Coin Monday: To Be Continued?

Aug. 10, 2010
Written by John Dale

(As you will read below, which I will let JDB explain in more detail, the Heritage blog is going to be taking a sabbatical. It is only fitting that John be the one to sign off, for the time being at least, as he's held down the majority of the writing for the better part of the last year. For that, and for his continuing good work and insight in all the aspects of his work, he has my thanks, as do those of you who have read this blog over the last two years. Best, Noah.)

This will be the last time you see me in this space for a while.

The Heritage Auctions blog is going into mothballs, to be re-evaluated in a year. I’d love to see it come back, but since there are no guarantees and I’ll be waiting a year in the best case, I want to send this incarnation of the blog out in style.

One of my regrets is that in a year and a half of blogging for Heritage, I haven’t been able to make a decent Viking reference. Thus, today’s topic is this Norse-American Centennial medal, part of the Dr. and Mrs. Claude Davis Collection in Heritage’s ready-to-launch August 2010 Official ANA Auction in Boston. http://www.HA.com/1143

The Norse medal, as it is usually abbreviated, has an unusual place in U.S. numismatics. Unlike many medals of its time, it is fairly well-established as an object for mainstream coin collecting. I have described it as an “honorary commemorative” in Heritage catalogs, and the history of the Norse medal is closely knotted with the silver commemoratives of the same era.

In fact, those other commemoratives are the reason the Norse medal is a medal and not a coin.
Several different commemorative coin issues were being struck or authorized in 1925; coins dated 1925 include the Lexington-Concord, the Stone Mountain (Georgia), the California Diamond Jubilee, and the Fort Vancouver (Washington) Centennial, and the 1927 Vermont (or Battle of Bennington) commemorative was authorized the same year. Many more commemorative bills were filed, only to die in committee.

The 1925 Minnesota State Fair featured the Norse-American Centennial, a celebration of early Norwegian immigrants’ arrival to the U.S. in 1825 and subsequent Norwegian contributions to American life and culture. The sponsor of the bill that created the Norse medal was Ole Juulson Kvale, a U.S. Representative from Minnesota of Norwegian descent, who was elected to the House in 1923.

Kvale was well-placed to influence the business of commemorative coinage bills, as he served on the responsible House committee. Through his service, however, he must have been aware of the logjam of commemorative coin bills. To win passage, he made the Norse commemorative a medal instead of a coin. Kvale’s bill passed out of the House and eventually became law.

Norse medals are eight-sided with a Leif-Eriksson-before-longboat motif on the obverse and a longboat on the reverse. The design was by James Earle Fraser, who is better known as the creator of the Buffalo nickel. Medals were made on thin and thick planchets, the vast majority in silver like the present piece, but also 100 struck in gold, like this September 2002 offering.

To be continued...

Coin Monday: The Business of the 1882 Double Eagle

June 21, 2010

Written by John Dale

One of the most important coins in the upcoming July Summer FUN U.S. Coin auction is an 1882 double eagle graded AU53 by PCGS. The issue has a mintage of just 571 business strikes, the lowest for any regular-issue double eagle with the James B. Longacre-designed reverse. (The Paquet reverse is another story, as there are just two Philadelphia 1861 Paquet coins. Heritage has sold one of them.)

Beyond the obvious rarity-by-mintage, there is another twist to just how elusive the 1882 double eagle business strikes are: the Smithsonian Institution doesn’t have one. The reason the Smithsonian lacks an example actually ties in to why the coins are so rare overall.

Now, it certainly seems like the Smithsonian, more specifically the National Numismatic Collection in the National Museum of American History, has one of everything, including a number of unique items. (If you dream of owning a Class II 1804 dollar or an 1849 pattern double eagle, well, dreams are all you’ll ever have.)

The NNC began with the United States Mint’s official cabinet, built up through its transfer to the Smithsonian in 1923, and it was later built up through private donations and transfers; the most famous of these, the gold coin cabinet of Josiah K. Lilly, Jr., arrived in 1973.

(Deeply personal aside: a love of coins is not the only connection I have to Mr. Lilly. Along with his father and brother, he established the Lilly Endowment, a philanthropic foundation that focuses on my home state of Indiana. Thanks to its Community Scholarship Program, I was able to attend my college of choice. I am eternally grateful.)

