issues
6. Speculative Issues, Tokens, and Patterns
7. Coinage of the States
8. Private Tokens After Confederation
9. Washington Pieces
10.Continental Currency
11.Nova Constellation Patterns
12. Fugio Cents
Of the coins and tokens listed above, the earliest piece bears the date 1652, and the latest 1820 – though others were struck as early as 1616 and undated, or as late as 1850 or 1860 and backdated. Are you with me so far?
Some coins and tokens on this list were struck in early America, others in England, Ireland, France, Spain, Mexico, etc.
Some circulated in early America (but also in what is now Canada, Bermuda, the Caribbean, etc.) as money, by official decree, some informally, some perhaps not at all.
And some issues are on this list because they bear motifs or legends which have some connection (however tenuous) to early America.
And this is to say nothing of the other issues and series which are often referred to as colonial, or colonial related - including contemporary circulating counterfeits of American origin, additional foreign issues known to have circulated in early America, some medals, etc. - which aren’t in the Redbook. Yet.
In other words, these issues are not all Colonial per the normal definition of the word. But in the absence of any other convenient, universally accepted term to describe all of these diverse coins and tokens (and because reciting these 12 categories and the other unlisted items by name is fairly cumbersome), it is the best we have for now.
With that, I would suggest we put the semantic argument to bed.
<< <i>
<< <i>Fugios are some of my favorite colonials... >>
Why do people insist on calling Fugio coppers "colonials" when they were struck in 1787 after we gained our independence? >>
OK...fine. Fugios are some of my favorite coins...period.
People insist on calling Fugio coppers "colonials" because it's convenient to lump them with all the other colonials;
because they were struck in what is commonly considered the "colonial era" before the first US mint was officially established;
because, right or wrong, the Redbook has traditionally included them in the "Colonial" section - although marked as federal issues under "Contract Issues and Patterns";
because they have design elements common to other "colonial era" coins such as the Continental Dollar (also considered a federal issue in the Redbook);
and because they don't really fit in with other federal issues.
<< <i>With that, I would suggest we put the semantic argument to bed. >>
Oops...CCU responded while I was still typing. Thanks CCU.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>CCU---I understand what you are saying and you have told me nothing that I didn't already know (I've been collecting coins since I was a kid and I'm 61 now so I've been around for a while). I still don't consider Fugio coppers to be colonials since they were struck under the authority of the US government under the Articles of Confederation eleven years after the colonies declared their independence. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. In any event, they are neat and historical coins. >>
I gotta admit, I always pegged you as a Gen-X dude. Maybe it's the Mountain Dew avatar . . .
<< <i>
<< <i>CCU---I understand what you are saying and you have told me nothing that I didn't already know (I've been collecting coins since I was a kid and I'm 61 now so I've been around for a while). I still don't consider Fugio coppers to be colonials since they were struck under the authority of the US government under the Articles of Confederation eleven years after the colonies declared their independence. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. In any event, they are neat and historical coins. >>
I gotta admit, I always pegged you as a Gen-X dude. Maybe it's the Mountain Dew avatar . . . >>
I wanted to pick a colorful avatar that others would not want to pick. So far it's worked. Drank my first Mountain Dew last week.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>CCU---I understand what you are saying and you have told me nothing that I didn't already know (I've been collecting coins since I was a kid and I'm 61 now so I've been around for a while). I still don't consider Fugio coppers to be colonials since they were struck under the authority of the US government under the Articles of Confederation eleven years after the colonies declared their independence. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. In any event, they are neat and historical coins. >>
I gotta admit, I always pegged you as a Gen-X dude. Maybe it's the Mountain Dew avatar . . . >>
I wanted to pick a colorful avatar that others would not want to pick. So far it's worked. Drank my first Mountain Dew last week.
Has the caffeine worn off yet?