| Contenu de l'article |
- From mike468hodder@yahoo.com Sun Sep 12 09:31:17 2004
Return-Path: <mike468hodder@yahoo.com>
X-Sender: mike468hodder@yahoo.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 11768 invoked from network); 12 Sep 2004 16:31:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
by m24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 Sep 2004 16:31:16 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO web50310.mail.yahoo.com) (206.190.38.243)
by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Sep 2004 16:31:16 -0000
Message-ID: <20040912163115.86646.qmail@web50310.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [65.175.143.225] by web50310.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:31:15 PDT
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
In-Reply-To: <6.332c3703.2e757579@aol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 206.190.38.243
From: Mike Hodder <mike468hodder@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: WM under Sprig New Jersey
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=172578868
X-Yahoo-Profile: mike468hodder
Dave:
There are others, too, as you noted. The steam coinage
medal date alteration is a good one. I wrote about the
implications of the error reverse for the dating of
the reverse die sequence of the WBB medal in last
May's Ford catalog. If we extend the discussion to
include early US Mint coins we'll find scads more
examples of dies with very obvious alterations used to
make copper, silver, and gold coins.
Mike H
--- dmenchell@aol.com wrote:
> Hi Jim, Mike, at al:
>
> Other examples which immediately come to mind
> include the U.S. Mint's medal
> commemorating the first steam coinage, with the date
> first listed as FEB. 22,
> and the Washington Before Boston medal struck at the
> Paris Mint with the error
> date MCCLXXVI (1276). The First Steam Coinage medal
> was to be struck on
> Washington's birthday, but the actual event was
> delayed until March 23rd due to
> mechanical problems. There are examples of the
> medal with the original FEB. 22
> date and the subsequent MAR. 23 date punched over
> the original date.
>
> As for the error date Washington Before Boston,
> there had been speculation
> originally that the error reverse was an early die
> trial. However, examples
> using this reverse have the obverse die with more
> advanced die rust than
> specimens with the correct date and original reverse
> (Boston Public Library specimen
> in gold and others in silver and bronze). It is now
> believed that the error
> date reverse was prepared as a replacement for the
> original reverse die which
> probably failed in the 1790's, and the date was
> subsequently corrected to
> MDCCLXXVI. This die was used until the 1820's (the
> first Paris restrike)., when it
> failed and was replaced by a third reverse (the
> second Paris restrike).
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dave M.
>
|
|---|
| URL source |
|
|---|
| Date publiée |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
