Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;19Lyds, post: 1960187, member: 15929&quot;]Thanks for the reply Caleb as you&#039;re the reason I made this post in wanting to get some &quot;unbiased&quot; discussion going.</p><p><br /></p><p>I do not believe that the hub pictured is a master hub and this is based solely on the number of AH Kennedy&#039;s which have been identified. Had this been a &quot;Master&quot; hub, then certainly the numbers would have been much greater since, as pointed out, Master Hubs produce Master Dies which produce Working Hubs which produce Working Dies.</p><p><br /></p><p>I asked if the AH was possibly a Hand engraving due to some flaw in the Hub making process since this area is a &quot;high&quot; point on the design. I did not mean the &quot;Master&quot; Hub making process but only the &quot;Working&quot; hub making process and only a single working hub.</p><p><br /></p><p>The other question was regarding Jackie Kennedy and her role in this particular coin. Coin World stated the following:</p><p><br /></p><p>&quot;On Dec. 17, Roberts showed a prototype of the coin to the president’s widow. He told ‍Lisot (the Roberts interviewer), “They wanted Mrs. Kennedy to see — this is&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p>the portrait that is on the half dollar. And I had emphasized the part in his hair. </p><p>He had a great shock of hair as you recall, and most artists, when they did a Kennedy portrait, they made a lot of this shock of hair, thinking that’s going to help them to make it look like Kennedy, you know. Well, they were right, but they had a tendency to overemphasize this part in his hair. And Mrs. Kennedy looked at the coin, and she said, <b>‘Could you muss up his hair a little bit?’</b>&nbsp;&nbsp; “All right, I thought, that was a wonderful criticism. She was a bit of an artist herself, and I think that aspect of the likeness was the first thought in her mind. It was very helpful, <b>so I mussed up his hair</b> and sort of half hid the part, made it less obvious, which helped. It was good criticism so I thanked her, too, for that helpful hint.” &quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>Now, if you look at the part in Kennedy&#039;s hair, it just doesn&#039;t seem to be that obvious which in itself could be the result of&nbsp; &quot;and sort of half hid the part&quot; but that did not address &#039;Could you muss up his hair a little bit?&#039;</p><p><br /></p><p>After the above meeting, CW states: &quot;The obverse design was revised to “muss” the hair and another trial strike made. Roberts flew to West Palm Beach, Fla., Dec. 27 to show the revised design to the Treasury secretary, who signed off on it. </p><p>(Note that Mrs. Kennedy was not shown the revisions or at least the article in CW and the quotes from the book indicate this.)</p><p><br /></p><p>Is it &quot;possible&quot; that the hair accents were added to a working hub solely to get approval of the design and really had nothing at all to do with Jackie Kennedy?</p><p>(Did Mamie Eisenhower &quot;approve&quot; the Eisenhower Dollar design?) Or, as I suggested earlier was that working hub modified as a result of a weak hub impression?</p><p><br /></p><p>I did some comparisons of the Accented Hair Kennedy against a regular 1964 Proof coin and could not really see ANY significant differences in the hair other than those accented hair highlights. Everything else (except the &quot;I&quot; which could have been the result of some finishing process for the hub OR an indicator of a failed hub making process) matches up hair for hair.</p><p><br /></p><p>You know, this would not be the first time someone in the die making shop modified either a die or a working hub to &quot;highlight&quot; certain details of the coin. Look no further than the Washington Quarter proof (1952/1953) or the Jefferson Nickel Proof (1938). Both have been hand engraved.</p><p><br /></p><p>I have no doubts that the Accented Hair Kennedy was NOT the result of Jackie Kennedy and I further expect that the coin WAS the direct result of a failure of some type in the Hub Making process which was then corrected by a technician.</p><p><br /></p><p>The appearance of this coin in the early stages of production (with the original RDV-001) only testify to the fact that the US Mint was under heavy pressure to get these hubs/dies into production presses. The abundance of doubled die obverses and reverses backs this up. The quality control in the die making shop is quite evident by the shear number of doubled dies which exist for the 1964 proof and business strikes.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thoughts??[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in