The Mint and Lilly collections shared an important trait: neither of them collected both proofs and business strikes when proofs were available. The two were seen as part of the same issue, with proofs preferable to the “ordinary” coins. Thus, the NNC has two proof 1882 double eagles (mintage 59 specimens) but no business strike examples.

Collector perspectives today are generally different, however, and proofs and business strikes are treated as two distinct issues. This is highlighted in the great Encyclopedia of U.S. Gold Coins by Jeff Garrett and Ron Guth, which used the NNC for images and research. (Unsolicited book recommendation: it’s one of the few that never leaves my cataloging desk.) On the entry for the 1882 business strikes, the caption that usually lists the condition of the best NNC specimen says instead, “No specimen in Smithsonian Institution.”

The 1882 business strike double eagle is an important enough coin on its own, but the idea of owning a coin that the Smithsonian doesn’t have is quite the bonus. Happy bidding!

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: Personal Treasures from the "S.S. Central America"

April 5, 2010

Written by John Dale

There are certain stories that will be told and retold for as long as there are collectors of U.S. coinage. The sinking of the S.S. Central America, with its lost gold and lost lives, has enough financial and personal tragedy to endure for centuries. Yet for decades the disaster faded from memory, not quickly but with the slow erosion of waves on a rock, as ships such as the Titanic and the Lusitania took on more meaning.

When the Central America’s gold was re-discovered, so too was its story, and the long-forgotten details seemed fresh and exciting. The “Ship of Gold,” as it is now often called, gave historians new insight into California Gold Rush assayers’ ingots and collectors a remarkable opportunity to own like-new 1857-S double eagles, such as this Gem in the upcoming April-May Central States U.S. Coin Auction.

The assayers’ ingots and gleaming double eagles, stacked up and packaged up in the hold of the Central America, are of great historical and collector importance. When I think about the wreck, though, I find myself drawn to other numismatic treasures. In addition to the ingots and double eagles, headed for the banks of New York City before they met a different fate, there was more gold onboard the ship: the personal fortunes of passengers, which often took the form of double eagles but also eagles and half eagles, gold dust and nuggets.

There were also a number of oddities, reminders of the strange and often dysfunctional monetary system that Californians cobbled together in less than a decade. Two Territorial gold coins in the Central States auction, both moderately worn from five years of use in West Coast commerce, were recovered from the bottom of the ocean floor. One is an 1852 ten dollar Augustus Humbert/United States Assay Office coin, graded VF30 by PCGS; the other, also dated 1852 and graded VF30 by PCGS, was issued by Moffat & Co.

As the San Francisco Mint became established, many of the old Territorial gold coins that stayed in California were melted, and few survivors remain. Both coins are of varieties rated as R.6, or “very rare,” with a couple dozen examples known at most. While fewer Territorial gold coins were recovered from the Central America than assayers’ ingots or 1857-S double eagles, the few Territorial pieces salvaged do offer valuable clues to how various issues were used or not used in California at the time.

One of the great paradoxes of the Central America is that for all the value its gold holds for us today, there was a time when it was all but worthless. Survivors’ accounts tell of people throwing away their golden fortunes, like the coins and nuggets were leaden weights instead of wealth—and why not, for what is the value of gold against one’s life? We, however, are not in danger of drowning. We can study. We can acquire. We can collect.

We must remember.

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: Heritage Auctions and The Riddle of the ‘Double Eagle’

March 22, 2010

Written by John Dale

One of my favorite pop tunes is Nik Kershaw’s “The Riddle.” The lyrics are pure British nonsense (the artist has stated as much) that originally served as placeholders for the incredibly catchy music.

Recently I fielded a riddle of my own from another department. Actually, it wasn’t a riddle, but a genuine question: why do numismatists call the big gold coins “double eagles” when there’s only one eagle on the back?

I giggled a little. I hadn’t thought about the term “double eagle” that way. Then I put on my Serious Professional cap and typed my reply. The word “eagle” in “double eagle” doesn’t actually refer to the bird on the reverse, but rather a denomination of ten dollars.

