Ok, so i recently acquired an 1861 half-dime Breen-3101 It was an ebay picture gamble but im fairly happy with the coin for now and it will find a home in my collection. I am curious though, can anyone tell me what the 3101 Breen designation means? I want to say that its a die-clash because thats what I feel like I am seeing to the right of lady liberty in the field, but I have no clue and this isnt my particular denomination. The scratches are on the slab. and sorry for the not so great of pictures using my iphone, shes horrible at these coin pictures.
Breen showed only two for 1861. The 3101 is the normal coin and the 3102 is the 1861/0. This coin with a clash would be the 3101. Cool coin.
I remember you mentioning the coin in another thread; now that it has arrived, may I ask what it graded as?
That appears to be a die clash in the right obverse field and the blunt area by Ms. Liberty's toes looks to be the top of an ear of corn from the reverse. Breen numbered each issue or variety and 3101 is the number he gave this coin.
Been looking on line for this, can not find anything on it. Do you have a site or reference. i am curious. Thanks
I've been eyeing copies now myself but I haven't seen a price I can swallow for a book. I think I see the ear of corn you are talking about. Would that small triangular shaped are just above and slightly to the left be the leaf near the same ear of corn? That's about how I'm seeing it. One of those fancy overlays would be nice.
I would not recommend a purchase of Breen's Encyclopedia. I realize some may view that statement as numismatic heresy, but it's just the truth. Breen put an enormous number of hours into his works and he turned up quite a bit of information using more rigorous research of the available data than many before him had applied, but he also occasionally placed some bits into his works that have not stood the test of time, were pet theories with little or nothing to support them, did some mistaken reckoning or perhaps was just plain wrong. Therefore, with all the newer and likely better referenced material out there to choose from, I find it difficult to encourage folks to spend $125 or so for a global work on US coinage that may or may not be accurate on a case-by-case basis. By the way, I have had this work for nearly two decades and use it less and less as time goes on. Currently, I may take it out twice each year.
This is also in response to your earlier question: I would like to see more light thrown on the coin before saying more, and will do an overlay tomorrow if you re-shoot with the exact rotation, and is photographed with the camera the same distance from the coin in each shot (this make doing the overlay much quicker and easier). Your call. I agree that there are much better specific references available, and as with you, I too find myself using the book less and less as the years go by. However, until or unless another similar reference is produced, I do believe that it does/can have a place, at least for certain "all over the map" collectors, and as long as they understand not to take everything as absolute fact (just my opinion).
I have to admit when I read thT I was quite shocked, lol. However after reading the whole statement I will take that into heavy consideration. I dabble in numismatic research, for fun. I absolutely love finding new information that someone is seeking, looking for, etc. I would hate to give someone information which I believe is from a valid source only to be proven wrong. Thanks.
I have a copy of this book and completely agree. I've had it for about 6 months and I've used it maybe 2 times. I feel that the $125 or so would be better utilized buy 1-2 specialist works on your series. But I got mine for $50 so I'll take it.
One of the problems with using Breen is that there is a cloud cast over so much good data. In other words, one has to almost know ahead of time what to trust and what to discount. I am likely more of a Richard Cranium with this aspect of Breen's work than most others. It may come from my background; aside from being a full-time coin dealer, I have a PhD in molecular biology and biochemistry. In those fields, outdated work is not taken at face value, but is given credit in references while newer, perhaps better validated work is used to move the field forward.
