Replies: 2 / Views: 130
Posted Yesterday 6:48 pm
There were three basic options when faced with an order for silver dollars;
- Re-use the Morgan dollar design, like they did in 1921;
- re-use the Peace design, the most recent silver dollar design;
- Create a brand new design for the next-generation of dollars.
However, it wasn't up to "the Mint" to decide the design. Design of coins is up to Congress, and Congress did not designate a design when considering the legislation allowing for 1964 dollars. The legislation has all the signs of it being rushed, and drawing up a new design would have wasted precious time. With no authorization for a new design, Option 3 was out. With no mention of a design at all, this would mean that the "default design" - the one most recently used, and the one that was theoretically still on the books as the design for a silver dollar - would be the one to use. So, Peace instead of Morgan.
As for the appropriateness of the "peace" design for a country in the middle of a war - let's just say that "coins as propaganda" has been a thing since Roman times. More than one Roman emperor issued coins with themes of "concord with the army" just before the army assassinated them, and more than one Roman emperor celebrated "peace with the Parthians" while the Parthians were giving them a good thrashing. And let's not forget the Roman coins celebrating "happy days are here again" while the Empire was disintegrating from civil war and foreign invasion. So a coin commemorating Peace in 1964 would be a Roman-like celebration of an aspirational desire, rather than a proclamation of objective fact. After all, if the Reds had only surrendered nice and quiet like, there would have been peace.
- Re-use the Morgan dollar design, like they did in 1921;
- re-use the Peace design, the most recent silver dollar design;
- Create a brand new design for the next-generation of dollars.
However, it wasn't up to "the Mint" to decide the design. Design of coins is up to Congress, and Congress did not designate a design when considering the legislation allowing for 1964 dollars. The legislation has all the signs of it being rushed, and drawing up a new design would have wasted precious time. With no authorization for a new design, Option 3 was out. With no mention of a design at all, this would mean that the "default design" - the one most recently used, and the one that was theoretically still on the books as the design for a silver dollar - would be the one to use. So, Peace instead of Morgan.
As for the appropriateness of the "peace" design for a country in the middle of a war - let's just say that "coins as propaganda" has been a thing since Roman times. More than one Roman emperor issued coins with themes of "concord with the army" just before the army assassinated them, and more than one Roman emperor celebrated "peace with the Parthians" while the Parthians were giving them a good thrashing. And let's not forget the Roman coins celebrating "happy days are here again" while the Empire was disintegrating from civil war and foreign invasion. So a coin commemorating Peace in 1964 would be a Roman-like celebration of an aspirational desire, rather than a proclamation of objective fact. After all, if the Reds had only surrendered nice and quiet like, there would have been peace.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
