I'm tempted to post a thread about colonials...and so I have!
MidLifeCrisis
Posts: 10,560 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have my preferences set to show 50 threads on the first page. Of those 50, I think I counted 11 or 12 that had something to do with "the big one" or "dreck" (including a thread I posted earlier 
).
But I have seen some attempts to get back to posts about coins.
So, anybody wanna discuss colonials?
).But I have seen some attempts to get back to posts about coins.
So, anybody wanna discuss colonials?
0
Comments
<< <i>I have my preferences set to show 50 threads on the first page. Of those 50, I think I counted 11 or 12 that had something to do with "the big one" or "dreck" (including a thread I posted earlier
But I have seen some attempts to get back to posts about coins.
So, anybody wanna discuss colonials?
Mr. Midlife Sir,
Colonials are your field. I will be glad to read anything you post on the subject. I know very little on the subject but we never get too old to learn. Have at it my friend.
Ron
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Actually, I am leaving for work now, so you can post with reckless abandon.
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)
- It seems that most of the well-known collectors in the 19th and early 20th centuries had substantial quantities of colonial coins in their collections. Even Eliasberg - who focused on federal issue coinage - had a nice selection of colonials. Yet, nowadays, large colonial collections only seem to be formed by those who choose to specialize in them.
- Forming a simple type set of colonials can become a serious challenge. Just determining what such a type set should include can be difficult. Red book types? PCGS Registry lists? World coins that circulated in early America? Which ones? What varieties? Etc., etc.
- My collecting philosophy concerning colonials continues to evolve. When I first started, I wanted to collect only mint state colonials. In fact, really nice, mint state coins from the 18th and sometimes even 17th Centuries have always amazed and awed me. I soon found out that I could not afford such a collection so I settled on mid-grade pieces of XF or better. But recently I have begun to appreciate lower grade colonials more and more - especially rare but easily recognizable varieties with great color (milk chocolate) and surfaces.
- Gold coins from the 18th Century that were used in early America in some fashion (not necessarily circulating widely but used in higher level commerce, for example) are really a great area to further specialize a colonial era collection.
IMO this is the impact of population growth and financial affluence. Meaning the survioring coins have a greater number of potential hands collectoring them with more money chasing them.
There also may be an element of not only moving further away from those time periods, but the large number of modern offerings that absorb collectors and funds, meaning some potential colonial collectors of financial means are directed elsewhere.
www.brunkauctions.com
<< <i>i recently purchased a book titled 'History of the United States Mint and American Coinage, ancient and modern' by George Evans c. 1885 and the text refers to Fugio cents as 'Franklins'.......does anyone know why this is?......i have never heard them referred to as Franklins previous to this tome.......i would think that by 1948 and the introduction of the Franklin Half dollar, this usage could be quite confusing >>
Isn't it because Franklin may have designed it? MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
feel free to edit where i may be offbase MidLife...
www.brunkauctions.com
<< <i>
<< <i>i recently purchased a book titled 'History of the United States Mint and American Coinage, ancient and modern' by George Evans c. 1885 and the text refers to Fugio cents as 'Franklins'.......does anyone know why this is?......i have never heard them referred to as Franklins previous to this tome.......i would think that by 1948 and the introduction of the Franklin Half dollar, this usage could be quite confusing >>
Isn't it because Franklin may have designed it? MJ >>
Exactly.
Quoting Louis Jordan from the University of Notre Dame Department of Special Collections website:
"...the Confederation passed a resolution on April 21, 1787, for the contract coining of a national copper cent. About two and a half months later they agreed on a design. A resolution of July 6th stated the penny obverse would have the sun and a sundial with the legend "FUGIO" (I fly), the date, and the legend "MIND YOUR BUSINESS." The reverse would contain thirteen linked circles with the legends "WE ARE ONE" and "UNITED STATES." This copied the February 17, 1776, fractional currency and the 1776 Continental Currency "Dollar". Eric Newman has shown these designs and mottos were the work of Benjamin Franklin. Because of these features the coin has sometimes been called the Franklin or ring cent."
