@conder .... Found this at
https://sites.google.com/site/moste...-breast-1787 reads as follows ....
"Unique 1787 Brasher Doubloon, EB on Breast, Garrett Specimen
America's First Gold
Coin Struck
Pronounced by Numismatic experts as America is most famous and significant
coin, this unique doubloon is also widely accepted as the very first gold
coin struck by the United States of America. One of only seven examples known, this specimen is unique in that the EB counterstamp (initials of silversmith Ephraim Brasher, who made the
coin) is on the shield over the eagles breast. The other six examples carry the EB stamp on the eagles wing.
A
coin of unparalleled historic importance, this precious rarity has been a classic since the earliest days of coin collecting in the United States."
@ conder ... Can you cite any numismatic sources that refer to the Brasher pieces as tokens?

------------------------------------------------
Note that every numismatic article I've ever encountered on Brasher doubloons refers to them as coins. I've yet to read about a "Brasher token" Indeed, some possess elements of traditional U.S. coins, circulating today. There's the motto, E PLURIBUS UNUM, the eagle, stars and the olive branch. The doubloons had a specie value, too. It can easily argued that Brasher's coin helped set a standard for official U.S. coins that followed.
In 1787, there was
no mint. Brasher sought approval for his pattern coin in NY State. If I was to accept the belief that "coins" not issued and released for circulation by the U.S. government are really tokens, doesn't that imply that 1913 Liberty "Nickels," 1933 Gold "Double Eagles," 1894-S Barber "Dimes," etc., and all pattern pieces are also tokens, not coins?
------------------------------------------------
IMHO, pattern pieces like the Brasher Doubloons were proposed to circulate as coins, therefore, they're not token issues. Tokens are substitutes for coins. Doubloons, one of which PCGS assigned a $15 denomination, were not coin substitutes.
-------------------------------------------------
Quote:
I would agree with you on that, a counterstamp does not stop a coin from being a coin.
Glad we can agree on something, I am.
Rich Hartzog, God rest his soul, was an expert on exonumia. Rich long held the position that, by "virtue" of being counterstamped, a coin becomes a token and ceases to be a coin. It's been estimated that, during the 1850's, about 10% of then circulating coins were counterstamped.
--------------------------------------------------
In looking back to reference what I said, about a Brasher Doubloon once being the most valuable coin sold, it appears that I should've said "gold" coin ....

It's been a long time since I read that, and I'm unable to cite the specific source.
