I have the opportunity to pickup a 1938 New Rochelle Commemorative Half that was graded sometime back by NGC as MS65. Nothing special there, but the coin has a Walter Breen paper stating that it is of the 50 Proofs that were struck for the Westchester County Coin Club. In today's market, this would be the SP version that PCGS designates to this coin. Is there anyway to tie the papers to the coin? Outside of taking a gamble on purchasing the coin and submitting to PCGS, I don't know of any other way to authenticate/tie the papers. If you have any thoughts then I'm interested to read them. Notes: - I have not seen the coin in hand as it's in the possession of a dealer many, many States away. - I have seen the scanned Breen document and he mentions characteristics on the coin that he says attributes it to the Proof strike for the Westchester County Coin Club. - There is nothing that ties the coin specifically to the letter that I can tell.
I agree. While he was a trailblazer in many areas of US numismatics, and was a contemporary of the likes of David Bowers, his research is also rife with shortcuts, assumptions, etc. In the end, the coin needs to speak for itself. If it truly was a special strike, the coin should have indications of such. Short of that, the paper from Breen is simply an interesting accessory.
NGC, for years, was the only TPG grading the New Rochelle Specimen Strikes. I would expect them to know the difference between one of those Specimens and a normal strike, and would have designated it as such when they slabbed it. I feel someone's trying to turn a $300 coin into a $3000 coin. You can have a Condition Census MS68 for the price of an SP66, and by all accounts the Specimen coins weren't particularly overwhelming in appearance, being struck only once on heavily polished dies.
I can tell you from experience that you will be fighting a tough battle unless the designation is already on the holder. TPGs are unlikely to recognize any special pedigree or ownership based on a letter. I've run into this with both PCGS and NGC, in both cases with rock solid documentation.
I would hope NGC knows the die from specific markers; otherwise there's no credence to their attribution. PCGS began attributing them last year, which reinforces my thought that the markers are known.
Sounds like a phone call to PCGS is in order... I've found them to be wonderfully helpful once you get them on the horn.
I would trust NGC 101 times out of a 100 over someone who was repeatedly charged with child molestation through out his life. His letters and words carry 0 weight with me personally
As much as I hate anyone who does that, what does that have to do with his numismatic research? I bet you a ton of high profile numismatists do things we would be shocked by. Yes, I detest what the man did in his private life and am glad he was in jail for it. I simply do not know why that would influence my opinion of his research though. Numismatically he was a well respected man, for good reason. Much of the knowledge we casually use today was written by him.
And in other fields as well. Not just numismatists either. There are people in all fields that have done things that we may consider abhorrent. Should be discard all knowledge/research not conducted by saints?
Story 1 - NGC: Bought a number of tokens from a well known dealer out of a well known collection. All 2x2 cardboard flips were in the handwriting of the original collector, I had all bills of sale, and the dealer and I had a conversation with NGC as I submitted. In the 11th hour, they would not pedigree the tokens. This I kind of get, because the tokens were not holdered, but still kind of a bummer. Story 2 - PCGS: Submitted a coin to cross over that was holdered in NGC plastic. The coin had previously been sold at Hertiage (while in the NGC holder, which was clearly visible with the certificate number in the auction images). The auction noted (as many do) the pedigree, which included not only the owner, but also Robert Vlack as a dealer of the coin. PCGS would not recognize the pedigree because it was not already noted on the label. I do have to say, I'm not bashing either company. Both have been great to work with, although I use PCGS much more frequently because coins in my private collection all get Secure holders with TrueView. But it is very tough to get them to acknowledge something for a label that isn't already on the label.
Do you blame them though? Seems to me all risk and no reward. Do this 100 times maybe 99 are fine, but that 1/100 causes problems, consternations, lawsuits, etc. If I were either firm I would not put it on the label unless furnished very clear proof in which I outlined and controlled. Simply not enough revenue to justify the risk they would be taking.
I really don't care if people are acting immoral without hurting someone or what they do in their private lives for the most part, if they want to cheat on their wife or use drugs ect that is their business. However child molestation is one of if not the most heinous things someone can do. We aren't talking about statutory rape where it was consensual either, a 13 year old boy and his (step?)daughter for instance. In my opinion Breen is a black eye on the numismatic community that should be allowed to fade into oblivion where he won't be missed. Now as far as how does it affect his research, well I would argue that it does in several ways. We already know he was someone with no morals or integrity, people who have those don't molest children over several decades. Numismatic research is a field where integrity and character are extremely important with all the reporting in the style of "I was told...", "I remember....", "I have seen..." ect. It is very important for these types of stories to be coming from a source that can be trusted and isn't just making things up to sell books and make money. In my opinion the money was all he cared about. I personally don't believe any of his stuff until it is confirmed by someone reputable, which certainly has happened. But a fair amount has also been disproved and it doesn't seem to be a secret about his notes that you could get a "proof" if you were willing to pay up given how few if any have ever actually turned out to be a proof. Even auction houses who would have a vested interest in his proofs being a proof have disagreed with his letters before. His research to me is of mediocre quality. There is just to much to wade through to get to the good stuff and prefer to stick to sources that were trying to get it right instead of just trying to sell books. Had his research been top notch, then as much as I would have despised his actions I would use it, but given what type of person he was the quality of his "research" was no where near good enough for me to overlook that.
Frankly, we could cast aside all the moral implications of his actions and the plain fact that he wasn't afraid to invent facts would be enough to cast doubt. I do not take Breen's word on anything in my research, he gets vetted against sources I *do* trust.
Fun fact (I think): The Columbian and New Rochelle are not only the only classic commems for which proof/specimen strikes are known, they are the only classic commems with denticles.
Re: denticles, this is true if you're only talking about half dollars. The Isabella quarter and Lafayette dollar both have denticles. Re: proofs, you are quite correct. Proof Hawaiian halves exist as well. There may be others, but I can't recall offhand.
Surprisingly there are actually quite a few that have proofs in the population reports now aside from those two. PCGS some Isabella, Hawaii, and a single example of the Missouri 2x2/Grant with star/Vancouver. NGC has those two plus Isabella, all 3 1938 Arkansas, all three 1937 Boone, California, Connecticut, Elgin, Grant with star, Hawaii, Lincoln, Maryland, 1926 Oregon, and a Norse that was struck in copper that was sold in 2014 by Stacks Baltimore auction.