The usage dates back all the way to 1792, when the Second Congress passed the Mint Act, which laid the groundwork for the United States Mint and is followed (albeit with much modification) to the present day. The term “eagle” appears in Section 9 of the Act, which starts:

“And be it further enacted, That there shall be from time to time struck and coined at the said mint, coins of gold, silver, and cop­per, of the following denominations, values and descriptions, viz. EAGLES – each to be of the value of ten dollars or units …”

The section continues from the eagle through the half eagle (one-half of ten dollars or five dollars) and quarter eagle (one-quarter of ten dollars or two and a half dollars), before going on to silver. When the discovery of California gold inspired calls for a coinage denomination larger than the eagle, the Act of March 3, 1849 authorized the striking of “double eagles, each to be of the value of twenty dol­lars, or units …”

Actual production began in 1850.

While terms like “dollar,” “cent,” and “dime” (originally (“disme”) are in common use today, “eagle” is not. Even when gold coins were made with regularity, they weren’t used much except by bankers and the wealthy. While many Americans grew up with cents and parts of a dollar, even in the early 1800s, gold coins were simply irrelevant to everyday life.

When the eagle denomination went back into production in 1838 after a 34-year hiatus, the denomination was written as “TEN D.” (for DOLLARS) instead of “ONE EAGLE.” Similarly, the early double eagles read “TWENTY D.” instead of “DOUBLE EAGLE.”

All too often, numismatists can be impatient with others who don’t understand the jargon, and I’m no exception. When I thought about it from the asker’s point of view, though, the question was perfectly logical.

If I didn’t know any better, I could see myself flipping over a double eagle and wondering why there weren’t two birds on it myself!

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: ‘Well, now, I wouldn’t say that!’

Jan. 25, 2010

Written by John Dale

I had something of a “throwback moment” recently, reading through a copy of the “Greysheet” for the first time since — was it my internship here in the summer of 2004, or all the way back in 2002, when I was still in high school?

The Greysheet, more formally known as the COIN DEALER newsletter [sic], is a weekly publication listing “bid and ask” - suggested “buy” and “sell” prices - for many collectible U.S. coins in a variety of grades. The Greysheet, named for the signature color of its paper, has been a coin-shop staple since its inception in 1963, and two of its spin-off publications are of similar importance.

First, the “Bluesheet,” or CERTIFIED COIN DEALER newsletter, covers high-grade coins certified by NGC or PCGS, such as this 1944-D Walking Liberty half dollar, MS67 NGC, in Heritage’s upcoming February 2010 Long Beach U.S. Coin Auction. The other major spin-off is the “Greensheet,” or the CURRENCY DEALER newsletter, which covers collectible U.S. currency, but I’ve never actually used it; you’d have to talk to “the currency folks” for that one.

So if the Greysheet is such a numismatist’s essential, I should look at it every week, right? But as the Richard Q. Peavey character from The Great Gildersleeve would put it, “Well, now, I wouldn’t say that!” (For those of you unwilling to admit you heard The Great Gildersleeve over the radio, or those under the age of 55, perhaps you’ve seen a classic wartime Looney Tunes short, “Draftee Daffy,” in which Daffy Duck tries with increasing desperation to avoid the deliverer of his draft notice. The bespectacled messenger makes frequent use of the Peavey catchphrase.)

As a cataloger, I just don’t have much of a reason to pick up a Greysheet and look at it. I write about coins; I don’t make buying or selling decisions for the company, or help others make them. Thus, I consult price guides with less frequency than one of Heritage’s wholesale buyers, or a consignment director giving a client advice on proper venues for coins. When I do check a price guide, usually it’s to help me decide whether a coin should be photographed for the catalog, for example, or get a full-page description.

For that judgment call, I turn to Heritage’s Permanent Auction Archives and get my numbers from the past results. The Greysheet calls itself “The Only Source for Accurate, Timely & Unbiased Rare Coin Pricing Information!” I’ll admit to being a bit biased myself, but considering all the information, the actual prices paid for actual coins to be found in the Archives, I have only one proper response: “Well, now, I wouldn’t say that!”

To leave a comment, please click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: Hat Trick at Heritage FUN

Jan. 11, 2009

Written by John Dale

In keeping with Chris Nerat’s post on the virtues of Heritage’s Permanent Auction Archives, I’m going to finish off my coverage of the January 2010 FUN U.S. Coin Auction (don’t forget the Post-Auction Buys!) with a look at what the auction means for Heritage’s archives, and more specifically the coin wing of Heritage’s Auction Hall of Fame.

For starters, Heritage just auctioned off three million-dollar coins. The 1927-D double eagle? Yes. The 1874 Bickford $10 pattern in gold? Yes. The 1913 Liberty nickel? Oh heck yes. Three coins - one auction, one session - for more than one million dollars. No other firm has auctioned three million-dollar U.S. coins as single lots in one sitting. That’s reason to smile.

This isn’t the first time Heritage has pulled off the hat trick, either (credit due to Senior Cataloger Mark Borckardt for the reference). Back in January 2005, Heritage rattled off its first three million-dollar coins. An 1894-S dime was the crowning glory, and it came only about 150 lots after two different types of Brasher doubloons, the Punch on Wing for $2.415 million and the Punch on Breast for $2.99 million, sold as consecutive lots. (Since then, another duo, the 1796 No Stars quarter eagle and the 1796 With Stars quarter eagle, have sold as consecutive lots at Heritage auctions for more than a million dollars, but there was no third million-dollar coin to complete the trilogy.)

November 2005 closed out that year with another hat trick, as the fantastic Phillip Morse Collection of Saint-Gaudens double eagles redefined the record books. Lot 6522, an Ultra High Relief, Lettered Edge coin from 1907 (not to be confused with the “merely” High Relief Saint-Gaudens double eagle) went for $2.99 million. After Morse’s 1921 double eagle went for $1.0925 million, excitement built, since his 1927-D double eagle was still to come - and at $1.8975 million, it did not disappoint.

The two hat tricks of 2005 are important to the history of the company, but two key achievements make the January hat trick all the more remarkable. First, never before in history have three U.S. coins have sold in a single auction for over one million dollars hammer price, before Buyer’s Premium is added in. (Buyer’s Premium is the 15% difference between, for example, the “Sold for $900,000” announced for the 1894-S dime and the customer’s bill for $1.035 million.) At $1.1 million hammer for the Bickford ten dollar, $1.3 million hammer for the 1927-D double eagle, and $3.25 million hammer for the 1913 Liberty nickel, all three clear the bar easily.

Second, while the two previous hat tricks have been dominated by one consignor (the consignor of the Gold Rush Collection in January 2005, or obviously Phillip Morse in November 2005), the January 2010 FUN Auction’s three million-dollar coins all came from different sources. Ralph P. Muller proudly put his name on his collection and his 1927-D double eagle. I also know who consigned the Bickford $10 pattern, though as always, Heritage’s consignors remain private unless declared otherwise.

As for the 1913 Liberty nickel, even I don’t know who owned it. In the coin auction business, there are three broad classes of stories: the stories you can tell, the stories you won’t tell, and the stories you can’t tell. And as for who at Heritage “can’t tell” and who “won’t tell,” well, I won’t be telling…

To leave a comment click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: The Catalog Stands Alone

Dec. 14, 2009

Written by John Dale

It’s been a while since I last wrote about the coin cataloger’s perspective, so why not this week? (Don’t worry. You’ll get your coin fix closer to the end of this post. See hint at right.)

As a cataloger, I realize that my coin descriptions have two uses: the short-term and the long-term. In the short term, my lot descriptions have to sell the coins - that’s why I get paid - but finding a balance is tricky. Before the auction, if a consignor doesn’t like what I’ve written - doesn’t think it’s complimentary enough, or believes I’ve left out a Very Important Fact™ - and complains to the Consignment Director, I hear about it.

Then again, after an auction, if a buyer doesn’t like what I’ve written - see above, substituting “strict” for “complimentary” and “customer service department” for “Consignment Director” - I REALLY hear about it. So in selling the coin, I have to “sell” the lot description to two different audiences with wildly different expectations, making bidders say “It’s fair” and consignors say “It’s wonderful!”

While the department doesn’t have a 100% hit rate, considering the tens of thousands of coins the cataloging department describes each year, we come surprisingly close.

Once the auction has closed, the descriptions in the Heritage catalogs have a second life as reference material. While even the most basic photo-and-text description can help with tracking the provenance of an item, the greatest catalogs — usually single-collection catalogs focused on a specialty such as early copper or silver dollars — are treated with nearly the same reverence as scholarly books, and referenced nearly as often. A glance at our Catalog Orders page shows a number of catalogs that have attained this level of respect, such as the Lemus Collection of pattern coins, sold January 2009, and the Belzberg Collection of Canadian coinage, sold January 2003

(Conspicuously absent from the list is the Walter J. Husak Collection catalog, covering his impressive collection of large cents, which has completely sold out and now commands a strong price in secondhand numismatic literature circles. You might have heard about the Husak collection — maybe from the Washington Post or Ripley’s Believe It or Not! or even Saturday Night Live. Cue Seth Meyers: "A California man's collection of 301 rare American pennies [Bzzt! Never call a cent a “penny,” even if you’re Seth Meyers. – Noah] sold at auction this week for $10.7 million. Far exceeding my pre-auction estimate of three dollars and one cent.")

In January 2010, Heritage will hold two auctions with specialized catalogs that have every chance of becoming time-tested references. On the World Coins side, the Canadiana Collection will be auctioned in New York City. It’s one of the most jaw-dropping collections of Canadian coinage ever assembled—the legendary 1936 Dot cent is just one of many highlights.

On the U.S. side, the standalone collection leading the way in our Florida United Numismatists (FUN) auction has a distinct Floridian flavor: it’s called The Boca Collection, Part I. The collection contains a complete run of the 71 proof sets issued from 1856 to 1953, covering denominations up to one (silver) dollar.

The 1890 set has an added bonus: the four gold denominations, from two and a half dollars to $20, are also included in proof. Every one of those coins is a rare delight. Each year, Heritage auctions coins and collectibles from thousands of consignors. Every consignment is appreciated, but only a handful of these collections have the value and the strength to stand alone. While I treat each coin that comes across my desk with the respect it deserves, I invariably find myself giving extra attention to coins destined for stand-alone catalogs.

A stand-alone catalog means a great collection, and even if Heritage is going to sell it off one lot at a time, a collection that great deserves to last, if only in pages.

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: The Legend of the 1943 Bronze Cent

Dec. 7, 2009

Written by John Dale

Back in late October, I discussed wrong-planchet errors in the context of a Franklin half dollar that had been struck on a planchet designed for a quarter. (The results from Houston are in, and the piece sold for $1,150. Not bad for a Mint mistake!) At the end, I left a slightly cryptic clue to another wrong-planchet error I knew about: “Oh, but I did mention ‘wrong size or type,” didn’t I? Well, I’ll tell you about that later…”

It’s officially later, if later than I’d planned, so now it’s time to let you in on the secret. This is the good stuff. The really, really good stuff.

Click here.

For those of you who clicked and didn’t experience sudden coin euphoria, let me slip into my best Olmec impression and tell you The Legend of the 1943 Bronze Cent:

“Long ago, in the city of Philadelphia, there was a building called the U.S. Mint. In the early days of World War II, when copper was needed urgently for bullets and artillery shells, the Mint was using tons of copper to strike one cent coins, which were made out of bronze. To save that copper for the war effort, the Mint metallurgists experimented with other, different metals in search of a replacement. They even tried making cents out of plastic!

In 1943, for one year only, the Mint made cents out of zinc-coated steel, but a handful of 1943-dated cents were made in the old bronze alloy instead, and one of them made its way to the January 2010 FUN Auction!

Your quest is to outbid the rest of the room, retrieve the 1943 bronze cent, and add it to your collection.”

…yes, I watched Legends of the Hidden Temple way too much as a kid. To Viacom, Nickelodeon’s corporate parent: no box set? Seriously? Not even a “best-of” compilation on one DVD? But I want to give you money...

Where was I? Oh, yes, 1943 bronze cent. These wrong-metal rarities have been sources of intrigue ever since their discovery, and even today, tall tales about them flourish. To quote the 1943 bronze cent’s description in the catalog:

“Almost from the outset, the 1943 bronze cents were the subject of misinformation. Henry Ford, the automobile titan, supposedly offered a new car in exchange for a 1943 ‘copper’ cent, for example; this was not the first coin hoax centered around Ford. … Similarly, news dispatches in 1999 about a 1943 bronze cent supposedly spent as an ordinary coin overestimated its value; the original wire report claimed it was worth a quarter of a million dollars, a number that increased to a cool half-million as the story was retold!”

The legends made the 1943 bronze cent as special as it is. Generations have sought it, most finding nothing, some discovering a great love for coins. The best part of any legend, though, is its tiny center of truth, and that truth—3.11 grams of bronze, stamped by dies that never should have struck anything but steel—makes all the built-up hype seem irrelevant. It sits in the hand, sandwiched between layers of protective plastic, terribly ordinary-looking for such a prized relic. Yet it is the driving force, the dreamed-of ending for thousands of stories, true stories.