More can be found here.
<< <i>you may be correct, i dont recall ever hearing that though......i know he had a hand in getting the Betts-615 Libertas Americana medal commissioned......seems like the medal was designed in France and Jefferson's cabinet included an example of the medal that attibuted it to Franklin
feel free to edit where i may be offbase MidLife... >>
Benjamin Franklin was indeed responsible for the Libertas Americana medals. I believe he even paid for their production out of his own pocket.
According to Stack's, "The Libertas Americana medal is most famously associated with Benjamin Franklin, as the designs and legends were the result of his collaboration with other top minds of his era: Robert Livingston, who offered early encouragement; Sir William Jones, the Englishman who suggested a line from Horace be used as the reverse legend; fresco painter E.A. Gibelin, who was the first to sketch Franklin's conception. Of course, it was Franklin's friendship with the top French sculptor of the period, Augustin Dupre, that made the Libertas Americana medal an exceptionally beautiful monument to the American Liberty they both held in great esteem. Guided by Franklin's influence, it was Dupre who conceived the beautiful face of Liberty with flowing tresses that came to be the instantly identifiable face of the new nation."
Here is another interesting article on the Libertas Americana Medal.
I have a question: If the coins were made to facilitate commerce, and contained full weight and measure of the precious metal, what do you call them? "Counterfeits" seems too harsh and unrealistic.
Once you have answered that question, because I sure haven't, what do you call the imitation British gold sovereigns made in the middle east to be used as dowries and/or bride prices? They are usually of good gold, and sometimes even bear a countermark from the maker, a la the Brasher and Barry "doubloons."
TD
<< <i>Was just looking at my new Colonial Newsletter with the article about Standish Barry, and was thinking about his imitation 8 Escudos that is very much in nature like the Brasher imitation 8 Escudos. >>
I need to read that article.
I agree that "counterfeit" seems too harsh. I would call them "privately minted" to facilitate commerce.
As for the imitation British gold sovereigns made in the middle east, I don't know much about them, but I'd probably call them private issues as well.
(Edited to remove part of my response because it was actually pretty ridiculous.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
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
My perception:
I cannot tell a fake from a real and I perceive there to be many fakes out there.
They are old so they cost more.
They are made out of copper, bronze, and other "off" metals and thus prone to corrosion and porosity, both of which, if not identified can cost me a lot of money.
They come in the front of the red book and require a lot of reading to know what you have....
These are just MY perceptions that limit me from collecting them (Of course I have 4 other FULL sets working right now so Capital is also an issue)
John
<< <i>Was just looking at my new Colonial Newsletter with the article about Standish Barry, and was thinking about his imitation 8 Escudos that is very much in nature like the Brasher imitation 8 Escudos.
I have a question: If the coins were made to facilitate commerce, and contained full weight and measure of the precious metal, what do you call them? "Counterfeits" seems too harsh and unrealistic.
Once you have answered that question, because I sure haven't, what do you call the imitation British gold sovereigns made in the middle east to be used as dowries and/or bride prices? They are usually of good gold, and sometimes even bear a countermark from the maker, a la the Brasher and Barry "doubloons."
TD >>
By definition, they are still counterfeits no matter what the good intentions that the manufacturer may have had.
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>Without reading too much of all these posts I want to post why I do not collect Colonials:
My perception:
I cannot tell a fake from a real and I perceive there to be many fakes out there. >>
Buy from reputable sources, and use the purchases as a learing experience.
<< <i>
They are old so they cost more.
>>
Not necessarily
<< <i>
They are made out of copper, bronze, and other "off" metals and thus prone to corrosion and porosity, both of which, if not identified can cost me a lot of money.
>>
Definitely true, again depend on reputable sources to set you straight until you have learned. To me this is one of the things that interest me about colonials, learning about how to tell a good one from a bad one.
<< <i>
They come in the front of the red book and require a lot of reading to know what you have....
