As you get older sometimes you start to think about and appreciate the nuances and details of the past, more than you used to. Wanted to share some common info that maybe people don't stop to appreciate on these old classic commemoratives. Some will know this, but guessing many do not. The collaboration of our most historic engravers that are more traditionally known for their work on our circulating coinage. To me, it adds a level of interest to some of them, beyond just a low mintage or attractive design. First, a condensed version of the history at the US mint. I start here because our first classic commemorative was collaborated on by two of them. It's good to learn something new every day, if you can. I knew of Charles Barber but today I learned that it was William Barber, his father that was the chief engraver at the mint initially with George T. Morgan (designer of the Morgan dollar) working beneath him. The Barbers were a family of generational engravers with no formal training but had learned from their fathers. William hired his son Charles to the mint with no engraving experience. He desired to train him on the job, in hopes that he would eventually replace himself as chief engraver. Charles of course later went on to produce the Barber design we all know well. William passed away in 1879 (the second year of the Morgan dollar) and there was heavy debate over who should be the next chief engraver: the elder Morgan or, Charles. Charles ended up with the appointment but many felt Morgan should have gotten the position. It's clear to see why George and Charles did not get along. Charles would hold the position for 38 years until he died in 1917, at which point George T. Morgan became chief engraver at the age of 72. He continued work at the mint until he became ill and passed away at 79, Jan. 4th 1925. At this point he was succeeded by John R. Sinnock, designer of the Roosevelt dime and the Franklin half dollar. Here is the first US commemorative with another interesting story and what I feel was a very cool design for the World's Fair in Chicago, called the Columbian Exposition, being the 400 year anniversary of Christopher Columbus arriving in America. The expo took place in 1893. The 1892 having a mintage of 950,000 and the 93 version 1,550,405. Charles Barber having engraved the bust of Columbus on the obverse and George Morgan having engraved the reverse with the Santa Maria, Columbus' flagship over two hemispheres. These were sold for $1 each at the World's Fair and many went unsold. A substantial amount were released into circulation or sent back to the mint to be melted. From there, not much interest in them. Before the internet, people in later years likely didnt even know they existed and just continued purchasing them as a novelty if they happened to stumble upon one at a shop or see it in a catalog. The earliest records PCGS has on this one were sales at $8 to $40 through the 1970s. For a MS-65! Then investors entered the high end coin market and started convincing everyone to invest in rare coins. By 1984, the value of this coin shot up to $1k. By 1989-1991, the value shot up to between 5 and $6k! This was at a time when gold was only $350 an ounce! So it's apparent somebody lost their shorts. Soon after the market collapsed back down to regular levels and values returned to somewhat normalcy supported by actual collectors. By 2006, the value of a 65 had dropped to 7 to $800 and now today, apparently even fewer are interested and it has settled back to $350 for this same coin. At a time when gold is $2,726/ounce. Hard to believe the roller coaster, value wise, this one has went on. IMO compared to similar mintages these are really cheap now for the historical significance and given the inflation that has transpired, but I digress. I recently picked this one up so it's not for sale. These have so many nicely toned examples in affordable grades. Ive got a ring toned 64 in my collection as well. Was thinking about doing a grade set since they did circulate. Census wise, the 1892 in MS-65, NGC lists: 958 and PCGS: 930. Between the two, a total of 977 grading higher. Figured I'd throw that info in since discussing the relative values.
Charles and George would go on to collaborate on several other commemoratives. The 1915 Panama Pacific Expo half and the 1915-S gold $2.5. Also the 1916-17 George McKinley Memorial gold dollar. The 1918 Illinois Centennial I also have in my collection. I got this graded and came back as a MS-62. 100,058 mintage. George Morgan designed the bust of Lincoln and JR Sinnock the reverse.
In later years, sculptors James Earl Fraser (the designer of the buffalo nickel) and his wife, also a sculptor, Laura Gardin Fraser (designer of the bust of Washington on our current quarters) would collaborate on one of our most iconic commemoratives, the Oregon Trail Memorial. I picked up this MS-66, 1937-D, (1 of the 14 date and mintmark versions) with a mintage of 12,008 in 2021. Insanely affordable given the mintages.
As an aside in 1932 there was a contest to determine what the new Washington bust would be on the quarter dollar to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Washington's birth. It came down to John Flanagan's design vs. Laura Fraser's as the finalists and eventually Johns was chosen. She passed away in 1966 so would not live to see her design's impact on future coins. In 1999, the mint decided to recognize Lauras design on a $5 gold commemorative acknowledging the 200th anniversary of Washington's death. While not from the classic period, that one really grabbed me as well and I got a MS-70 example years ago, with a mintage of 22,511 to go with my quarters set in honor of the runner up. It was very fitting that they opted to use her design on the current women's quarters, honoring women's acheivement. Many people don't realize this.
The crazy price swings were the result of three things. First the creation of the grading services PCGS and NGC. Second the entry of Wall Steet into the coin market because they had been convinced that thanks to the grading services coins could now be treated as being fungible (Like stocks, one share of stock is just like, and interchangeable with, any other share of the same stock. one MS-65 slabbed coin was the same as any other MS-65 slabbed example of the same coin. Thus coins could be bought and sold sight-unseen.) And three the services were new and had not slabbed that many coins yet and were loathe to call anything better than MS-65. Since there were very few coins graded better than MS-65, MS-65 came to be known as an investment quality grade. As the investor money came chasing them those MS-65 quality coins skyrocketed. (Around that time MS-65 1881 S Morgan dollars were approaching $1,000 apiece!) The problems came from two fronts. One the idea that coins were fungible. We all know that one MS-65 is NOT the same as every other MS-65. And that killed the idea of sight-unseen trading which was absolutely necessary for the Wall Street crowd. (Many people have the wrong idea of what sight unseen trading was/is. Many people think it means "I haven't had the chance to see the coin yet, and when it gets here I'll look at it and decide if I want it.". What it actually meant was if you ordered a MS-65, as long as the coin was graded MS-65 you were obligated to accept it. You ordered a "MS-65" and you got a "MS-65" which in theory was supposed to be equal to any other "MS-65". Since you didn't know what piece of junk you might be sent this caused bids to start going way down.) The second problem was that the services eventually started grading more and more coins higher than MS-65. Most of todays MS-66, 67, 68 or better coins back in 1988 would have been or WERE called MS-65. So a lot of investors found that their "investment grade MS-65's, were no longer "investment" grade coins. And this also caused the price of MS-65's to fall.