-
Re: For EARLY U.S. coins – What’s the difference between a Specimen and a Proof?
In 1816 there was a fire at the mint, and in the ensuing rebuild project, new, and much better, coinage presses were installed. I don't know the exact reasoning behind the decision to use the term 'P… (View Post)2 -
Re: For EARLY U.S. coins – What’s the difference between a Specimen and a Proof?
Judd 19, the original design 1794 $ struck in copper, exhibits indications it was struck twice. The only press available at the time of striking was not designed to strike coins larger than a half do… (View Post)2 -
Re: For EARLY U.S. coins – What’s the difference between a Specimen and a Proof?
In 1836, the "King of Siam Proof Set" was presented to King Rama of Siam (Thailand today,) by a US envoy. This set of coins was struck specifically as a presentation set, on the direct orde… (View Post)1 -
Re: For EARLY U.S. coins – What’s the difference between a Specimen and a Proof?
That's a good definition for the "proof" coins sold to collectors, yes. The problems arise when we try to choose the terms we'll use to describe "special" coins from the era befor… (View Post)1 -
Re: For EARLY U.S. coins – What’s the difference between a Specimen and a Proof?
Today, 'commercial proofs' (coins for collectors,) are all struck on special planchets, from 'proof dies', (which were also "proved" by striking initial examples, BTW, often at a higher pre… (View Post)1
