A Vision of Liberty for a Modern Nation, Part 1: Treading Lightly

American Liberty 2017 gold UHR coin main2

In March of last year, when the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee released its final design choice for the 2017 American Liberty high-relief gold coin, the numismatic zone of the Internet exploded. The conflict renewed at each step in the process, including the official unveiling this month: fans praised the design’s inclusiveness and beauty, while detractors called it politically correct, unattractive, or both. Charges of racism—some justified, others not—were hurled. Over and over again, the discussion returned to Liberty’s braided hairstyle. Although some complaints focused on the size of the stars in Liberty’s crown, it was her braided hair, by far, that provoked the most outrage. In a nation founded on one of the highest principles imaginable, our national conversation was preoccupied with a hairdo.

For weeks, I’ve tiptoed around the subject of this coin. It’s an major piece of our numismatic history, largely because of the race of the woman representing Liberty—but how do I address the subject without starting a dumpster fire? Race is among the most important issues of our time; it’s in greatest need of discussion, yet is one of the hardest things to discuss. I began to realize that avoiding the subject on Mint News Blog was exactly the wrong thing to do. The more difficult the discussion, the more important it is to have it.

So I began studying the matter in depth, and discovered there’s much more going on here than a decision to give a black woman a turn at being Liberty. The paths leading to this coin come from a world of subjects—not just race but gender, American history, ancient history, biology, banking, immigration, art, economics, and mythology. Even pornography (a word I never imagined using here) makes an appearance in the story.

As it turns out, a blog post is a woefully inadequate medium for the subject, which needs an entire book to give it the treatment it deserves. But a blog is the venue we have here, so in this tight framework, I’ll give it my best.

The End of One Series, and the Beginning of Another

To understand the interpretation of Liberty on the 2017 high-relief gold coin, it helps to start with its predecessor, the 2015 American Liberty HR gold coin—which leads us back to the 2009 edition, which leads us back further still to the historic Saint-Gaudens double eagle of 1907. (As you can see, we haven’t even made it out of the first paragraph and the paths are already forking.)

In July 2014, the CCAC held one of its regular meetings via teleconference. The major topic on the agenda was an ultra-high-relief, 24-karat gold, American Liberty–themed coin, along with a silver medal of the same design, to be recommended for the Mint’s 2015–2016 production calendar. The Mint (which had representatives in the conference call) viewed the coin as a bookend* to the 2009 high-relief gold coin struck during the tenure of Edmund Moy, who was director of the U.S. Mint at the time. Moy’s coin, in the words of Mint representative April Stafford, “fulfilled the original vision of Augustus Saint-Gaudens, closing one chapter of American coin design and beginning a new one.” (Quotations from this meeting have been shortened for use in this article; the complete transcript is available here.)

Stafford was referencing, of course, the original 1907 Ultra High Relief double eagle gold coin, designed by Augustus Saint-Gaudens at the behest of President Theodore Roosevelt. The president wanted to revitalize the designs on American coinage, which he felt was “artistically of atrocious hideousness.” The first, pattern strikes of this coin were a test of how far the Mint could take the concept of extremely high, medallic* relief. The results, although quite beautiful, were of course unsuitable for long-term production. The Mint lowered the relief somewhat and tried again, but even these coins were troublesome, taking three strikes per coin to bring up the design. After producing a little more than 12,300 of these high-relief strikes, the Mint moved to a flatter, more traditional relief that was both beautiful and production-friendly—but was nonetheless a diminished version of Saint-Gaudens’s original.

The 1907 Ultra High Relief double eagle. (Photo courtesy of Stack's Bowers Galleries)

The 1907 Ultra High Relief double eagle. (Photos courtesy of Stack’s Bowers Galleries)

2009UHRObv-Rev USMint

The 2009 Ultra High Relief gold coin. As CCAC member Michael Moran pointed out, although the Mint describes the coin’s relief as “ultra” high, it is not as high as that in Saint-Gaudens’s original. (This post uses the term “high-relief” in the interest of accuracy.) Note, however, the precision of the details made possible by modern minting technology. (Photos courtesy of the U.S. Mint)

With the 2009 HR gold coin, Director Moy felt Saint-Gaudens’s original vision could be realized—that, as CCAC chair Gary Marks put it in the teleconference, “a past failure could be corrected.” According to Marks, the Mint director hoped the coin would be the first in a series of ultra-high-relief gold issues with modern designs. That was the CCAC’s hope, as well.

The upshot of the teleconference was that a 2015 renewal of the format would be a worthy complement* to the 2009 coin. Where the 2009 coin had brought to a close an era of classic American coin design, the 2015 coin would open the door on a new one. The committee hoped that, if the Mint followed up on its recommendations, the resulting design candidates would be more than a rehashing of past classics. As Marks put it, “I’d like the artists to try to pull out of their souls some new ideas about what Liberty might look like in the twenty-first century.”

Which brings us to another fork in the path.

Women and People of Color on Money

The late Richard Doty, who was senior curator of numismatics at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, was a close student of artwork on American currency. In Pictures From a Distant Country: Seeing America Through Old Paper Money, he describes the evolution of designs on 19th-century private bank notes. Then, as now, the designs on money depicted the outer world while also revealing the worldviews of the artists and those who commissioned their work.

Doty traces the evolution of the design elements on those now-obsolete bank notes, and includes depictions of people who are especially relevant to our discussion of a modern Liberty. “There were three groups,” he writes, “who frequently appeared on our early currency, but who played little or no role in the money economy that that currency facilitated. They were Native Americans, African-Americans, and women, and their constant visibility on bank notes (in contrast to their virtual invisibility in a number of other areas) says a great deal about the mind-set of those who requested, designed, engraved, and used the bills.” He goes on to demonstrate how “the depiction of the three ‘out’ groups evolved through time, manifesting a visual progression that mirrored the evolution of the country itself.” (Italics are the author’s.)

Across three of the book’s chapters, Doty makes the case that, at the beginning of the private-bank-note era, each of these three groups served merely stage props, standing in for the figures in popular imagination. The Indian was a sneaky enemy, or a remote figure who looked on in denial as the white man’s progress, in the form of trains and factories, rolled onward. The African-American began as a feature of the landscape, indistinguishable as an individual among a group of slaves. As the issue of slavery grew more contentious, the African-American was depicted as a happy worker, beaming a great smile while carrying a bushel of cotton, or singing joyfully while hoeing a row.

Here, "a native group has been disturbed, its men in disorganized pursuit of that which they cannot understand."

Here, “a native group has been disturbed, its men in disorganized pursuit of that which they cannot understand.”

"One can just imagine the wife in [this] scene ... saying, 'Look honey, factories! Aren’t they neat?' To which her husband responds with a monosyllabic grunt that roughly translates to 'Phooey.'”

“One can just imagine the wife in [this] scene … saying, ‘Look honey, factories! Aren’t they neat?’ To which her husband responds with a monosyllabic grunt that roughly translates to ‘Phooey.’”

This vignette originally depicted a field of white laborers harvesting wheat. A South Carolina bank wanted to use the image, but asked that the laborers be changed to black slaves, and the wheat to cotton.

This vignette originally depicted a field of white laborers harvesting wheat. A South Carolina bank liked the image, but asked that the white laborers be changed to black slaves, and the wheat to cotton.

PFDC African-American 2

Examples of the “happy-slave” trend, in which many bank notes served as propaganda for the pro-slavery cause.

Members of the third group, women, were often depicted as grand allegories, which often was an excuse to render them naked. The precedent of nudity in fine art served as an excuse for partial or total nudity on banknotes; there was little danger that the “fairer sex” would be exposed to the images, as women (especially gentlewomen) rarely handled money. “One is rather hard put,” Doty writes, “to come away with anything but a lingering impression that the bathing nude on a $20 bill from Macon, Georgia, was there as the 1840 equivalent of a pinup.”

"This was not the sort of thing you would show to your mother—or your daughter, or your wife." Although Doty doesn't mention it, the position of the eagle's wings gives the scene a creepy similarity to the story of Leda and the Swan.

“This was not the sort of thing you would show to your mother—or your daughter, or your wife,” Doty writes. Although he doesn’t mention it, the position of the eagle’s wings gives the scene a creepy similarity to the story of Leda and the Swan.

In an opposing trend, women were depicted as soft-cheeked ideals of virtue. Of this tendency to romanticize female figures, Doty writes, “Nowhere was this need more indelibly expressed than in the profession most commonly associated with them, that of the milkmaid. From the simple testimony of the currency, milking cows must have been the growth industry of the 19th century.”

This particular milk maid seems a tad overdressed...

This particular milkmaid seems a tad overdressed…

Woman as a symbol of purity, complete with white dove.

Woman as a symbol of purity, complete with white dove.

As time passed and American culture progressed, Native Americans and women came to be depicted in a more realistic fashion, as features of the world that is rather than the world as others want it to be. Women, who were beginning to earn and spend money of their own, began to be depicted as workers in stores, mills, and factories. Native Americans, as their physically threatening status diminished, were depicted living ordinary lives, canoeing, fishing, and hunting “without moral commentary.” As for African-Americans, the happy-slaves trend came to an end, but not because of cultural progress. In the midst of the Civil War, the National Bank Act of 1863 made the U.S. government the sole issuer of paper money. The era of private bank notes was over, and soon afterward, the era of slavery was, as well.

As women began to earn money for themselves, banks began to depict them realistically on their bank notes.

As women began to earn money for themselves, banks began to depict them realistically on their bank notes.