Come January, let the end be written.

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: Lucky 13 and the 1927-D Double Eagle

Nov. 23, 2009

Written by John Dale

Normally, I’d be talking about a coin in the upcoming December 2009 Houston U.S. Coin Auction in this space, but if I don’t get started on my preview/commentaries for the January 2010 FUN Auction , I know what’ll happen — it’ll be the day before the auction and I’ll still have half a dozen coins to write about. (That may happen anyway, though. Heritage’s FUN auctions are just that awesome.)

For the longest time I had to keep the secret that a certain coin is coming up for auction, as part of a remarkable set of Saint-Gaudens double eagles. With the mailers we’ve sent out, though, plus the Heritage Web site preview and the humongous advertisement in Coin World, I figure it’s safe to say…

We have a 1927-D! We have a 1927-D! (Insert video clip of me doing the Heritage Happy Dance of Coin Joy.) [Not happening. – Noah]

The 1927-D double eagle is rare, and I’m not talking garden-variety rare. When Heritage sold a Class III 1804 dollar earlier this year for $2.3 million, one of the big selling points, as has always been true in its history, is that there are only 15 known 1804 dollars out there.

In our census of 1927-D double eagles, part of an in-depth and potentially mind-bending catalog description in its final stages, Heritage has accounted for only 13 distinct examples. While 13 is seen by many as an unlucky number, it takes a mighty lucky (and wealthy!) numismatist to own one; moreover, since four of the 1927-D double eagles are in museum collections and thus as good as permanently impounded, that leaves just nine coins for collectors.

Just between us, there are a lot more than nine people who want this coin.

When Heritage offers a 1927-D double eagle, the results can be impressive. We offered this particular 1927-D $20 once before, when it was consigned by the Connecticut State Library; it brought $390,500 back on June 2, 1995. (For reference, I was still in fifth grade then. You may now feel old.)

In the Heritage Auction Hall of Fame’s Coins Wing, 17 of the 20 pieces listed sold for more than a million dollars total, and of the 17, two of the coins are 1927-D double eagles. In November 2005, we sold the MS67 Morse specimen for just under $1.9 million, while the MS65 example we offered in January 2006 went for slightly more than $1.3 million.

This coin is graded MS66, so it splits the difference, and it seems a fairly safe bet that this 1927-D $20, part of the Ralph P. Muller Collection, will be Heritage’s Million-Dollar Coin #18…unless it turns out to be Million-Dollar Coin #19, that is!

The story of that other seven-figure coin, however, will have to wait until next week, so stay tuned…

To leave a comment, click on the title of this post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: “Seeing Double?”

April 27, 2009
Posted by John Dale

When coin collectors and auctions appear in popular entertainment, usually the writers get a few things right and much more wrong. An episode of Hawaii Five-O from 1973, “The $100,000 Nickel,” was entertaining enough, even if the plot point of a 1913 Liberty nickel getting dropped in a vending machine makes me shake my head.

More recently, the episode of The Simpsons that had Bart and Homer collecting coins, “All About Lisa,” started well enough with the two filling out a coin board with Lincoln cents culled from the change dish at the Kwik-E-Mart, among other sources. Many collectors, myself included, had a similar start. The fake variety, the 1917 “Kissing Lincolns” cent, I could tolerate as creative license. The scene at the auction house got too much wrong, though. The last straw for me was when the auction house referred to the “Kissing Lincolns” cent as a “penny.” No, no, and heck no! The United States Mint has never struck a “penny”; that’s a holdover term from colonial days, and even if Bart and Homer didn’t know any better than to call a cent a penny, that auction house in Springfield should have!

Earlier, the cult-classic Weird Al Yankovic movie UHF had its own coin-collector moment at the climax, when a coin given to a beggar turns out to be valuable. The moment I heard the line “1955-D Doubled Die,” though, I said out loud, “That’s wrong.”

My roommate, who had introduced me to the movie and was watching it with me, asked for clarification. I answered that there is a real 1955 Doubled Die Obverse cent that can be worth thousands of dollars, though it was struck at Philadelphia and not Denver.

