| Author |
 Replies: 51 / Views: 3,743 |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2600 Posts |
I far prefer the turkey feather bundle. My niece could come up with a more detailed and interesting design than the shield reverse. It does not even look like it is finished. IMHO
Jim
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
The shield was used before, during, and after the war. As such it bears no special relationship or meaning as to the holding together of the union. It was even used while the union was split apart.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2589 Posts |
The shield design looks better than the wheat one. Id like to see them bring back the 3 cent piece or Half Cent as a nifc, like they did with the double eagle. Something cheaper for the masses. -XoG |
|
Moderator
 United States
188629 Posts |
The question then is, what is an appropriate image to comply with that mandate?   |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1082 Posts |
I'll say it again -- they should update the look of the Presidents on all coins along the lines of what has been done with the Jefferson nickel. I am sure they could do a great job with "forward facing" Presidents. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3077 Posts |
"The question then is, what is an appropriate image to comply with that mandate"
a flag ?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
414 Posts |
I don't like either of them. Both are kind of ugly.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
Quote:
a flag ? One might say that Conder's arguments against the shield would equally apply to the flag. The flag did not lose any stars for the Southern States. Actually, two stars were added during the war for Kansas and West Virginia (although Kansas became a state before the war, stars are not added until the first 4th of July after being admitted). That said, the flag was a consistent symbol before, during, and after the war. One can argue that it is significant because the flag still exists with as many stars. Had the Union lost the war, surely the stars would have been removed, or more radically, the flag changed altogether. But could this argument be applied to the shield as well? If the Union was drastically changed by (losing) the war, wouldn't the symbols as well? |
|
Valued Member
United States
447 Posts |
Quote:
The question then is, what is an appropriate image to comply with that mandate? How about an image of Abe Lincoln beating down Robert E. Lee with a flag in one hand and a shield in the other !?   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3077 Posts |
Jbuck I ment the 50 star flag
|
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
Although not stated, I assumed you meant a current flag.  I am not sure whether I agree or disagree with the idea, but it would be interesting to hear more arguments from both sides (for or against the flag as the subject for the reverse). My point about the stars is that the flag, like the shield, was a rather consistent symbol before, during, and after the war. Using the flag might be excluded by using Conder's argument that "The [flag] was used before, during, and after the war. As such it bears no special relationship or meaning as to the holding together of the union. It was even used while the union was split apart."I would like to know what Conder thinks, since he often comes up with things I have not thought about. Edited by jbuck
05/07/2009 4:46 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
that would be a great coin design...one that I would seek
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
The flag did not lose any stars for the Southern States. Actually, two stars were added during the war for Kansas and West Virginia (although Kansas became a state before the war, stars are not added until the first 4th of July after being admitted). That might be a compelling argument FOR the use of a flag, but make it the flag used used during the Civil War, with the stars visible showing that even though the south had left the Union, the Union had not abandoned them. And that at the end the Flag still had the same number of stars. (A bit of disinformation since the southern states HAD succeeded in leaving the union and had to be readmittedto the Union. A process that took place AFTER Lincoln had died and to a large extent done in a manner contrary to the way he wanted it done.) |
|
Moderator
United States
188629 Posts |
A very good assessment, Conder!  I wonder how much different reconstruction would have been had Lincoln lived to see it through. |
|
Valued Member
United States
439 Posts |
I'm a sucker for a shield but it still seems kinda simplistic to me. Almost like they had better things to do so they just whipped up this design really quick and then went off to lunch or golfing or whatever.
|
|
|
Replies: 51 / Views: 3,743 |
|
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 05/06/2009 10:27 pm