Thoroughly Modern Liberty

In its 2014 instructions to the members of its Artistic Infusion Program (AIP), the Mint’s instructions—like the CCAC’s recommendations—were intentionally vague (especially in comparison to the lengthy, rigid requirements often required by Congress for circulating coinage, with the Apollo 11 commemorative being a recent example). As the CCAC had hoped, the goal of devising a modern Liberty representative of the nation’s diversity gave the artists a much-needed dose of creative freedom.

Justin Kunz, the AIP artist who produced the winning 2015 design, said, “The problem we were tasked with solving, to portray Lady Liberty as a modern figure (rather than a traditional one), proved a bit more difficult in practice than it sounded in theory. It required a lot of studying, sketching and meditating about what Lady Liberty represents, what it is that defines our time from past eras, and how these ideas might be distilled down to a simple visual statement that could be expressed in an elegant way.”

Kunz’s Lady Liberty on the 2015 high-relief gold coin is clearly a modern figure, particularly in two aspects. The first is her stance. Liberties of the past, when depicted in full or three-quarter length, have been grand allegories. They are untouchable; they stride from an exalted world into our own, bearing a shield of war or a sheaf of grain, carrying a torch of freedom, extending an olive branch or merely a beckoning hand. They tend to have dawn trailing from the skirts of their Greek-inspired, billowing robes. These Liberties were handed down to America from a time when human beings seemed to be utterly at the whim of the gods.

The 2015 high-relief gold coin, depicting an all-new, thoroughly modern interpretation of Liberty. (Photos courtesy of APMEX)

The 2015 high-relief gold coin, depicting an all-new, thoroughly modern interpretation of Liberty. (Photos courtesy of APMEX)

The 2015 Liberty is strong and dignified, but she is very human. She lives in a world where people, including women-people, control their own destinies, to the degree that it’s possible within the bounds of nature. Her Greek-inspired gown hangs straight, obeying gravity rather than a divine wind. The breeze that ripples the flag catches her sleeve and gives it a flutter, but the effect is entirely realistic. Her arms are strong, with a hint of muscle. Rather than holding the torch of freedom above her head as if leading a vast army, she grips it at a practical height, as if she’s leading her neighbors on a long trek to safety. Her hair is not a flowing fire hazard. It’s either done up or worn short, with a few strands escaping to one side. She stands perfectly still, but the rippling flag, the dancing torch flames, and the flame-like shapes of the laurel wreath on her head suggest motion. (In fact, one CCAC member, Michael Bugeja, had emphasized that “liberty” means not only freedom of will but unrestrained motion, an aspect the design captures.)

The second modern aspect of Liberty was not a complete surprise, as the design instructions had called for a sense of diversity—that said, “diversity” was left open to interpretation, and an other-than-white Liberty had not been a strict requirement. Whatever they had expected, the committee members were pleased to see that, for the first time, Liberty could be interpreted as being from a race other than white.

This may or may not have been intentional on Kunz’s part. Given his youth and gender, he’d be forgiven if he didn’t realize modern American beauty standards are quite different from what they were even 20 years ago. However, as an artist, he’s probably aware that in the not-too-distant past, “beauty” meant white skin, a small nose, and medium-to-thin lips. As more and more African-American, Latina, and mixed-raced women became celebrities, that ideal evolved. American preferences in skin tone, bone structure, lip fullness, hairstyles, and so on have changed greatly, and many “ideal” beauties today are of mixed or even indeterminate race.

From the outset, the CCAC was keenly aware that, whatever design was chosen, the coin must be an across-the-board success, or there would be no further high-relief coins from the Mint. The effort needed to work not only artistically but from the manufacturing (i.e., strike-ability) and marketing standpoints. Thanks to careful attention at each step of the process, the work was an unqualified success. Both the high-end 2015 gold coin and its companion piece, the more cost-conscious 2016 silver medal, were sell-outs, which meant that a new, high-relief gold coin was a possibility for 2017.   ❑


* This posted was edited for accuracy at 5:45 on January 30. At the suggestion of CCAC member Michael Moran, I changed the description of the relief on the 1907 UHR coin from “almost sculptural” to the more correct “medallic.” In addition, the original text said that the CCAC saw the 2015 coin as a bookend to the 2009 coin, but that was actually the view of the Mint, not the CCAC. Mr. Moran points out that “bookend” has a ring of finality to it, and that the CCAC wanted the coin to be the start of something rather than the end of it. I’ve adjusted the text accordingly.

Facebook Twitter Email

Comments

  1. Mike the Greek says

    I have an idea about why this coin is causing such a ruckus. I really don’t think it’s about racism at all, although some folks are like that. I also really don’t think it’s about the supposed beauty, or lack thereof, of the coin – although some folks have preferences one way or the other.

    I think it’s a much deeper, and simpler issue. I think the mint majorly gaffed here. They messed with an iconic image, the general form of which has been around for centuries. Think about it. If Superman movies came out here in America with an African Pygmie Midget playing the role, wouldn’t that cause quite a stir? And if anyone dared complain they would likely be called a racist by Little People. But the issue isn’t racism – it’s the classic character was changed in a fundamental way.

    When they changed Classic Coke’s formula to the New Coke, there was outrage – even though pre-taste tests showed coke fans loved the new flavor more than the old. When people get used to something, especially something as iconic as an image that represents their country, there’s bound to be some ire with any kind departure from previously held standards.

    I think this is what is at the heart of it. I don’t think it’s any more complex than that. I think the woman looks quite beautiful, and the coin is both stunning and provocative. For me personally, she doesn’t look like the classic Liberty I’m used to, so I have a bit of a reaction simply for that reason.

    What do you guys think?

  2. says

    Diana! I don’t have the time right now to devote to a well-considered comment, so I will wait until later for that, but I do want you to know that this is a most commendable post!…and that is after reading only the intro so far (but I can see this is going to be good). I completely agree that this needs to be discussed much more in our hobby – and to understand the underlying factors contributing to collectors’ reactions to the 2017 Liberty gold coin.

    @Mike the Greek
    I think it’s a much deeper, and simpler issue. I think the mint majorly gaffed here. They messed with an iconic image, the general form of which has been around for centuries….there’s bound to be some ire with any kind departure from previously held standards.

    If you pick up a Red Book and flip through the history of US coinage, you’ll see that the “general form” of Liberty has varied greatly over the centuries. I would ask you what it is about the depiction of Liberty on this particular coin that you believe is a break with that “general form” or “previously held standards”? The answer to that question may be the actual crux of this topic, so think about it.

    But the issue isn’t racism – it’s the classic character was changed in a fundamental way.
    Have you ever compared the Turban Head $5 piece to the Peace Dollar? I would say the classic character was changed in a fundamental way there too. Still Liberty, no?

  3. Phil says

    After 40 years of collecting coins I sometimes start thinking I know a fair amount about coins and then I read one of your articles Diana and I realize how little I really know. Thanks.

    Now I’m really glad I own the 2015 gold Liberty because I never appreciated the work and thought that went into the coin, but now I know a little more than I did.

    Well Done.

  4. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    I tend to think of the new black Liberty as affirmative action for US coins. I don’t know if that’s a good thing or a bad thing but it has sparked some interest, I guess.

    Kudos to you, MNB, for wading into the minefield. Coins and currency are symbolic representations and should reflect the times…… or animals. Who doesn’t love dogs? or Trees?

    I just got another 1917 type 1 Standing Liberty Quarter the other day and I wonder if the outrage over a bare-breasted Liberty posed any similarities to the new Liberty? The 1917 slq is, imo, one of the nicest coins ever made and yet it faced fierce opposition. Today, it’s highly collectible so who knows?

    I follow a strict “collect what you like” strategy so I won’t be buying these coins. Maybe they’ll do well or maybe they’ll be the new Susan B Anthony.

    btw, I really like SBA Dollars. And Sacagewea Dollars. Those were nice designs.

    I think Mike the Greek made some valid points.

  5. cagcrisp says

    Herein lies the problem “From the outset, the CCAC was keenly aware that, whatever design was chosen, the coin must be an across-the-board success, or there would be no further high-relief coins from the Mint. The effort needed to work not only artistically but from the manufacturing (i.e., strike-ability) and marketing standpoints. Thanks to careful attention at each step of the process, the work was an unqualified success.”

    That’s the departure from 2015 vs. 2017. The 2017 HR is Much more divisive than the 2015 HR. That is the problem. It is hard enough for a 1 oz. Gold coin in the price range of $1,700 to be successful if EVERYONE is pulling in the same direction. In 2017 there will be too many pulling in the opposite direction for it to be successful. The 2017 HR is way to divisive to be a Financial success. Everyone has their own definition of success, however, any way you Financially measure the sales of the 2017 HR vs. a Mintage of 100,000 and it will fall wayfully short.

    The cost is too high, the design is to controversial and not enough people will be pulling in the same direction to meet the mandate of:

    “From the outset, the CCAC was keenly aware that, whatever design was chosen, the coin must be an across-the-board success, or there would be no further high-relief coins from the Mint.”

    I see the 2017 HR lingering, lingering and lingering on the website. In my terminology ” The 2017 HR will die on the vine.”

    Personally, I think the design is a classic design, however, from an investor point of view a Mintage of 100,000 is a non starter for me and for people like me that Buy 1 oz. Gold to turn it down, that’s not a good sign…

  6. erki jansen says

    Mike: Wow. A well stated, reasonable argument. With no screaming from the rafters, pea shooter impatience nor contagious interruptions. Have I just experienced a rare bird sighting?

