Q. David Bowers
Particularly interesting is the 1795 BB-51 variety with small letters on the reverse. This identical reverse die was used with six different obverses dated 1795, 1796, 1797, and 1798!
All dollars of 1796 and 1797 are of the Draped Bust obverse and Small Eagle reverse type. Silver dollars of both dates exist in several varieties. A rarity is the 1797 issue with the Small Letters reverse, BB-72, struck from the durable reverse die just discussed, first used to coin 1795 BB-51. Nearly all specimens of the 1797 BB-72 dollar are weakly defined on the reverse, due to the shallow relief of the die after it had been resurfaced (relapped). No specimens of 1797 BB-72 exist above the AU level, to my knowledge, and the best grade usually seen is VF.
During the first part of 1798, two varieties of silver dollars of the Draped Bust type with Small Eagle reverse were produced, 1798 BB-81 and BB-82. Coinage was quite limited, as can be estimated from the fact that there are over 30 different die varieties of 1798 silver dollars, of which just two have the Small Eagle reverse style. 1798 Small Eagle dollars are scarce in all grades.
The most often seen early silver dollarsare those of the 1798-1803 years with Draped Bust obverse and Heraldic Eagle reverse. The new reverse motif, by Robert Scot, was first employed on the 1796 $2.50 gold quarter eagle, and is an adaptation of the Great Seal of the United- States. The Heraldic Eagle coin motif differs in that the eagle holds arrows in its dexter claw (observer's left on the coin) and an olive branch in its sinister claw (observer's right).,the opposite of the placement on the Great Seal.
Various adaptations of the Great Seal motif appear elsewhere on American and related coinage, including the Peter Getz' 1792 Washington cents and half dollars, half dimes 1800-1805, dimes 1798-1807, quarters 1804-1807, half dollars 1801-1807, $2.50 1796-1807, $5 1795-1807 (although the 1795-dated $5 coins were minted later, in 1798), $10 1797-1804, Barber quarters and half dollars beginning in 1892, Kennedy half dollars beginning in 1964, the one-ounce silver "eagles" beginning in 1986, etc.
The year 1799 saw the first overdate in the silver dollar series, 1799/8. Apparently an unhardened, unused 1798 obverse die was on hand in 1799, and rather than waste the die (or harden it and then use it with the 1798 die date-this was also an early Mint practice), the timely digit 9 was punched over the earlier 8, thus producing the overdate. Including the overdate (which occurs in three die varieties, from mating the obverse die with three different reverse dies), there are 22 distinct 1799 dollar issues. This year and 1798 seem to be the most common of all early dollars, and nearly half of all known silver dollars within the 1794-1804 range known today are dated either 1798 or 1799.
The Heraldic Eagle design was continued in 1800. Popular references list several different variations within the year; including the curious AMERICAI variety which is not a diecutting error but, instead, has the terminal "I" in the form of a stray mark in that position. 1801-dated dollars include Proof novodels, popularly called "restrikes," . although no originals from the dies were ever made. Comments on these and the related 1802 and 1803 "restrikes" are discussed in chapters 5 and 6.
Among1802 dollars the overdate 1802/1, known from five different obverse dies, is especially interesting. On many examples the undertype 1 is almost as bold as the 2.
Dollars of the year 1803 include those with small 3 in the date and one variety with large 3.
The very rare 1804-dated silver dollar, the most famous of all United States coins, was first minted for presentation and numismatic purposes circa 1831-1834 and was not intended as a regular circulating issue. This issue is discussed in detail in chapters 5 and 6.
How rare is a given early silver dollar variety? In the present book I attempt to give rarity ratings for individual die varieties as well as for major dates and types (such as 1795 Flowing Hair dollars as a class). My estimates ate based upon estimates of rarity given by Bolender, and cataloguers who have attributed coins in their publications; data compiled by Mark Borckardt and Bowers and Merena Galleries staff members by using hundreds of auction catalogues, advertisements, and price lists (especially since about 1950, for as Bolender mentioned in his book, in earlier times dealers' attributions to Haseltine numbers were often incorrect); consultations with specialists; and my own observations. In addition, I present what I consider to be good reasons why previously published Mint report figures and/ or coinage figures in numismatic reference books for certain years, types, and varieties (e.g., 1797 BB-72 with Small Letters reverse) probably are not correct.
Unfortunately, the great coin market innovation of the decade of the 1980s-certification of coins, beginning with the Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS) in 1986-did not include attribution of early dollars by die varieties. As a result, many outstanding early dollars have been examined by PCGS, Numismatic Guaranty Corporation of America (NGC), and ANACS (American Numismatic Association Certification Service), but the plastic "slabs" in which the coins are placed do not include information about die varieties (except for ANACS). Perhaps in the future this oversight will be remedied.
It is to be regretted that requests for inventories of collections of dollars owned by members of the John Reich Collectors Society (IRCS), published in the John Reich Journal, have drawn only a limited response. Part of this is because collecting early dollars by die varieties is not a popular specialty today. Another reason is that it takes a lot of effort to compile a listing of one's holdings, and few are willing to devote the necessary time to the task. Another consideration is that of security: many numismatists want to maintain privacy concerning their holdings. I recall that in one of our auction sales, an enthusiastic bidder on a rare 1794 dollar hastily made up a pseudonym when he was interviewed by a member of the numismatic press.