>>
Also definitly true, and another reason whty i like colonials, I enjoy doing the reasearch.
They are not well suited to collectors who only appreciate high grade, mint state coins - especially flashy, blast white ones.
Grading colonials can be even more subjective than federal issues because of the primitive minting technology, problems with planchets, etc.
There are really no set price guides to go by when deciding how much to pay for a particular coin - although auction records help a lot. Sometimes it just comes down to what price feels right to you based on your knowledge, experience, and trust in your dealer.
But to those of you who have some interest in them, please don't let their complexity keep you from learning about them and collecting them. Even on a very low budget, you can assemble a collection of colonial coins that speak volumes about our nation's history and the way people lived during the 17th, 18th, and early 19th centuries.
<< <i>you're an awesome numismatic sort of guy and bring good vibes to the coin world. (in my humble view) . >>
I agree on Mr. MLC and I'm grateful for this thread since these are not in my wheelhouse and I would love an education. I'm intrigued by them...........MJ
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Not My Coin
Rosa Americana
<< <i>
Not My Coin >>
But it should be!
Do you think this 1743 Roses King George II Full crown circulated on this side of the pond back in the day?
<< <i>Hey MLC
Do you think this 1743 Roses King George II Full crown circulated on this side of the pond back in the day? >>
It's quite likely.
Quoting Louis Jordan at the University of Notre Dame Department of Special Collections again:
"Although England restricted the export of its silver coinage, it is clear some British silver, as well as some British gold coins, found their way to the American colonies. Coins were brought to the colonies by settlers, by British officials and soldiers, as well as by merchants and sailors. Indeed, throughout the colonial period numerous tables were published listing the exchange rate of various foreign coins for a particular colony...the 1759 edition of Father Abraham's Almanack by Abraham Weatherwise of Philadelphia, the English sixpence coin (6d) was valued at 9d in both New York and Philadelphia, while the English crown (5s) passed for 7s6d in Philadelphia and 8s in New York."
Here's a copy of Father Abraham's table.
<< <i>The variety of coins that circulated in the colonial period, and into the mid-19th century, is fascinating. >>
<< <i>Was just looking at my new Colonial Newsletter with the article about Standish Barry, and was thinking about his imitation 8 Escudos that is very much in nature like the Brasher imitation 8 Escudos.
I have a question: If the coins were made to facilitate commerce, and contained full weight and measure of the precious metal, what do you call them? "Counterfeits" seems too harsh and unrealistic.
Once you have answered that question, because I sure haven't, what do you call the imitation British gold sovereigns made in the middle east to be used as dowries and/or bride prices? They are usually of good gold, and sometimes even bear a countermark from the maker, a la the Brasher and Barry "doubloons."
TD >>
If the colonies were protectorates of the "Crown", then by their standard, they (the British) would authorize the minting of coins. Because there was not enough British coins to satisfy commerce in the colonies, they (the Colonists) took it upon themselves to mint coins to satisfy this need. I assume in the eyes of England, these were counterfeit. The true test is whether the coins were accepted in commerce. I guess the same could be said of Confederate coins during the Civil War.
BTW, I had a complete set of Franklins until I read this thread.
(edited to clarify the pronouns)
<< <i>BTW, I had a complete set of Franklins until I read this thread. >>
Glad I could help!
<< <i>
<< <i>Was just looking at my new Colonial Newsletter with the article about Standish Barry, and was thinking about his imitation 8 Escudos that is very much in nature like the Brasher imitation 8 Escudos.
I have a question: If the coins were made to facilitate commerce, and contained full weight and measure of the precious metal, what do you call them? "Counterfeits" seems too harsh and unrealistic.
Once you have answered that question, because I sure haven't, what do you call the imitation British gold sovereigns made in the middle east to be used as dowries and/or bride prices? They are usually of good gold, and sometimes even bear a countermark from the maker, a la the Brasher and Barry "doubloons."