    I like your clarity, but……Symbols of liberty harken back to the classic (we are told original experimental) days of practical democratic civility. Certainly, Greek. But the idea of Liberty also certainly predates that in other orders of society and natural worldliness. Maybe not for all in those instances? And what of those symbols and their recognition, let alone defense? And BTW, the crown of (oversized!) stars on the coin obverse is not an original idea or rendering … and potentially not so original is the choice of alternative ethnicity….hint: look and learn of the history and artists intentions of what stands atop the Capitol dome in DC. Incredible.

    Thank you, everyone for not interrupting. Now, your turn to think, synthesize, share and pass the torch of thought…please

  7. Erik H says

    Diana, nice post (well worth the wait).

    I can’t wait for this coin. Will buy on day one, 12 noon.

  8. Mint News Blog says

    @erik jansen — Since you’ve mentioned it, part 2 will, indeed, cover the fascinating history of Thomas Crawford’s Statue of Freedom (among other things). I’m looking forward to wrapping it up and getting it posted!

  9. Louis Golino, Author says

    Terrific, beautifully written piece that provides essential background to the 2017 coin.

    On the one hand, the Mint did (I listened to the meetings) present the 2015 coin as a continuation of the vision started with the 2009 coin, but on the other hand the 2015 coin was the first of a series that continues with the 2017 coin. That makes sense since the iconography and symbolism of the 2015 coin is still, as Diana writes, Greek-inspired and is a kind of modern version of what Saint Gaudens did, whereas the 2017 coin takes a very different artistic approach, but is still a representation of Liberty like all three coins. In other words, there is link to Saint Gaudens in the 2009 UHR and 2015 HR but not with the 2017 HR.

  10. Louis Golino, Author says

    As for sales, mintages, and whether or not it will be a commercial success, let’s wait and see. I still think it will be a strong seller but agree 100K is too high. But I also am sure only part of that will be minted initially, and if the demand is not there, they won’t make the max.

    And I am certain the coin will be released as planned on 4/6. It has given the Mint huge positive publicity and more mainstream media coverage than any other coin in years, if not decades.

  11. Dustyroads says

    MNB, Wow, you really wrote an amazing article. There’s so much area you covered, I don’t know where to start. I think I’ll start with your observation of the 2015 HR Liberties sleeve movement due to the air gently passing and catching the flag…awesome! The standing Liberty is my personal favorite, allegorically speaking. I’m concerned the 2017 HR Liberty in profile will be a stepping back in design. Of course everyone will have to digest this over the sales period, but I’m proud of the Mint for taking the time to recognize another portion of our society other than whites. The road forward to prosperity for our nation will be one which will be accomplished together, or will be a failed mission.
    I’d like to address your comment eluding to pornography in depicting women on coinage. I will always wonder a little about why women are depicted in this way so many times on coinage from around the world. I’m inclined to believe it is primarily because it’s mostly men who want to buy these things, and that’s a great way to boost sales numbers. On the other hand, I also feel in reality, that “Liberty” is unaware by nature of herself, or her nudity, as she is most concerned with who she is watching over. It is sad that we live in a world consumed and overrun with smut gazing pedophiles, so I totally get the anger women, and most men feel about the subject. However, I’m fairly certain that a scantly dressed Liberty would not fall under the heading of pornography.

  12. Scott says

    The first thing I noticed about the 2015 HR was the HUGE “LIBERTY” on the obverse. To me that oversized lettering overwhelms and detracts from what I consider to be questionable artwork on the rest of the obverse. Unfortunately the 2017 HR obverse uses the same HUGE LETTERING although the rest of the obverse may be artistically better. Neither of these coins appeal to me because of their mintages and high premiums.

  13. cagcrisp says

    A box of 10 Winged Head Liberty dimes Sold Yesterday for $4,023.00.

    A box of 10 Winged Head Liberty dimes cost $2,054.95 from the Mint on Launch Day.

    That’s what I call a Financial Success. As I’ve said before we All have a definition of financial success but for me there Has to be a secondary market success for it to be an overall financial success…

  14. Louis Golino, Author says

    As for Mike’s argument, I’d have to disagree. First, Liberty is not exactly “an image that represents their country,” but an allegorical symbol of freedom, the main ideal upon which the U.S. (and many other countries) is based. In other words it is really a symbol of our democratic ideals.
    I agree that people are usually resistant to change, but sometimes a little disruption is good for them as it reminds us that nothing stays the same, everything evolves and changes. The original idea of freedom or liberty was confined to certain people in this country, but today it embraces everyone, and what better why to show that than by representing that icon in a new way that captures the changes? And by using imagery (the crown of stars, for example) the design is clearly trying to be symbolic in a specific way, riffing off Crowford’s statue, which is a symbol of the end of slavery.
    Finally, as some have suggested this is hardly the first time Liberty has been depicted in a new way, one that is a departure from the white, Greco-Roman-inspired classic version, including Native-American Liberty on pre-1933 gold and the Sacajawea/Native American dollars.

  15. Mint News Blog says

    @Dustyroads — Thanks for the kind words! Regarding the pornography bit, I fell far short of capturing Dick Doty’s original meaning. Although he uses the word “pornography,” what he’s describing is more “naughtiness” than what we’d think of as porn today. I agree that Liberty probably wouldn’t give a hoot whether she’s clothed or not, and I’d add that, to the ancient Greeks from whom we borrow so many themes, the birthday suit was just another set of clothes. I do think Doty was onto something, though, with his assertion that the nude goddesses on banknotes were more than just classical art — especially since the paper ladies began to put their clothes on once women started earning and handling money. (But I’m taking that from a hasty re-reading of the text, so don’t hold me to it.)

  16. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    I think part of the issue I have with symbolic gestures is that they are merely symbolic. Freedom and Liberty are great ideals but they are trampled on daily by people everywhere. I’d be happy if people were just ok to each other.

    A black Liberty feels like some kind of cultural appropriation. True, we live in a melting pot and cultural exchange is inevitable but it feels off. The Native American elements in the Statue of Freedom feels like cultural appropriation.

    I don’t really care for the buzzword cultural appropriation but it’s a thing in certain circles. Many white people fall all over themselves trying to impart a racially unbiased aura and they feign offense at every chance to bolster this mostly symbolic gesture.

    I went to a high school that used the Redskins name for sports teams. The mostly (all) white school newspaper editors went on strike and refused to use the name Redskins but as it turns out, nine in 10 Native Americans say they are not offended by the Washington Redskins name.

    The people that are offended are the mostly white people. Some people have called it white guilt which is probably a real but unconsciously expressed thing.

    Blacks don’t really care about black Liberty on a gold coin. They want reparations and jobs…. not some symbolic gesture.

    Native Americans don’t care about a Sacagawea Dollar…. they want their land back and respect for Nature and the aforementioned Buffalo.

    We’re a nation of symbolism, today. Even our democracy is symbolic. I almost cringed every time Hillary wore a different color pantsuit to symbolize some event or heroic deed. Thank black Jesus that’s over.

  17. Throckmorton says

    I wonder if Britannia or Marianne will undergo a similar transformation in the near future. The Swiss, if their attitude can be measured by recent shooting medals seem, to have different ideas for Helvetica

  18. Louis Golino, Author says

    Throckmorton- The French have a whole series of coins with iconic French symbols- Marianne, the Sower, Hercules, and Roosters. They just issued some nice Marianne coins and those and the Sowers from a couple years ago are modern versions of the classics, though as far as I can tell it’s the art rather than ethnicity that changed. I will be covering some of this soon in Coin World in the April issue, including a great coin that depicts the Statues of Liberty that are in Paris.

  19. Louis Golino, Author says

    Britannia still hews pretty close to the original except on the 2014 proof coin, where she is shown in a very modern, art deco style. and that is an amazing coin. This is the kind of thing I’d like to see our mint too as well. Be more creative in the way Liberty is shown, which is not only about diversity.

  20. joe says

    I enjoyed this article…very well written from an interesting perspective. Thank you for that!

    While the 2015 coin was pretty nice, I think they could have done so much better on the design. Whether black or white lady liberty, those stars are just gaudy.

    To the point of your article though, there are always reasons behind the images that are placed on our coins and currency. It may be an expression of the culture, the times, or merely trying to sell an opinion. It is also possible that political correctness can be behind a coin’s image. The reasoning behind this 2017 coin is no exception. It wasn’t an arbitrary decision…there is a motive for the Mint (or congress or whoever) choosing to have a black lady liberty.

    Whatever the reason, the US Mint is one of the few institutions that can be politically correct and get away with it. Unlike real businesses, I don’t think they excessively worry about whether a product will sell or not. I’m not sure Moy’s top motive with the 2009 High Relief was money…it was to leave an innovative legacy…a coin that was a throw-back to a day when the the technology for high relief coins wasn’t as progressed. Similarly, with coins having edge lettering, curves, and so forth. Coincidentally, novel coins (curves, edge lettering, high relief) typically sell better until the novelty wears off.

    In the case of the 2017, the novelty IS that the Mint (or whoever) chose to make lady liberty a black woman. I have no problem with the decision IF it wasn’t merely about being PC. The problem is, I can’t find any other reason for them to make the change.

    My favorite coin ever is the buffalo coins with an American Indian on the obverse and an American Buffalo on the reverse. For some reason, both say “America” to me. For better or worse, when I look at this 2017 coin I don’t say “American” or “Liberty” for many reasons. Perhaps it’s because our country was founded with slavery, and today the BLM community wants to kill police officers (black or white).

    Although a black lady liberty just doesn’t inspire me, I would be all in for a Clarence Thomas coin. That man is inspirational to me because his values rise above the pettiness of “black and white.”

  21. VA Bob says

    I’m waiting for the Burka Liberty. Let’s give everyone a shot. I thought the 2015 was going to be a one-off, not a series. Too rich for my blood, being the highest of three price levels for a single ounce of gold. Mintage wouldn’t matter to me, but I certainly understand it’s a factor for some. If it’s as popular as the 2009 UHR 100k should be no problem. Of course I paid $1189.00 for my UHR.

  22. Svetlana Sorikino says

    The problem with this coin is that there is no diversity in it at all. It is 100% black or African-American or whatever you want to call it. To achieve diversity, the figure should represent those of mixed race. It should include Caucasian, Asian, Negroid, Hispanic and any other elements of race that people contain. Diversity means having diverse elements while this coin has only one. Mixed-race people are the wave of the future and represent true diversity. That is what the new Liberty character should possess.

  23. Karl Meyer says

    I didn’t like the 2015 art work for it’s unusual placement of the arm holding the torch. I bought the coin my wife loves it mostly cause it’s gold. The 2017 coin has a strange alignment of of head, neck, shoulders. Could of left off the shoulders and the piece would be right. The overtly racial cultural portrayal of liberty is what has me but I will probably buy the coin. Next since the mint is going down this road I wish to see an Asian liberty the group as a whole may never of been brought to the continent as slaves but no other group of immigrants has been treated as badly as the Chinese who built the railroads, the Japanese of the twentieth century, the Philippine soldiers of WWII. This group has had to endure as much racism as any other group but proudly believe in liberty. Great article please more, the articles have only been getting better and better

  24. says

    @joe –
    there is a motive for the Mint (or congress or whoever) choosing to have a black lady liberty.

    yep, there is a reason joe (see page 2)

    https://www.ccac.gov/media/calendar/lettersToSecretary/2016_0315.pdf

    excerpt: “We felt we could be inclusive of the many races in our country, mindful that there are many ideals of a woman, and sensitive to these defining characteristics.”

    So what exactly do you mean when you say “political correctness”?

  25. Mint News Blog says

    Svetlana and Karl — The next post will talk more about the future of the series, which is intended to portray Liberty in several different ethnicities. In fact, the Times of India (I think that was the news outlet) didn’t even mention the black Lady Liberty, but focused with excitement on the idea of an East Indian Liberty.

  26. Mint News Blog says

    Joe and one fine dime, kindly don’t let the comments devolve into another shouting match. I had to delete more than 40 comments this afternoon, and I don’t care to delete any others.

  27. gatortreke says

    Diana, thanks for the excellent article and taking this subject head on. The topic is controversial but so far, the replies have mostly brought out the best of the posters. Give the masses something worthy of talking about and they can and will do so in a civil and respectful manner. Kudos.

    Perhaps it is a product of our times or just of human nature but based on what I’ve read here, doing anything other than placing a traditional view of Liberty on the coin was bound to raise the hackles of someone, somewhere. The initial thought is that doing so must be for political correctness or some other devious reason but how does change occur without doing something different? Even if some of this suspicion is proven to be correct, does it really matter? All designs of our past coins weren’t made with pure motives, politics and controversy is just part of the process.

    Personally, I like the change, not because it is a black woman but because it does break with the traditional view yet still hews to the concept of Liberty. It is something new and It is vastly superior to most of what we are subjected to on our coins, that is the dead presidents and other people. We’ve longed cried out for the return of Liberty and I for one am happy to see a series with her featured on the coin. For all those who don’t like the design, perhaps that will change over time. I have a coin collecting buddy who detested the 2015 HR coin when it was first announced and yes, race was a major component of his reaction. He refused to purchase the coin but since its release, it has grown on him, resulting in him being an eager buyer of the silver medals when they were released last year.

    I certainly hope this coin isn’t a token checkoff to one of our racial minorities with future coins being tokens to our various other minorities as suggested by one of the posters. I’d like to see future designs take on different challenges. For example, I’d be very happy to see a well sculpted, well toned Liberty, on a future coin. Traditional classical views of women generally emphasize a certain plumpness and creamy whiteness of the skin but that has changed with bronze skin and well toned bodies becoming much more of an ideal in this day, something represented by our women sports stars . Something tasteful reflecting this change in our concept of beauty, as hinted at above by Diana in her article for the 2015 design, is one such design possibility.

    I just recently purchased the Doty book cited in this article. I can see I’m going to need to read it sooner rather than later. I look forward to Part deux of this article.

  28. Throckmorton says

    Louis, the artistry is really what draws me to the foreign coins. The 2015 50 pound silver is my favorite Britannia.
    The Sower evokes thoughts of grace. I always thought that was a personification of Marianne. I wish the French would make a one ounce gold version of that one! The Chervonetz is another sower that has appeal.

  29. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    I love those Brittania Proofs. I have the first one from 2013 (with the owl). The 2014 is a favorite, though. These proof coins change every year but the bullion coins keep the original design now.

    The old Sower coins are also amazing. The gold Roosters are high on my must have list. With the US Mint languishing in racial pandering I’ll be looking elsewhere.

  30. So Krates says

    “I had to delete more than 40 comments this afternoon…”

    More like sixty and way too heavy handed. They are comments not content. Remove only what is egregious and leave the rest to be read or ignored.

  31. DBR says

    Everything about coins and minting coins, more or less, revolves around the Fine Arts. And let’s not kid ourselves, most people don’t know anything about the Fine Arts because these subjects were removed from general education by Philistines a long time ago (budget cuts).

    Philosophy: Race is an accident of birth. Don’t make too much of it, you didn’t do anything to receive the race you have (mixed or otherwise).

    Culture? That’s were the real focus of the source of people’s opinions will come about this coin’s design. It’s cultural. Can one see this coin as a legitimate expression of the USA culture? I do.

    Art and Beauty: Artists, designers and sculptors bring these designs to life in the coinage. And these groups are well-read and well-studied. Those who are trained in art and the depictions of beauty personified through the ages know that classical Beauty is the nude form; it’s not considered pornographic or even overtly sexualized. This juxtaposition of female beauty was marvelously rendered in Renaissance Europe in Titian’s “Sacred and Profane Love.” (c. 1514)

    This article inspired me to go research what images appear on African currency and coins. These tend to be more homogeneous cultures so I’m expecting African images for their depictions of what values and people they hold dear and who represent their cultures and ideals. After that, perhaps see what appears on Asian, Latin American and Middle Eastern money (again very homogeneous societies for the most part).

    There is a way to present something which celebrates our nation’s diversity without one gender, race or ethnicity having to be triumphalistic or superior about it. To do otherwise is obnoxious and insulting to those who have come to terms with the richness of our nation’s complexity a long time ago. Nobody is saying the USA is Shangri-La but we’ve striven for high ideals.

  32. Mint News Blog says

    Regarding “comments not content,” So Krates, I have to disagree with you there. MNB is the only blog I’ve ever encountered where the comments are as important as the content, if not more so. If that weren’t the case, everyone would have disappeared last week when the blog appeared to go toes-up with x’s for eyes. I’ve seen quite a few remarks from newcomers praising how much they’ve learned from the comment thread. Many readers (like me, for instance) avoid comment sections like the plague, because they tend to be 99% garbage. MNB is a remarkable exception.

    As for the deletions, apologies to anyone whose harmless comment went under the mower with the weeds.

  33. EvilFlipper says

    What a fantastic and informative article!!! I will admit I didn’t realize how much thought went into these coins but now I will be looking to put these in my collection!!! Keep up with more articles like this please!!!

  34. data dave says

    Diana, thanks for such a well written and researched article. After reading an article like that, I think most posters will take a little more time thinking about what they are typing rather than just shooting from the hip. I have always loved studying the history of coins and find it fascinating how they are constantly changing. I also think that people are entitled to like or dislike a certain coin design based on personal preferences without being called a negative label. The interesting thing about coins is that people will vote with their pocket book on which designs they really like.

  35. cagcrisp says

    The United States Mint is announcing pricing changes for some 2017 United States Mint Numismatic Products, in accordance with the list below:

    • 2017 United States Mint Proof Set $26.95
    • 2017 United States Mint Silver Proof Set $47.95
    • 2017 United States Mint Uncirculated Set $20.95

    …NOW…How does that compare to 2016 pricing?

    • 2016 United States Mint Proof Set $31.95
    • 2016 United States Mint Silver Proof Set $52.95
    • 2016 United States Mint Uncirculated Set $26.95

    …SO…

    • 2017 United States Mint Proof Set Down $5.00
    • 2017 United States Mint Silver Proof Set Down $5.00
    • 2017 United States Mint Uncirculated Set Down $6.00

    Why are 2017 prices Down?

    • 2017 United States Mint Proof Set; You get 10 coins or $2.91 face value for $26.95 whereas in 2016 you got 13 coins or $5.91 face value for $31.95

    • 2017 United States Mint Silver Proof Set ; You get 10 coins or $2.91 face value for $47.95 (7 coins in Silver) whereas in 2016 you got 13 coins or $5.91 face value for $52.95 (7 coins in 90% Silver)

    • 2017 United States Mint Uncirculated Set; You get 20 coins or $5.82 face value for $20.95 whereas in 2016 you got 26 coins or $11.82 face value for $26.95

  36. cagcrisp says

    The Above mentioned Annual Sets are Yearly Losers for the Mint…

    FY16 Loss of $24.1 million
    FY15 Loss of $8.5 million
    FY14 Loss of $16.9 million
    FY13 Loss of $3.4 million
    FY12 Loss of $2.7 million

    …SO…In the past 5 years the Silver Proof Set, the Mint Proof Set and the Uncirculated Set have combined for a Loss of $55.6 million.

    Maybe the reduction in price for 2017 will Increase sales to some extent to Cut the losses…

  37. data dave says

    So on the 2017 UNC set you get $6 less in face value for $6 less in purchase price. The 3.6x face for the remaining coins will be the highest ever.

  38. Sith says

    Throwing my hat in the ring. Although it will have an effect on sale, IMHO it does not matter so much that the change may isolate some current coin collectors, they key is are the people who desired the change buying coins, or inspiring other to buy it. For example, despite of the fact they they won the lawsuit against the Humane Society, and other animal rights activist groups, Ringling Brother’s pulled the elephants. Their ticket sales collapsed, as a lot of the people who did go to the circus hated it, and stopped going, but more importantly despite the change, the protestors were too busy patting themselves on the back, to actually go to the circus. That is of course assuming they actually had any interest in the circus, outside of their limited agenda.

  39. says

    Great comments here so far.
    I’ll say that I generally agree with Diana’s assessment: “the comments are as important as the content” but only as it relates to on topic comments. Off topic comments on this blog have been the norm more than the exception for years.; and by “off topic”, I mean anything not relating to the current post under which the comments are written. So far, the comments here on this current thread have been on topic (for the most part), and I think MNB would greatly benefit if all its visitors would sort of agree to keep it that way. But that rarely happens.

    Personally, I find it really irritating that the current “discussion” is now interrupted by cagcrisp and his typical reportage. That is off topic. Maybe I’m a total minority here, and everyone loves that cagcrisp does this. Maybe Diana feels that cagcrisp is a sort of co-blogger with her on MNB…I just don’t know.

    To data dave’s comment: “I also think that people are entitled to like or dislike a certain coin design based on personal preferences without being called a negative label.
    I’ll say that I certainly agree. But when someone dismisses the value or relevance of this coin by calling it “PC”, and they are asked to explain what they mean by this, and they don’t, then did they truly convey any opinion at all?

    When someone says that this coin only exists as a kind of affirmative action, how is that not racist? Let’s all be honest, please. Because, to me, as I’ve said before, We The People (of which the CCAC is certainly a cross section), looked around them and came to the conclusion that not all of us look like white europeans, and questioned why we are still depicting Liberty on our coins as ONLY a white european looking woman. Right? How is that affirmative action? Isn’t it just considering the breadth and depth of ethnicity of the American people when they depict Liberty as a human being. Simple as that, not all Americans look alike, so why would we always depict Liberty as the same race all the time?

    Here’s a comment:
    There is a way to present something which celebrates our nation’s diversity without one gender, race or ethnicity having to be triumphalistic or superior about it. To do otherwise is obnoxious and insulting to those who have come to terms with the richness of our nation’s complexity a long time ago.

    Does it mean that we should not create a coin with an obviously black woman depicted as Liberty? Who is being superior about it? I honestly cannot even determine what this comment means.

    Here’s another comment:
    The problem with this coin is that there is no diversity in it at all. It is 100% black or African-American or whatever you want to call it.

    Ok, how is that not racist? Think about it. We have depicted Liberty as 100% european-american (or whatever you want to call it) since the birth of our nation. Is that a “problem”?

    Here’s another comment:
    I’m waiting for the Burka Liberty. Let’s give everyone a shot.

    Let’s think about this one. The commenter is equating a depiction of Liberty as a black woman with a type of clothing used by some people in the world to completely obscure women – what could certainly be considered as limiting the “liberty” of women. It is curious what this commenter is trying to say here.

    So I agree with Diana when she says, “the comments are as important as the content, if not more so.” But in the spirit of free speech and critical thinking, I believe it is important for each of us to “challenge” each other on what we say (certainly not meant to incite an argument or “devolve into another shouting match”).

  40. Old Big Bird says

    @cagcrisp thanks for supplying the possible pricing on the US Mint items. I purchase a number of sets for my collections and it is nice to calculate the amount that I might need to spend in a given month. Please keep up the excellent infomation

  41. Old Big Bird says

    Does anyone know if they are still going to have some form of the Annual Uncirculated Dollar Coin Set
    They had the burnished American eagle and the president dollar and Native American dollar in it.
    Would they have a simple American eagle and native American dollar in a two coin set?
    I have all of them from 2007 to 2016 minus the 2009 (never produced)

  42. bobo says

    Thanks Diana for a super article. And I appreciate the info that Cagcrisp provides. I just don’t know how he has the time to keep us so well informed.

    I fail to understand why people think an idea, like the idea of liberty, should be portrayed solely with a young white woman, just because that is how liberty was portrayed in the past. Liberty and freedom are ideas and ideals. Every person, regardless of how they look, wants liberty and freedom. Also, according to the census, this country has 63% non-Hispanic whites now, but by 2043 non-Hispanic whites will be under fifty percent of our population. This does not bother me at all. Why should it? What I care about is people having good character, which they have some say in, not in how they look, which they had no say in.

    I do think that the best practical representation of freedom in America is the Bill of Rights. I would love to see a modern gold coin series that represents more concrete ideas associated with freedom, such as freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom to bear arms, freedom from government spying (4th amendment) etc.

  43. says

    A truly poetic description Diana; it is a most compelling design indeed! Do you know if the 2016 silver medal version was minted in “high relief”?

    The 2015 Liberty is strong and dignified, but she is very human. She lives in a world where people, including women-people, control their own destinies, to the degree that it’s possible within the bounds of nature. Her Greek-inspired gown hangs straight, obeying gravity rather than a divine wind. The breeze that ripples the flag catches her sleeve and gives it a flutter, but the effect is entirely realistic. Her arms are strong, with a hint of muscle. Rather than holding the torch of freedom above her head as if leading a vast army, she grips it at a practical height, as if she’s leading her neighbors on a long trek to safety. Her hair is not a flowing fire hazard. It’s either done up or worn short, with a few strands escaping to one side. She stands perfectly still, but the rippling flag, the dancing torch flames, and the flame-like shapes of the laurel wreath on her head suggest motion.

  44. joe#2 says

    FWIW…. I just wish the 2017 American gold liberty coin looked a little bit like Kerry Washington or Halle Berry.. Regardless knowing the mintage of 100,000 is quite high , And the piece being the first in a series, The piece as well usually looks better in person. The pics from the Mint looked awesome. I guess true coin collectors who are interested will pick one of these up.I like it because it’s something different instead of the same old same old. If i pick 1 up, I will leave it in the OGP..

  45. joe says

    When someone doesn’t have a good argument these days, they tend to play the racism card whether it’s valid or not. These days, crying “Racist!” is another means of trying to bully people into silence. Pathetic really…

    I liked and purchased the 2015 coin, which was obviously a black woman. But the 2017 coin is just downright ugly and embarrassing…stars and all. And calling people who hate the 2017 coin “racist” isn’t going to change the fact that it’s still an ugly coin. It’ll never sell out unless someone swoops in and snaps them all up just to make it look like a winner (kind of like Hillary Clinton’s books).

  46. Mint News Blog says

    one fine dime, the 2016 medal was not struck in the high relief of the gold coin, but I don’t know whether it was struck at a normal coin relief. I’ve asked someone on the CCAC for clarification and will let you know when he replies. (And thank you for your kind words about the blog post — I’m glad you enjoyed it!)

  47. cagcrisp says

    From Louis Golino, Author “And I am certain the coin will be released as planned on 4/6. It has given the Mint huge positive publicity and more mainstream media coverage than any other coin in years, if not decades.”

    IF you want publicity, I can give you 10x the Current publicity AND make the coin Sell out on Launch Day.

    How?

    Publicly Pull the coin on April 3rd.

    The coin would then be The Headline on News Cast and not a back page article. The Fire Storm would be Immediate…And…

    Then… On April 5th Publicly Announce on Second Thought that the coin will be Sold on a First Come First Serve basis on April 6th…

    …And Voila the Coin Sells Out 100,000 in hours…

  48. joe#2 says

    Bottom line…. If you’re a collector… You’ll love/like or hate it.
    If you’re out to make a fortune when you receive it (flipper) or whatever:::
    It ain’t gonna happen>>>>>>>

  49. Louis Golino, Author says

    The CCAC wanted the medal to be struck in HR but also wanted it on an ASE planchet, and the Mint said it could not do both, so they went with the large planchet. However, in hand the medals seem to have a slightly higher than normal relief than most coins.

  50. Dustyroads says

    cagcrisp, Not sure what to complaining is all about, I find it all completely relevant and helpful. Thanks

    joe#2, I tend not to think that the complaints are rooted in racism as well. The Mint chose a design which was available, I’m not sure if they had the luxury of waiting for another. But the fact of the matter is that they chose a plain design. I’m sure they could have come up with a Liberty which was knock down, drag out beautiful if they wanted, but they didn’t. The design we have seems to be created as an outreach to a specific portion of our society, and that’s fine by me, but that just leaves the door open for a plethora or comments, some being made by people who are better off not leaving comments at all. I think we all know families who can’t get along, this is how a nation acts when people get mouthy.

  51. Scott says

    To me the woman on the 2015 coin looked like an alien from another planet, at least we know the woman on the 2017 coin is a human.

  52. Ernesto says

    Very interesting blog post. I can’t wait to read Part 2. As for the design itself it’s not the best out there but I’ve seen worse. Also who is to say what the “classical” version of Liberty should be. Different cultures have different representations of Liberty. Why not try something new that could possibly appeal to more than the collector community? Depending on the price I hope to be able to buy one. I also hope that the coin is successful enough that the “series” continues with different designs.

  53. Dustyroads says

    Hot dog! NPS gold Unc. down 4 more to 5160

    2015 Silver Proof Set up 1 to 387,322. 8,121 lower than the 2012 set.

    Nice to see 2 all time low selling issues in 2016.