The error is so dramatic that when it first turned up in circulation, comments, speculations, and rumors soon built up around it. What could have caused the dramatic doubling on the lettering and date? In the mid-1950s knowledge of the minting process was not as widespread as it is now, and many erroneous explanations were floated for the strange cents.

In its own way, the real story of how the 1955 Doubled Die Obverse cents came to be is just as wild and fantastic as the more outlandish vintage suggestions. The term “Doubled Die Obverse” means that the doubling on these cents comes from the die used to strike them on the front, or obverse. The error happened during the die-making process. Cylinders of steel called “working hubs,” which look like one side of a coin, are pressed against heat-softened blank steel cylinders, leaving a mirror impression on the heat-softened steel; the cylinder receiving the impression became a “working die,” which would then be inserted into a coinage press and used to strike coins. In the mid-1950s, this process, called “hubbing,” had to be done multiple times to transfer all necessary details from hub to die.

Most of the time, the two (or more) impressions made on the working die are perfectly aligned, or are at least close enough that any difference between them is not visible without high-powered magnification. On this obverse die, though, the two impressions did not match; there were several degrees of rotation between the first impression and the second. The result: readily visible doubling, boldest at the outer lettering and the date, less obvious but still visible on certain details of the portrait, such as Lincoln’s bow tie.

Unlike many other rarities which require specialized knowledge to appreciate, the 1955 Doubled Die Obverse cent was instantly recognized as an oddity by collectors and non-collectors alike. As a result, many were saved with only a little bit of wear. Completely unworn pieces are more elusive, however, particularly those that retain their original color. This MS65 Red piece is tied for top coin in the population data for PCGS, which certified it. It’s perfect for the error enthusiast, the Lincoln cent specialist, or—dare I say it?—the cult-classic movie re-enactor.

To post comments, click on the headline above and enter comments after the post.

-John Dale Beety

Coin Monday: Rarity Comes With the Territory

March 30, 2009
Posted by John

Though cataloging comes fairly late in the consignment process, often the catalogers get a hint of what’s coming through the pipeline. My main source is the consignment director grapevine; I can’t count the number of times I’ve met a CD in the hallway and the first thing I hear is: “You’re going to love this. I had an (insert fabulous rarity here) come in today. It’s going in the next auction.”

I have my other sources as well, and one of them told me about a small gold ingot that was in-house and was going to be part of next month’s Central States Auction. A few probing questions later, I found out it was a Moffat ingot, created in 1849 during the California Gold Rush. I was on the numismatic equivalent of a sugar rush the rest of the day, asking for updates on the ingot’s internal processing status a little too frequently. I also spoke with the other catalogers and convinced them to let me do the write-up on it. Victory was mine!

Two days later, I had the opportunity to actually catalog the ingot itself. In the meantime, I’d done plenty of research and consulted with outside sources, supplementing my knowledge of the Moffat ingots in general.

Most ingots created during the California gold rush were meant only to serve as a way of transporting gold; a solid rectangular ingot was much easier to handle than the gold dust and tiny nuggets that made up the bulk of California gold discoveries. Such ingots were weighed, usually to the hundredth of an ounce, and stamped with that weight, the ingot’s fineness to three decimal places, and a conversion of that weight and fineness to a dollar value based on official government rates. Sizes and dollar values varied widely.

The Moffat ingots from 1849, by contrast, are smaller and share the denomination of $16.00.

Why $16.00? Some scholars suggest that the $16.00 denomination corresponded with the eight escudo coins, better known as doubloons, circulating in Latin America; just a few years before the gold rush, California was Mexican territory, and even after California became part of the United States, Mexican coinage stayed in use. (Two other small-size Moffat bars are known, denominated in irregular dollars and cents. They are unique and held by the Smithsonian.)

Somewhere between one dozen and two dozen of the $16.00 Moffat ingots survive today, suggestive of what must have been a much higher original mintage. In addition, all known examples show wear from handling. It is clear that the $16.00 ingots, of a much smaller size than other ingots, were not intended as a mode of transportation; instead, they were made to serve as money, and judging from their worn states, the Moffat ingots did indeed serve that purpose. They were among the first pieces of West Coast territorial gold, or gold money struck by private individuals or firms instead of a government mint or assay office.

This $16.00 Moffat ingot is a fascinating artifact of the California Gold Rush, an inspiration for those with a passion for the past. As I held it, I remembered the classic numismatist’s line about money being “history in your hands,” and once again I felt its truth.