Commems Collection Classic: Quick Bits 125 - The Potential Impact Of James Earle Fraser

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

Author	Replies: 4 / Views: 694
commems CCF Master Historian of USA Commemoratives United States 12252 Posts	Posted 11/22/2024 11:07 pm In my recent post about the 1921 Missouri Statehood Centennial Half Dollar and the 1921 Alabama Statehood Centennial Half Dollar and the special mark that each featured in its obverse field. (Alabama: 2X2, Missouri 24), I included a quote from a letter James Earle Fraser wrote to HR Caemmerer, Secretary of the CFA. (You can read the full quote as well as further details about the special marks here: Quick Bits 124 - Second Variety Connection.) Fraser also stated in the same letter: "I think that all states, wishing to do a centennial coin, ought to have this information..."* Considering that several Statehood commemorative coins were issued in the years that followed, the classic-era US commemorative coin series might have looked very different had Fraser's thoughts been adopted by all of the various State coin committees. Possibilities (with Statehood Order): - 1925 California Statehood Jubilee: Plain and "31" varieties - 1935-39 Arkansas Statehood Centennial: Plain and "25" varieties - 1946 Iowa Statehood Centennial: Plain and "29" varieties Of course, I can also envision other States wanting to "get in" on the party, even if not entirely germane to the anniversary being commemorated: - 1934 Province of Maryland Tercentenary: Plain and "7" varieties - 1934-38 Texas Independence Centennial:Plain and "28" varieties - 1935 Connecticut Tercentenary: Plain and "5" varieties - 1936 Landing of the Swedes in Delaware Tercentenary: Plain and "1" varieties - 1936 Providence, Rhode Island Tercentenary: Plain and "13" varieties - 1936 Wisconsin Territorial Centennial: Plain and "30" varieties Who knows how many coin committees would have requested second varieties of their coins via an obverse (reverse) field mark?! Collecting history one coin or medal at a time! (c) commems. All rights reserved. Report this Post to the Staff

Coinfrog Bedrock of the Community United States 94367 Posts	Posted 11/23/2024 09:30 am Quite a few, I'm guessing. Report this Post to the Staff
jbuck Moderator United States 187582 Posts	Posted 11/23/2024 2:09 pm Very interesting to ponder. Thank you for sharing. Coin Collector Since 1978 Avatar Old Avatar 7070 Eisenhower Australia Canada World CCF Members on eBay CCF eBay Search Engine Report this Post to the Staff
nickelsearcher Moderator United States 15388 Posts	Posted 11/24/2024 12:41 pm I'm glad these additional special marks did not come to fruition, but it would not have changed my collecting approach. If they had come to pass, the current 144-coin complete classic silver commemorative set would of course have been expanded (by at least the nine coins you mention, plus potentially many more if the multi-year Arkansas and Texas examples used this gimmick every year). That said, I wonder how many collectors, then and now, would have cared to pursue them? Consider for discussion purposes the population of numismatists who seriously pursue the classic silver commemoratives. By my arbitrary definition these are collectors who at a minimum are assembling a complete 50-coin type set. Of that population of folks, I speculate without hard data that the vast majority (say 4 of 5) complete only a type set, with maybe a few favorite varieties as additional coins. I fit into that collection group, albeit with two complete type sets MS and Circ. The folks then and now that were willing to pursue all 144 coins likely would have added any additional special mark coins that came along. So had Fraser comments resulted in action, by my logic above, most collectors would not have cared and a small group would have to pay more for their preferred sets. Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art Report this Post to the Staff
commems CCF Master Historian of USA Commemoratives United States 12252 Posts	Posted 11/24/2024 6:16 pm Quote: ...plus potentially many more if the multi-year Arkansas and Texas examples used this gimmick every year). I've wondered about this and the possibility that the special mark would have been limited to use only for the actual centennial year coins vs. each year of the extended program. Or maybe the programs would have been limited to just two coins and the subsequent years never struck. We'll never know, but it's fun to speculate! Collecting history one coin or medal at a time! (c) commems. All rights reserved. Report this Post to the Staff
	Replies: 4 / Views: 694

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

All Forums Category: US Coins and Currency Forums Forum: US Commemoratives and Non-Circulating Coinage (NCLT) Including Grading, Varieties, and Errors

The First Dollar, your premier source for bullion and rare coins. See our bullion list on the site and the coin inventory on ebay.

Silver Gold Bull US is the United States leading bullion dealer. We deliver gold coins, gold bars, silver coins, silver bars and precious metals to your door. Order today!

View Last 100 New Topics

View Last 100 Active Topics

Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us | Advertise Here | Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum

It took 0.25 seconds to rattle this change.