  54. cagcrisp says

    16CA 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE GOLD PROOF 4,916 (1)
    16CB 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE GOLD UNC 5,160 (4)
    16CC 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE SILVER PROOF 62,723 (3)
    16CD 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE SILVER UNC 20,996 (1)
    16CE 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CLAD PROOF 40,256 –
    16CF 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CLAD UNC 21,028 12
    16CG 2016 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 3-COIN SET 14,588 (1)

    16CH 2016 MARK TWAIN GOLD PROOF 13,266 –
    16CJ 2016 MARK TWAIN GOLD UNC 5,693 –
    16CK 2016 MARK TWAIN SILVER PROOF 78,536 –
    16CL 2016 MARK TWAIN SILVER UNC 26,284 –

  55. Sith says

    @Old Big Bird – Its too my understanding that the Annual Uncirculated Dollar Coin Set has gone the way of the Dodo. As far as a replacement program, I imagine they would have to introduce a new dollar program to do that.

  56. cagcrisp says

    16EA 2016 AM EAGLE SILVER PROOF 1 OZ 532,862 + 1,975

    16EB 2016 AM EAGLE GOLD PROOF 1 OZ 22,984 + 82
    16EC 2016 AM EAGLE GOLD PROOF 1/2 OZ 5,496 +33
    16ED 2016 AM EAGLE GOLD PROOF 1/4 OZ 7,135 –
    16EF 2016 AM EAGLE GOLD PROOF 4-COIN SET 16,832 + 601

    16EG 2016 AM EAGLE SILVER UNC 1 OZ 167,807 +54

  57. cagcrisp says

    16AL 2016 ATB SILVER UNC 5 OZ – HARP FRY 18,896 (2)
    16AN 2016 ATB SILVER UNC 5 OZ – FT MLTR 15,635 +141

  58. cagcrisp says

    16RA 2016 AMERICAN $1 COIN & CURRENCY SET 46,659 + 122
    16RB 2016 ANNUAL $1 UNC SET 15,325 + 210
    16RC 2016 LIMITED EDITION SILVER PROOF SET 36,543 + 360

  59. cagcrisp says

    16XA 2016 WALKING LIBERTY 24K GOLD .5OZ 60,331 (479)
    16XB 2016 MERCURY DIME 24K GOLD .1OZ 124,883 (1)
    16XC 2016 STANDING LIBERTY 24K GOLD .25OZ 87,554 111

  60. cagcrisp says

    17CH 2017 LIONS CLUBS SILVER PROOF 29,817 + 6,468
    17CJ 2017 LIONS CLUBS SILVER UNC 8,962 + 1,855

  61. cagcrisp says

    These are all New items:

    17NA 2017 NA $1 25-COIN ROLL (P) 8,959
    17NB 2017 NA $1 25-COIN ROLL (D) 8,928
    17NC 2017 NA $1 250-COIN BOX (P) 807
    17ND 2017 NA $1 250-COIN BOX (D) 1,011
    17NE 2017 NA $1 100-COIN BAG (P) 476
    17NF 2017 NA $1 100-COIN BAG (D) 507

  62. cagcrisp says

    16SA 2016 FS GOLD PROOF 1/2 OZ – NIXON 2,469 + 4
    16SB 2016 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – NIXON 1,547 (3)
    16SC 2016 FS GOLD PROOF 1/2 OZ – FORD 2,274 +31
    16SD 2016 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – FORD 1,533 +26
    16SE 2016 FS GOLD PROOF 1/2 OZ – REAGAN 3,337 +10
    16SF 2016 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – REAGAN 1,789 +5

    JQ1 2015 FS GOLD PROOF 1/2 OZ – TRUMAN 2,605 + 6
    JQ2 2015 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – TRUMAN 1,828 +3
    JQ4 2015 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – EISENHWR 1,933 +10
    JQ6 2015 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – KENNEDY 6,512 + 9
    JQ7 2015 FS GOLD PROOF 1/2 OZ – JOHNSON 2,623 + 2
    JQ8 2015 FS GOLD UNC 1/2 OZ – JOHNSON 1,740 + 1

  63. Sith says

    @Old Big Bird – Out of curiosity how did you get the 2010, and 2011 Annual Uncirculated Dollar Coin Sets. They are worth a ton of money 🙂

  64. cagcrisp says

    That Walking Liberty number is Surprising…

    16XA 2016 WALKING LIBERTY 24K GOLD .5OZ 60,331 (479)

  65. cagcrisp says

    For the “P” puck collectors…

    That Fort Moultrie number is a very Disturbing number. That is a Low number this far into sales and with Effigy right around the corner you could have a Weak Fort Moultrie feeding into a Weak Effigy.

    For me sales of the “P” puck are on a Downward spiral . IF you want Lower and Lower Sales numbers, I think that’s what you are going to get.

    Sales for the first 4 offerings in 2016 were satisfactory. Not Fort Moultrie…

  66. cagcrisp says

    For those looking for an Extremely Bright Spot in Mint sales, look no further than:

    16EF 2016 AM EAGLE GOLD PROOF 4-COIN SET 16,832 +601

    That is truly a Remarkable Number. To Sell $1,736,890 in a week for an item that has been on sale for 43 weeks is quite the feat.

    Total 4 coin sales for 2013 were 7,877
    Total 4 coin sales for 2014 were 8,861
    Total 4 coin sales for 2015 were 9,918
    Total 4 coin sales for 2016 (still going) are 16,832

    …SO…This week 2016 Sales for the 4 coin set EXCEEDED the Combined sales of 2013 and 2014.

    That’s Demand and that’s what I like to see…Demand…

  67. Scott says

    Uninspiring art on the FT. Moultrie has to be a factor, so I don’t expect Effigy sales to be any better.

  68. Throckmorton says

    Ft Sumter would have been the more relevant site by far for the S.C. quarter and most likely would have enhanced sales. I suppose they wanted to avoid a controversy.

    CAGCrisp, my apologies if I missed it but the 2016 Burnished AGE…..how does the mintage look for that one?

  69. VA Bob says

    For the PC police. A burka has nothing to do with race. Buy yourself a sense of humor snowflake, and quit your part time job analyzing comments from people you know ABSOLUTELY nothing about. Not a damn thing did I say about the design of any coin in the article.

  70. cagcrisp says

    @Throckmorton, “CAGCrisp, my apologies if I missed it but the 2016 Burnished AGE…..how does the mintage look for that one?”

    The uncirculated AGE hasn’t been listed on sales since 01/01/17. At that time sales were listed at 6,887 which was 105.4% higher than the 2015 mintage of 6,533…

  71. Buzz Killington says

    @MNB/Diana —

    I would never dare to speak for @So Krates, but I imagine the point he was trying to make is not that the comments aren’t important, but since they are just comments, you are not endorsing those viewpoints just by allowing them to be expressed.

    I am neither insecure, nor overly sensitive, so it doesn’t bother me to read comments I don’t agree with, and it doesn’t bother me to skip over certain comments.

    I agree the comments are important with this blog, which is why I echo the sentiments of @So Krates that the editing be done with a very light touch, so as not to risk the vitality of the comment section.

    I also want to say that the articles have been excellent, which more than makes up for their relative infrequency. I am a reader from way back when there were almost no comments, and Michael Zielenski would tell us what Mint products looked promising, and gave VERY helpful tips (which I ignored, of course) and which brooked few comments.

    I hope this forum will remain a vibrant place with relatively respectful discussions and disagreements, and the sharing of information and opinions. That is the best way to make sure the readership stays engaged, and it seems to have worked, making this blog more and more popular over the years. (I have followed it for *almost* 10 years, and it is basically the only blog I have followed for any period of time.)

  72. DBR says

    @ one fine dime said:

    “Here’s a comment:
    “There is a way to present something which celebrates our nation’s diversity without one gender, race or ethnicity having to be triumphalistic or superior about it. To do otherwise is obnoxious and insulting to those who have come to terms with the richness of our nation’s complexity a long time ago. ”

    Does it mean that we should not create a coin with an obviously black woman depicted as Liberty? Who is being superior about it? I honestly cannot even determine what this comment means.”

    I post pretty late at night so I’m tired and try to be succinct. I’m verbose but that’s not good for comments sections.

    I say by all means design and create a Liberty who is depicted as obviously African or African-American. This one is good I just would have preferred her visage to evoke more joy keeping in line with the celebratory nature of an auspicious anniversary such as a 225th Year of the USM. So instead it evokes solemnity and seriousness to me….and that’s all good too.

    The film Hodden Figures is out now and it will help people see a good slice of life that explores African Americans’ struggle for equal opportunity and a full expression of those equal rights we say we offer. Very inspiring movie. Those ladies could have been on this coin. Having an African American Liberty on our coinage sends the message to me that Liberty is for all and that African Americans’ experienced too. Hard fought indeed.

    The other part and point of my comment had to do with the marketing and rolling out of our cultural products. I’d aim for universal appeal as much as possible and that’s going to be tough for designers and artists but not impossible. Now appeal resides in the eye of the beholder and everyone has an opinion about what appeals to them. I just like cultural offerings, whatever they may be, to be able to stand on their merits alone and not need so much public relations help to “sell” it to the public. It makes me feel manipulated at times.

    I think this 2017 UHR coin stands on its merits. It’s got some great features and highlights. I remarked on my reaction to the coin in another post. The article above was great and offers some very good analysis on the origins and influences of this coins’ themes.

    If I intuit or sense that the motivations of those responsible for delivering us cultural offerings aren’t motivated by the ideals depicted on the coinage, then it bothers me and makes me feel manipulated or condescended to in the promotional materials. Some coins need the extra Public Relations, push but I’d recommend letting the coin speak for itself and avoid allowing bias to become a noise factor that distracts from the coin and what the artists and designers want to evoke out of us the collector or consumer. I guess I like the message, the messaging and the messenger to be insynch.

