Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;SuperDave, post: 2406875, member: 1892&quot;]Something there is about the mass of a Crown-sized coin, in hand, which cannot be duplicated. It says, &quot;I am intended to carry the heaviest load of commerce,&quot; whether that is true in life or not. They call lesser coins &quot;minors&quot; for a reason. The same is true of a Crown or a Thaler or a 5 Franc or a Spanish Real de a ocha....they are their issuer&#039;s biggest and best, the theoretical pinnacle of their coinage.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve always felt the Morgan to be that &quot;pinnacle&quot; of US coinage, whether it was a desired unit of commerce upon mintage or not. What more complex design was ever executed by the US in such numbers, in such wide variance of quality, time and location as to make multiple subspecialties still a substantial task in terms of quantity? Its&#039; sheer availability is why it enjoys such popularity today as to justify &quot;haters&quot; (I don&#039;t use that as an insult; haters mean all the more for me <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> ) who think of it the same as many Americans did when it circulated.</p><p><br /></p><p>Each to his own. I like Crowns and Thalers as well; many of them are <i>exquisitely</i> artistic by comparison to the Morgan. But Morgans are within reach, and I cannot say that of any other pre-20th-Century &quot;major&quot; coin.[/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