Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="JBK, post: 512528, member: 1101"]In relation to my point about the "Dollar" not being a denomination as such in the place where the Trade Dollars were intended to be used (the Orient), I would definitely take exception to your comparison here.  Early US coins may not have had denominations spelled out on them, but they had a set denomination just the same. The Trade Dollar said "Dollar" but the dollar was not the form of exchange in the Orient, nor was the British Trade Dollar, the Dutch Guilder, the Spanish 8 Reales, etc.  The coins - in various types of denominations - were traded based on Silver content/value.  As would the Silver Eagle. Merchant tokens have been issued over the years and were intended to circulate, but they are not coins. So, being intended to circulate (or not, as in the case of proof-only or even collector-only issues of otherwise circulating coinage) is not a fool-proof method for determining what is a "coin".  2008 halves and Sac dollars were not intended for ciruclation - are they not coins?  The 1913 Liberty nickel was not intended to circulate and was an unauthorized issue to boot - is it not a coin?  1933 St. Gaudens $20? Collectors can determine for themselves what they want to collect, but I am afraid that if one does not want to accept the textbook definition of "coin" that was listed earlier in the thread, then there is no end to the debate.[/QUOTE]