    I hope that helps clarify my intent in writing that portion of my comment.

  73. Erik H says

    I just took another look at the obverse candidates for the 2017 HR gold again and the designs available were all pretty bad. Besides the one that is being used, the only other design I like was HR-O-12-M (and that one wasn’t great either).

  74. Joe M. says

    I love my little pot of 2015 silver proof sets.
    I wonder if they will get to the 2012 silver proof set price??
    🙂

  75. cagcrisp says

    joe#2 says
    JANUARY 31, 2017 AT 2:57 PM

    “Bottom line…. If you’re a collector… You’ll love/like or hate it.
    If you’re out to make a fortune when you receive it (flipper) or whatever:::
    It ain’t gonna happen>>>>>>>”

    That pretty much Sums it up for Me…

  76. Robert says

    Excellent article on what will prove to be a historic coin. The only reason the Liberty figure’s race is being debated is because racism (and racist attitudes) still prevail throughout America.

    The day the U.S. Mint can produce a coin featuring a black Liberty that barely gets noticed just may be the day America has moved past the issue of race and on to more important matters.

  77. says

    @DBR –
    Good follow up, a positive way to continue the discussion.
    Regarding this: “If I intuit or sense that the motivations of those responsible for delivering us cultural offerings aren’t motivated by the ideals depicted on the coinage, then it bothers me and makes me feel manipulated or condescended to in the promotional materials.

    ….do you feel that way about this coin? Do you feel the US Mint is condescending to its customers?

    @Scott –
    To me the woman on the 2015 coin looked like an alien from another planet

    Wow, that’s a different take on it. How about the woman on this coin, earthling or alien:
    http://www.usacoinbook.com/us-coins/turban-head-gold-half-eagle-small-eagle.jpg

  78. Jeff Wheat says

    Long time listener, first time caller… one aspect of this discussion that I haven’t seen mentioned elsewhere is the rise of the internet and the reporting on the design and decision-making aspects of coinage. Perhaps I’m not as connected as everyone else, but I don’t ever remember a time before the last five to eight years that concept art for coins was available for the general public to see. While it’s great to be in the know, the flip side of that is than anyone can see all twenty or so concept drawings for any coin and compare them to what was actually chosen. I believe that was especially true for this coin, since the plan from the outset was to be inventive and generate attention (and it has!). Personally, as someone who doesn’t like this coin, my opinion is undoubtedly influenced by picking my favorites from the submissions and the eventual disappointment that certain designs and features from the concepts didn’t make the final product. Had the process not been so open, I would still probably think the coin is ugly from a design standpoint, but I wouldn’t know or miss anything about the other non-selected designs and would have a more favorable opinion of it. (I also think this has been happening with the ATB Quarters also, some interesting and attractive designs have not been chosen, and this dampens the enthusiasm for the coins when they’re released). While I respect the work of the various commissions and people who select the designs, I think it’s time for a popular vote and feedback to have a direct influence in coin designs rather than relying on the CCAC to represent the entirety of public opinion.

  79. data dave says

    @Robert – “The only reason the Liberty figure’s race is being debated is because racism (and racist attitudes) still prevail throughout America.” That might be one reason, but if you follow this blog closely, everything is debated. If they replaced Roosevelt with Reagan on the dime it would be debated. If you feel that race shouldn’t be part of this debate or that anyone who discusses race is racist, then how do we move forward?

  80. Sith says

    @data dave – That maybe true, but those debates are political in nature. IE does Ronald Reagan deserve the honor. Moving into a debate that more resembles this coin, the BSA coin depicted a female Venture. Although BSA, and the few members that associated with the BSA (and posted here) thought that that the Venture program, and the inclusion of a female represented the BSA. The objections here seemed to be that a girl should not be on the coin, The fact was that people here simply rejected the coin because one of the saluting figures on the BSA coin had breasts …IMHO gender should have not been part of the equation to reject the coin, and reflects at the very least a nostalgic view of the BSA.

    Some of the objections here seem to be that an African American women should not be portrayed as Liberty…IMHO the race of Liberty also should not be part of the equation to reject the coin…

  81. Old Big Bird says

    @Sith – thanks for your response to my Annual dollar sets. I got those from the Mint way back when.
    The reason I had asked my question about 2017 was an article that was in 11/1/2016 in http://www.coinweek.com
    It at a printout from the US Mint showing “Fiscal Year 2017” possible schedule. In the first quarter it showed Annual Dollar Uncirculated Set. So that raised the question in my mind as to how can that be.

    http://www.coinweek.com/us-mint-news/whats-store-u-s-mint-2017-coinweek-answers/

    This should be the link

  82. data dave says

    @Sith – I see your point but anytime artists portray something “non traditional” there will be objections. If a man was portrayed on a GSA coin, some (most) people would think it not appropriate. When women actors portray male roles in Shakespeare, it can be disrupting. If I portrayed Jesus as a female, I imagine there would be objections from people that are not sexist.

    I suggest that people that do not like Liberty as an African women ask themselves why? Or if the rest of the design stayed the same and the face was replaced with Caucasian features would you change your mind? I don’t think it is easy to tell what is truly going on in someone’s mind, especially on the internet. But with all that being said, I believe that race is still an issue for many if not most people.

  83. Old Big Bird says

    @Sith – my error not 2010 or 2011 Annu8al Uncirculated Dollar set. But the reason I had asked my question about 2017 was I have a print out from 11/01/2016 that was from coinweek.com and it showed a United States Mint “Fiscal Year 2017”. That article showed Quarter 1 Annual Dollar Uncirculated Set. I to was puzzled how they would have one without any real dollar series?

  84. Old Big Bird says

    Diana I have now sent two responses to @Sith and neither have shown up. Is there a problem with them?

  85. Old Big Bird says

    @ Sith It was my error on the 2010 and 2011 Annual Dollar Uncirculated set. There was not a 2009 and I do not have 2010 0r 2011.

    My original question base on an article on 11/1/2016 that I have a print out of from Coin Week.
    It showed a release for the US Mint that showed it as coming out in the 1st quarter.

  86. John Q. Coinage says

    PS: Now that Nancy has passed and forbid the GOP from removing FDR that may be next….civility is gone as to even talking bout coin$

  87. Old Big Bird says

    I just went over the US Mint Sales numbers as of 01/29/17 and the ATB Roosevelt S quarters ar now at 992,140 and most likely go over 1 million with in the next week or two. So it is one on the most popular S quarter in the last year

  88. says

    @John Q. Coinage –
    (love the name by the way). I think trump is clearly picking his battles. So far, not one decision has brought the country together, they have all been divisive moves. I would imagine that any notion of wielding his powers to “kill this item” should (hopefully) be dead last on his list. It would serve no purpose, and would only divide the nation further (as it would clearly be picked up in the media). Can anyone think of a single “good” motive for trump to do such a thing?

  89. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    Were there boys on the Girl Scouts coin? I don’t think so. What do you think the reaction would’ve been had there been males on the GSA coin?

    I wouldn’t have bought the BSA coin anyway but their recent changes make them even more irrelevant. They should just rename them the lbgtqrs club… ya know, to be more inclusive.

    Race seems to be a key element of the new Liberty coin. It was likely the deciding factor in choosing a design. I’m not sure that race has ever been such a prominent design element on a coin. I just don’t think race was a determining factor in other designs. The Statue of Liberty was modeled after the artists’ mother (or brother). No one set out to make Liberty white. The race of Liberty was not even a consideration of the artists when they conceived their art. Racial motivations were not a concern.

    So yes, race is purposely the key element in this design. Is it simply filling a racial quota for coins? Is it racist to even consider the racial aspects of these new Liberty coins?

    It seems like a common, if cynical, marketing strategy today. Maybe the novelty aspect of it will attract some buyers but I don’t think there’s a very big market for this coin. The Asian and Latina versions might find a niche and the one with all the races united in one Liberty should do well.

    If it attracts new people to coin collecting then it will have been a success. Time will tell.

  90. Mint News Blog says

    @Old Big Bird, there shouldn’t be a problem — I don’t see any comments being held for moderation.

  91. Old Big Bird says

    @Mint News Blog just note I know for a fact that I wrote two and they never appeared just like the old TV program “”Lost in Space” but thanks for checking on it

  92. says

    For Just Another Dave In Pa and others that still have questions about “motivations” for this coin (e.g., “Is it simply filling a racial quota for coins? “), here is the entire content of the CCAC’s March 22, 2016 letter to the Treasury Secretary:

    A public meeting of the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee (CCAC) was held on Tuesday, March 15, 2016 to review proposed obverse and reverse designs for the 2017 American Liberty High Relief 24K Gold Coin and Silver Medal.

    Mindful of the multiculturalism of our nation, the Committee took the opportunity to make a difference in applying a new perspective to broaden the view of Lady Liberty which, up to this point, has been cast in a European classical mold.

    We felt we could be inclusive of the many races in our country, mindful that there are many ideals of a woman, and sensitive to these defining characteristics.

    After studying the wide variety of Liberty depictions offered to the Committee, our recommendation is a profile view of an African-American woman, crowned by stars (HR-0-08). This remarkable and ground-breaking obverse, which garnered 28 of 33 points through the Committee’s scoring process, is paired with an elegant eagle (HR-R-01), that received 29 of 33 possible points.

    This letter can be found on page 2 of this document: https://www.ccac.gov/media/calendar/lettersToSecretary/2016_0315.pdf

    Can we all agree that the sentiment expressed by the CCAC is clearly NOT the same thing as “filling a racial quota for coins“!?

    I’m going to also express my disagreement with your choice of words regarding the BSA’s “recent changes”. Clearly it makes them much MORE relevant, because although you clearly think having compassion (i.e., being inclusive of other human beings) is some big joke, the BSA has determined it is the right ethical choice to accept transgender boys that identify as male. It is easy to judge others without having to walk a mile in their shoes; whether they are a woman, gay, transgender, black, disabled, non-christian, etc.

  93. says

    I think the new Liberty coin is remarkable! I see it as more of a representation of the U.S. than some mythical goddesses from the past. One thing I would have suggested though, if Miss Liberty ever should be wearing the cap, it would have been this one…

  94. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    right. The official document contains all the right buzzwords. Although I take exception to the wording

    European classical mold.

    There was never a mold used for Liberty. I guess this pertains to the evil patriarchy that has oppressed everyone for so long.

    They chose to portray Liberty as a black woman.

    No one ever chose to portray Liberty as a white European woman. The fact that Liberty has traditionally had those features is an organic consequence of the artist’s vision. It wasn’t chosen by committee to reflect some politically expedient, test-marketed racial identity association to reflect the benevolent understanding of the US Treasury Dept.

    Of course the official statement will read like a corporate policy designed to promote unity while shielding the organization from lawsuits.

    In that respect, it is filling a racial quota. The fact that Liberty is portrayed as a black woman is not an organic consequence. It’s a deliberate attempt to, in their own words; “be inclusive of the many races in our country, mindful that there are many ideals of a woman, and sensitive to these defining characteristics.”

    That’s what’s different. If you cannot see this very important distinction then you haven’t paid attention to the culture wars in this country.

  95. Sith says

    @Old Big Bird – I was just messing with you. 🙂

    @data dave, Hear, hear!

    @Just Another Dave In Pa – I believe in the melting pot, not the modern mosaic view of America as such I do not view “a deliberate attempt to, in their own words; “be inclusive of the many races in our country,” to be part of a culture war. Our culture is in constant flux. In context this is nothing new, as for example the Peace Dollar was labeled “America’s ‘flapper’ dollar,” because it failed to meet that generations ideal of Liberty. The model was Italian.

    FYI The Boy Scouts accept females. I didn’t tell them to do that, but that is the reality. They choose to represent that reality on their coin. The BSA coin sold out. The Girl Scout coin was a miserable failure. Some might say the coin was successful in-spite of the “female, but to me it sounds like the BSA did something right.

  96. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    I don’t think that statement is part of the culture wars either. It does point to a racial quota, though.

  97. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    To be clear;

    the distinction is between an organic artistic vision and a calculated, agenda-driven portrayal.

    I’m not even really against having these new Liberty coins. I won’t buy them. It’s not an unattractive coin, though.
    The cornrows are ok. It’s ironic that when a white girl or woman wears cornrows they call it cultural appropriation and they get angry that a white girl would try to profit from their culture.

  98. VA Bob says

    If one wants to see divisiveness look no further than the Mint itself (might as well include all of government). When they can refer to a person depicted on a coin as just plain old “American” instead of perpetuating and engaging identity politics, things will improve. The 2015 HR could have been a woman of any race, her facial features just weren’t that well defined, people assumed, but the Mint didn’t market it as the European-American Liberty, or the Asian-American Liberty. Why now? Are they afraid we can’t tell she is black? I’ve no issue with anyone celebrating their heritage. I do have a problem with government entities (Mint included) defining us for their purpose.

  99. VA Bob says

    Sith – They should have done a coin this year on the Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey Circus. Last year was the last for having elephants, and this May the circus will cease to exist after 146 years. No matter how one feels about it, it’s a piece of Americana gone forever. For many children it was the closest thing to a zoo they might have got a chance to see in person.

  100. Robert says

    Just Another Dave In Pa says: “No one ever chose to portray Liberty as a white European woman. The fact that Liberty has traditionally had those features is an organic consequence of the artist’s vision.”

    Your first statement is simply incorrect. Every artist who has ever portrayed Liberty on an American coin was a white man with European ancestry. Like most artists, these artists CHOSE to portray Liberty with facial features resembling their own race, which was white. They also CHOSE to depict Liberty with features strongly resembling classical Greek or Roman figures because those artistic styles were extremely popular in late 19th c. and early 20th c. American art and architecture.

    Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with what these artists did because generally all artists do this. That’s why Jesus Christ is generally portrayed as a white man with fair skin and reddish-brown hair and blue eyes, even though it’s highly unlikely he had any of these features given his origin. He was portrayed this way because he was painted almost exclusively by white men.

    However, we’re now in the 21st century, more than 100 years since the Neo-Renaissance of American art and architecture. Isn’t it about time our coinage reflects contemporary interpretations of the allegorical figure of Liberty? Let’s think outside the box for a moment and begin ito imagine how many different ways Liberty might be depicted on our coins, race being but one factor.

  101. Dustyroads says

    We’ve been talking so much about race, why not get passed it for a while and ask the question of why Liberty is even envisioned as a woman. I think Liberty over the years has been best envisioned as a woman because the message is that everyone in America has a chance to pursue whatever they decide. For so long this has been an uphill battle for women in general. It’s appropriate for our time that the vision of Liberty be extended to include the segment of our population that has been largely disenfranchised. It’s deeply saddening that so many of us lack common respect. On the other hand, no one deserves special treatment in America if they don’t try to personally better themselves. But this is where a large group of people fall into generalizations. It will always be important to think before we judge someone else. A couple of scriptures from the bible come to mind, “treat others as you would have them treat you”, and “judge not, lest ye be also judged”.

  102. Barry says

    The message from the BSA and GSA coins is that males can’t exclude females from their groups but, females can exclude males from theirs. Thus PC is implied.

  103. Just Another Dave In Pa says

    Regarding the BSA, steadily declining membership has put this organization in the position of accepting anyone that will have them.

    I think the same will happen with the Catholic Church and women priests. The declining number of men who want to be priests (as well as the abuse scandals) will eventually force them to admit women as priests.

    Both these organizations are increasingly irrelevant but money has no ethical standards. They’ll do what they have to do to survive.

  104. VA Bob says

    Dusty – I believe when we started as a nation, dominated by men, envisioned women as being the best of us. A separation of the grimy, nastiness of nation building with something pure and decent in their lives. Same for many today, though that is fading fast. Many ruthless, cut-throat women in places of power today. Perhaps one day there will be a male liberty on a coin. I don’t personally care to see it.

  105. Sith says

    @VA Bob – Hear, hear! On both posts. FYI My children are devastated it will be the last time they see this circus.

    @Just Another Dave In Pa – I agree

    @Dustyroads
    From the Roman goddess Libertas. Art historians have traced images of America’s lady liberty back to the first years of European discovery and invasion, when America–the untamed New World–was symbolized as the Indian Queen, a voluptuous,but stern Native American woman dressed in little more than head feathers. She was soon replaced with a tamer, more anglicized American image: the Indian Princess, a tawny, barefoot beauty often guarded by a rattlesnake. skinned, more classical image. In the years surrounding the American revolution, the image of the Indian Princess began to compete with emblems of the Greek goddess emerging from the European schools of classical art and architecture. “By the late 1790s,” folk-art historian Nancy Jo Fox points out, “it was not clear whether a feathered Indian Princess had changed into a Greek goddess or whether a greek goddess had placed feathers or plumes in her hair”

  106. earthling says

    Hey Mint people , just give us a cheap affordable thrill this year, OK?

    Gold anything isn’t affordable. You gave us P’s already. Now give us a few P-less Pennies. Maybe not everyone is thrilled about P’ ed Pennies.

    Do the cheap thing. Give P haters something to smile about.

  107. Erik H says

    Jeff Wheat, I like your observation on the publics ability to view the design choices and then being disappointed if their ideal design wasn’t picked.

  108. So Krates says

    @ BK – Couldn’t have said it better myself. I think I also might need to work on one of them there light touches you speak of.

  109. Mint News Blog says

    Louis Golino, one fine dime, and Old Big Bird — I just found some of your comments in the spam folder, and I’ve returned them to their natural habitat. None of them contained anything that should have flagged them as spam, and I couldn’t detect any pattern with regard to length, number of hyperlinks, etc. I’m not sure what digital glitch caused them to get bounced, but I hope it’s temporary and will keep an eye on it. My apologies for the issue!

  110. earthling says

    This year I want a 2017 Lincoln Cent from the Philadelphia Mint with no ( P) Mintmark. I’m willing to pay for it but no crazy prices like some people pay for stuff of relatively no value.

    I like the Muhammad Ali Coins and the Moon Landing Coins. Maybe the Peace Dollar restrike.

    Other than that I’m done. It was fun , for a while, but lately……….?

    😴

    🙈🙉🙊

    👏

  111. TemplePriestess says

    Thanks DustyRoads I picked up the Secret Life of Lady Liberty book. Its a great read, between the book and this article I have a new appreciation for the 2015 high relief coin. Really looking forward to the 2017 liberty release as well, I think it looks awesome! Though I may have to settle for the silver non coin version.
    Some people’s gripe that liberty has stars around her head make it no worse than if she had feathers, a wreath, or enlightenment encircling her head. The fact the design makes her a woman of color just adds to the evolvement of the liberty goddess. America has always been a melting pot, so its cool that other nationalities will get to have a version of Miss liberty in the coming years.

  112. earthling says

    Could we please get Betty Boop as Lady Liberty? I’ll even take Olive Oyl dressed as Liberty. Wilma or Betty?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *