I want to get a few opinions on what makes for a "pattern coin". The issue: There are some pattern coins that I see for sale from Guatemala at ebay. After inquiring with the seller, she/he told me that the coins were from the Guatemala Mint. That implies that they are "official" patterns. After doing a little googling using my limited Spanish, I find out that these coins were NOT made by that country's mint, but were presented to the Bank of Guatemala by an outside entitiy "as an example of material that could be used to manufacture currency" in Guatemala "without the solicitation or acceptance of the (Guatemala) Mint." A little more searching revealed that the Mint of Romania made them! The question: So, when an outside manufacturer, without solicitation, makes patterns in order to "fish for business" from a certain country (and is turned down), would you consider those unsolicited/unaccepted coins as legitimate patterns? Is there such a thing as a "legitimate" pattern? Now, if they WERE accepted by the Mint as patterns (but not subsequently used in any coin designs), does that make a difference? Even more interesting, I see that SCWC (39th edition) has these SAME tri-metallic versions of these coins listed as patterns. Your thoughts on this might help me decide whether or not to purchase one.
I don't know that you can say there is a definitive answer to your basic question because some are going to have different opinions on the subject of what does or does not constitute a pattern. But the basic definition, in my opinion, would be any design that is submitted as the possible design for a new coin. And it would not matter who made the pattern because not all patterns are made by the mint/country they are being submitted to. That is because many countries often have other countries mint their coins for them because they either do not have a mint up and running at the time or because it is cheaper for them to do it that way. So not only are the patterns not minted by the issuing country, the coins themselves are not minted by the issuing country either.
Ditto. I would add, though, that even recognizable coins can still be a pattern. A morgan dollar struck in 1877 is still a pattern, even though they ended up striking billions of the boring things. They are #2 on my all time "man I wish they had made better use of all of that coin in the design" list. #1 of course is the Ike. Ick.
I am sure they all had patterns, (or did before the era of computer design), but I sure have seen a lot of coins where the patterns no longer exist. Ever see a pattern ATB or state quarter?
Lets post a pattern. My latest ones. The first coin did not make it for circulation. The second is the 500 pesos obv we have today.
Thanks for your response. The crux of my question, really, is about "instrumentality": FOR WHAT PURPOSE was the coin made? Does that matter to you, or most numismatists you know? I am juxtaposing: (A) a pattern made by an outside source for the purpose of "getting business" from another country's Treasury Department, and, (B) a pattern that is actually solicited by a Treasury Department to fulfill a need or an order. The country they were meant for (Guatemala) DID NOT solicit them. In other words, these "patterns," IN MY VIEW, are really just SALESMAN'S SAMPLES from the Mint of Romania. It's like some huckster comes to the Bank and says, "Lookie here, I can make coins for you JUST LIKE THIS! (and here's my fee)." So, if these are considered "patterns", that means that any Tom, Dick or Harry can carve matrix dies and master dies, press some blanks between them with his shop vice, and make a few "patterns" for any given country in the world. He can then go solicit the treasury people in those countries, and whether or not they are accepted, the Standard Catalog of World Coins will list them as "patterns." (????) Really, what makes for an "authentic" pattern? If WHO made it doesn't matter, or THE PURPOSE behind its manufacture doesn't matter, then is it quality that matters? Is it down to the professionalism of the minting agency, (ie The Mint of Romania versus Joe Blow in his garage)? My poor brain... maybe I'm overthinking this. Maybe it just depends on what the market accepts it as. But, then again, if it gets published in the Standard Catalog of World Coins, then THAT lends legitimacy...
The purpose of any pattern is to get a mint, your own or somebody else's, to select that design for use as a coin. And it doesn't have to be for use as circulating coin. For example it could be for a commem or a special collector issue as well. And that's why it doesn't matter who makes the pattern. Sometimes mints solicit patterns from various designers. And sometimes they don't solicit them at all but still receive them just because people know they are considering coming out with a new coin.. But in either case the designer of the pattern is hoping to get paid for his work, which is why he does the work in the first place. But usually he only gets paid if his design is selected.
Got it. I know that the tri-metallic versions of the Romanian pieces are listed in the Krause Publications' SCWC. In considering the numismatic market for "patterns," I think that Krause Publications really has an influence, don't they? I mean, if I made some "patterns" for Zimbabwe in my garage, and word got around that I did so, I wonder if Krause would list them? (No, I'm not considering this... I don't even HAVE a garage). I wonder what would be the difference between these coins and "Fantasy" pieces?
Well you could say it's a subtle difference perhaps but there is a difference. Patterns are offered to a mint as possible designs for a new coin - before the fact. And even if they are not chosen as the design to be used, and most are not, they were still looked and considered. Fantasy coins on the other hand are made after the fact, and almost always by somebody who is saying - hey wouldn't it have been cool if ????
