Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Numbers, post: 803005, member: 11668"]The series year changes when there's a "major" change to the design; for a "minor" change, only the series letter changes.  What gets confusing is that the difference between "major" and "minor" has shifted over the years. Up until 1974, signature changes were considered minor--so if nothing changed but the signatures, then the series year was unaffected.  The first exception was Series 1974, which came as a shock to the collectors who were expecting it to be called 1969E....  The 1974 and 1969 series are identical save for the signatures, and indeed on some denominations the serial numbering of Series 1974 actually picked up where it left off in the 1969 printings, despite the change of series year! The story is that William E. Simon, who became Secretary of the Treasury in 1974, wanted "his" bills to have the current date on them; and since he was the boss, they did.  In any event, ever since then, each new Secretary's signature has been considered a major change* that results in a new series date.  So pretty much the only changes still considered minor are the occasions when the Treasurer's signature changes while the Secretary's remains the same.  That doesn't happen too often, which is why we don't get too many lettered series any more. Incidentally, if Simon hadn't come along and changed the rules, our current Series 2006 $1 notes would be called Series 1969S.  (And you thought the 1935 date lasted for a long time...!) _____________________ * Well, there was one exception: Series 1977A inexplicably reverted to the old dating rules.  It should've been called Series 1979 under the new system, since it's got a different Secretary's signature than did Series 1977.[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches