Q. David Bowers
In addition to the foregoing, common die varieties are under-represented and rare ones are overrepresented, as, for example, every specialist collector has aspired to own just one example of the common 1795 BB-21 and also just one of the rare 1797 BB-72. Because of this, large numbers of unsold 1795 BB-21 dollars resting in dealers' stocks or among collectors' duplicates are not represented.
In general, dollars of earlier dates are attributed in auctions and in dealers' stocks more often than are later dollars. In the past, numerous auction sales have had specimens of 1796 and 1797 listed by varieties, but the harder-to-attribute 1798, 1799, 1800, and later dollars were simply listed by date. This has caused an additional under-representation for dates after 1797.
Further, catalogue listings are not always what they appear to be. In one of my own firm's catalogues, Mark Burckhardt discovered that a dollar described as a rare 1796 Bolender-3 (BB-62) was actually of another, commoner variety. In looking at the offerings of the same variety in catalogues of other firms, he found that all but one (the Straus-Spies specimen sold by Stack's) were misattributed, Bolender mentioned in his 1950 book that he had purchased a dozen or more of this same Bolender-3 (BB-62) variety over the years, and that every one of them had been misattributed.
In checking 10 listings of another variety, 1795 BB-15 (Bolender-8), illustrated in modern auction catalogues, Mark Borckardt found that four were wrongly identified. Because of this, certain rare varieties-especially ones which differ from another variety only by some minor or hard-to-determine difference-care apt to be over-represented in catalogues. When such a piece is not illustrated, there is no way of telling today if it was attributed correctly.
Still further, it was and is often the practice to "recycle" unsold auction coins into a future sale. Because of this, two or three listings may represent just one actual coin. In the same vein, if a coin was sold in a 1970 sale, then consigned to a 1973 sale and sold, then consigned by its new owner to a 1980 sale and sold, etc., several differen catalogue listings over a span of years can represent the same coin. If the pedigree is given, as "from our Gilhousen Sale," then the duplication has been eliminated in the "Auction Population Survey" listings given under the variety descriptions (however, duplications have not been extracted from the "Borckardt Population Survey Totals" summarized below).
BORCKARDT AUCTION POPULATION SURVEY
(1992)
1794: 102 = 1.2% of the total coins surveyed 1795 Flowing Hair: 1,154 = 13.6%
1795 Draped Bust: 447 = 5.3%
1796: 490 = 5.8%
1797: 552 = 6.5%
1798 Small Eagle: 246 = 2.9% 1798 Large Eagle: 1,323 = 15.6% 1799/8: 265 = 3.1 %
1799: 1,650 = 19.4%
1800: 940 = 11.1%
1801: 330 = 3.9%
1802/1: 239 = 2.8%
1802: 329 = 3.9%
1803: 438 = 5.1%
Total: 8,505 pieces = 100% (In addition, just before this book went to press, 26 early dollars from the Heritage sale of February 1986, including 25 from the Frank M. Stirling Collection, were surveyed, and the results incorporated into the various listings.)
Data from the preceding, with duplicates deleted (in instances in which pedigree listings were given), are given under the individual entries.
Of the early silver dollars surveyed, very few were certified by ANACS, NGC, or PCGS. None of the coins in the major collections was thus "slabbed." Instead, grading was mostly adjectival, with some numerical evaluations as well. In order to compare the data, all descriptions were reduced to numbers. In instances of split grades, such as VF-EF, the lower grade was used, in this instance VF. In instances in which a cataloguer used a number, such as EF-40, these numbers were preserved.
In the Uncirculated category, all coins are listed as "MS-60 or finer," even though original catalogue descriptions ranged from a simple "Uncirculated," to "superb gem Uncirculated." The reason for this is that in the course of handling in modern times many "gem Uncirculated" coins from years ago, I have found that only a few qualify as gems today. Many coins that were listed as Uncirculated years ago, today are AU at best. Sample "Auction Population Survey" listings follow:
1794 BB-1: Good: 3, Very Good: 13, Fine: 21, Very Fine 34, Extremely Fine: 15, About Uncirculated: 4, MS-60 or better: 12. Total: 102.
1795 Flowing Hair, BB-21: Good: 6, Very Good: 45, Fine: 57, Very Fine: 88, Extremely Fine: 41, About Uncirculated: 23, MS-60 or better: 11. Total: 271.
The preceding illustrates the frequent appearances in auctions of the rare 1794, a coin of which Jack Collins, who has studied dollars of this year and who is preparing a book on them, 1794: The History and Genealogy of the First United States Dollar, believes that about 120 to 130 different coins exist. When a coin comes on the market, chances are good that it will be sold via the auction route. As noted, the auction data over-represent the 1794 BB-1 dollar.
On the other hand, 1795 BB-21 is one of the most common of all dollars of its era. Most specimens change hands privately, not across the auction block. I have had a half dozen pieces in stock at once, and I have seen a couple of dozen or more at a single coin show. It is obvious that the auction data under-represent the 1795 BB-21.