TD >>
If the colonies were protectorates of the "Crown", then by their standard, they (the British) would authorize the minting of coins. Because there was not enough British coins to satisfy commerce in the colonies, they (the Colonists) took it upon themselves to mint coins to satisfy this need. I assume in the eyes of England, these were counterfeit. The true test is whether the coins were accepted in commerce. I guess the same could be said of Confederate coins during the Civil War.
BTW, I had a complete set of Franklins until I read this thread.
(edited to clarify the pronouns) >>
These are post-colonial issues, made in the US of A.
TD
...just because I want to see something different on the first page.
me too!
<< <i>ttt
me too! >>
We could take this to 100 this way.
sure, why not?
Maybe something numismatic will happen along the way.
<< <i>ttt
sure, why not?
Maybe something numismatic will happen along the way. >>
I sure hope so.
What do you think of "contemporary imitations," similar to "contemporaty counterfeits," but different enough to indicate that no intent to defraud was intended?
TD
<< <i>Let's get back to my question about the Brasher and Barry "doubloons." I still can't come up with a good name for what they are.
What do you think of "contemporary imitations," similar to "contemporaty counterfeits," but different enough to indicate that no intent to defraud was intended?
TD >>
"Contemporary imitations" implies that they are fake. However, as you noted, they were made to facilitate commerce, and contained full weight and measure of the precious metal.
So I like my earlier answer to simply call them private issues.
Doesn't that work?
<< <i>goofy cartoonhead horse coins >>
Excellent description!
<< <i>
<< <i>Let's get back to my question about the Brasher and Barry "doubloons." I still can't come up with a good name for what they are.
What do you think of "contemporary imitations," similar to "contemporaty counterfeits," but different enough to indicate that no intent to defraud was intended?
TD >>
"Contemporary imitations" implies that they are fake. However, as you noted, they were made to facilitate commerce, and contained full weight and measure of the precious metal.
So I like my earlier answer to simply call them private issues.
Doesn't that work? >>
To me, "private issues" are pieces like the Templeton Reid and Bechtler coins, which stand on their own with unique designs. Out west, you have several issues that have unique designs such as Norris, Gregg & Norris, Bowie, Cincinnati Mining & Trading, etc.
But then, out west you have several issues that look surprisingly like a Federal $5, $10 or $20 Liberty coin, save only for the inscriptions. These are in the realm of imitations, designed to promote commerce without fooling anybody.
I don't have the answers here. I'm still trying to figure out the questions.
TD
<< <i>I don't have the answers here. I'm still trying to figure out the questions. >>
You and me both!
Either way, it's all good.
Anyone?
There was a modern Coinage Act (1965?) which restored all U.S. coins ever struck to legal tender status, including Trade Dollars.
Is there any way that could be construed to grandfather in the Fugio Cents?
TD
<< <i>There was a modern Coinage Act (1965?) which restored all U.S. coins ever struck to legal tender status, including Trade Dollars.
Is there any way that could be construed to grandfather in the Fugio Cents? >>
Well, indeed you are correct that the Coinage Act provided that "All coins and currencies of the United States...regardless of when coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues."
See Sec. 102 below:
As for the Fugio, according to Louis Jordan and the University of Notre Dame Department of Special Collections, "...the Continental Congress of the Confederation passed a resolution on April 21, 1787, for the contract coining of a national copper cent. About two and a half months later they agreed on a design. A resolution of July 6th stated the penny obverse would have the sun and a sundial with the legend "FUGIO" (I fly)...The Fugio cent was to weigh 157.5 grains, equal to the English halfpence and the Massachusetts coppers (which had been approved by the Massachusetts legislature nine days earlier on June 27th). Also, like the Massachusetts coppers, they were denominated as cents, that is a decimal coin based on one hundred to the Spanish milled dollar."
The Congress of the Confederation or the United States in Congress Assembled was the governing body of the United States of America from March 1, 1781, to March 4, 1789. The Congress of the Confederation was succeeded by the United States Congress.
If my facts are accurate, I think this makes a pretty strong case that Fugios are legal tender in the US today.