1839 sovereign

[refero]

Sharing today one of my most beloved sovs; everyone usually chases 1838 which is a lovely, and expensive sovereign, but not that rare even in high grade. Being the first year of Victoria, it has been kept and stored carefully since the beginning... but few did the same with the following year, which was looking like just one amongst the others (same happened for 1841); this coin is therefore very elusive in medium to high grade, and, quite surprisingly, pops more often in its proof version rather than the bullion one..

[LawrenceChard]

25 minutes ago, refero said:

Sharing today one of my most beloved sovs; everyone usually chases 1838 which is a lovely, and expensive sovereign, but not that rare even in high grade. Being the first year of Victoria, it has been kept and stored carefully since the beginning... but few did the same with the following year, which was looking like just one amongst the others (same happened for 1841); this coin is therefore very elusive in medium to high grade, and, quite surprisingly, pops more often in its proof version rather than the bullion one..

Actually, a lot, possibly most, 1838 sovereigns got melted down.

"The American diplomat Richard Rush was dispatched to England by President Andrew Jackson to collect the bequest. Rush returned in August 1838 with 105 sacks containing 104,960 gold sovereigns."

😎

 

[RDHC]

30 minutes ago, refero said:

Sharing today one of my most beloved sovs; everyone usually chases 1838 which is a lovely, and expensive sovereign, but not that rare even in high grade. Being the first year of Victoria, it has been kept and stored carefully since the beginning... but few did the same with the following year, which was looking like just one amongst the others (same happened for 1841); this coin is therefore very elusive in medium to high grade, and, quite surprisingly, pops more often in its proof version rather than the bullion one..

Now that really is something to admire, envy, and keep.

[refero]

1 hour ago, LawrenceChard said:

Actually, a lot, possibly most, 1838 sovereigns got melted down.

"The American diplomat Richard Rush was dispatched to England by President Andrew Jackson to collect the bequest. Rush returned in August 1838 with 105 sacks containing 104,960 gold sovereigns."

Thanks for this piece of history that i didnt personally know. Nonetheless, an original 1838 population of 2.718.694 was solid enough to sustain a significative melting or other loss during the decades where 1839 started with a poor 503.695 mintage, which of course explains why this year is that sought after nowadays.

In terms of grading there is no match; 

1838 (NGC and PCGS combined); 67 in MS (highest grading being a single MS66, with 17 in MS64, one to be auctioneed next 1 August at Heritage); and other 32 in Au58

1839; (NGC and PCGS combined); 13 in MS, (highest grading being a single MS65; and other 3 in AU58)

[LawrenceChard]

2 hours ago, refero said:

Thanks for this piece of history that i didnt personally know. Nonetheless, an original 1838 population of 2.718.694 was solid enough to sustain a significative melting or other loss during the decades where 1839 started with a poor 503.695 mintage, which of course explains why this year is that sought after nowadays.

In terms of grading there is no match; 

1838 (NGC and PCGS combined); 67 in MS (highest grading being a single MS66, with 17 in MS64, one to be auctioneed next 1 August at Heritage); and other 32 in Au58

1839; (NGC and PCGS combined); 13 in MS, (highest grading being a single MS65; and other 3 in AU58)

I would not argue with any of that.

Your 1839 looks a very nice coin, well worth a Chards photo, and yes I am aware that 1839 is a slight "sleeper" date. this often happens with the second or penultimate year of a design, people fixate on the first and last, whereas the cognosecenti keep an open mind.

BTW Whearabouts in Italy are you?

Dove sono lei, in Italia!

😎

[LawrenceChard]

I should probably have added the suggestion to read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithsonian_Institution#Founding

😎

[DaKine]

Don't forget James Smithson who donated 100,000 1838 sovereigns toward the founding of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. These were promptly melted & possibly restruck into US gold coins.

[dicker]

8 hours ago, DaKine said:

Don't forget James Smithson who donated 100,000 1838 sovereigns toward the founding of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. These were promptly melted & possibly restruck into US gold coins.

https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_1170352

[refero]

On 06/07/2022 at 13:12, LawrenceChard said:

Actually, a lot, possibly most, 1838 sovereigns got melted down.

do you have any hypotesis about the very low 1839 and 1841 full sovereign original mintage? i love when history and numismatic mix...

[SidS]

On 06/07/2022 at 12:12, LawrenceChard said:

Actually, a lot, possibly most, 1838 sovereigns got melted down.

"The American diplomat Richard Rush was dispatched to England by President Andrew Jackson to collect the bequest. Rush returned in August 1838 with 105 sacks containing 104,960 gold sovereigns."

😎

 

I wonder how many sacks @James32 ordered? 😁

Seriously nice 1839 sovereign by the way. The earliest of the shield dates are by far the most attractive.

[SidS]

30 minutes ago, refero said:

do you have any hypotesis about the very low 1839 and 1841 full sovereign original mintage? i love when history and numismatic mix...

I would surmise that like today they only ordered what was required. Some years nothing was ordered (see 1840 and 1867), other years perhaps smaller mintages to top up. Perhaps the 1839 and 1841 mintages were simply topping up for all the 1838 ones that were exported and melted, as well as some extra for natural wastage - obviously some older Georgian coins would have fallen below their legal tender weight and were being pruned on an as needed basis.

Mintages got a lot higher in later decades due to the expansion of the £sd system throughout the empire, the economy of the country was growing but also because there was a conscious effort to improve the circulating specie by replacing underweight coins.

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, refero said:

do you have any hypotesis about the very low 1839 and 1841 full sovereign original mintage? i love when history and numismatic mix...

No specific information, but I guess they had minted enough 1838s, so didn't need to make many more.

The usual supply and demand balancing.

😎

[LawrenceChard]

On 07/07/2022 at 13:00, DaKine said:

Don't forget James Smithson who donated 100,000 1838 sovereigns toward the founding of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. These were promptly melted & possibly restruck into US gold coins.

That's what this was about:

"The American diplomat Richard Rush was dispatched to England by President Andrew Jackson to collect the bequest. Rush returned in August 1838 with 105 sacks containing 104,960 gold sovereigns."

and 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithsonian_Institution#Founding

😎

[LawrenceChard]

1 hour ago, SidS said:

I wonder how many sacks @James32 ordered? 😁

 

He sent them back because some were scuffed. They didn't come in capsules or even tubes in those days.

Bloody sacks, I ask you, what sort of quality assurance does that provide?

The Americans were even worse stackers. The coins had bagmarks when they opened the sacks, so they melted them all down, and turned them into $10 gold eagles.

😎

Edited July 9, 2022 by LawrenceChard

[SidS]

Just now, LawrenceChard said:

...so they melted them all down, and turned them $10 into gold eagles.

😎

Which they then threw into their own mint bags, sewed up and sent them on a long bumpy carriage ride out to the west.

[Britannia47]

If 1838 sovereigns were melted down and turned into $10 Liberty Eagles, how would they have resolved the gold alloy issue from 22ct to 21.6ct (900) …….?👎 Or have I missed something!?

[Petra]

37 minutes ago, Britannia47 said:

If 1838 sovereigns were melted down and turned into $10 Liberty Eagles, how would they have resolved the gold alloy issue from 22ct to 21.6ct (900) …….?👎 Or have I missed something!?

If you melt something down that is made from more than one substance then they will separate, so whatever was in with the gold to make the original alloy will end up in reduced amounts?

[Foster88]

On 06/07/2022 at 12:12, LawrenceChard said:

Actually, a lot, possibly most, 1838 sovereigns got melted down.

"The American diplomat Richard Rush was dispatched to England by President Andrew Jackson to collect the bequest. Rush returned in August 1838 with 105 sacks containing 104,960 gold sovereigns."

😎

 

 

On 07/07/2022 at 13:00, DaKine said:

Don't forget James Smithson who donated 100,000 1838 sovereigns toward the founding of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC. These were promptly melted & possibly restruck into US gold coins.

Bloody Americans melting our history. 😆

[SidS]

9 hours ago, Petra said:

If you melt something down that is made from more than one substance then they will separate, so whatever was in with the gold to make the original alloy will end up in reduced amounts?

If it's 91.6% gold and you want to reduce it to 90% then surely you'd simply add in extra copper to the required amount to bring it down to the correct number.

[Petra]

30 minutes ago, SidS said:

If it's 91.6% gold and you want to reduce it to 90% then surely you'd simply add in extra copper to the required amount to bring it down to the correct number.

Yes, but they have to melt them first. Then find out what you have left in the pot and if wanted, add anything else you are using

[Britannia47]

26 minutes ago, SidS said:

If it's 91.6% gold and you want to reduce it to 90% then surely you'd simply add in extra copper to the required amount to bring it down to the correct number.

That’s exactly what I was thinking!  I didn’t understand Petra’s answer. Production of the $10 Liberty Eagle started in 1838. It weighs 16.72 g (about 2 x 1 Sovereign) so that consignment of 104,960 could convert to over 50,000, taking into account an adjustment for the 900 gold ie addition of copper - Simple!😺

[LawrenceChard]

11 hours ago, Foster88 said:

 

Bloody Americans melting our history. 😆

Nowadays, they usually rewrite it instead.

😎

[LawrenceChard]

On 11/07/2022 at 22:32, Petra said:

If you melt something down that is made from more than one substance then they will separate, so whatever was in with the gold to make the original alloy will end up in reduced amounts?

I don't know where you have got that from, but it is certainly incorrect as far a metals are concerned.

I am at a loss to think of anything which behaves as you describe, perhaps you could inform me, and the rest of TSF of course.

😎

[gazer]

On 06/07/2022 at 11:44, refero said:

Sharing today one of my most beloved sovs; everyone usually chases 1838 which is a lovely, and expensive sovereign, but not that rare even in high grade. Being the first year of Victoria, it has been kept and stored carefully since the beginning... but few did the same with the following year, which was looking like just one amongst the others (same happened for 1841); this coin is therefore very elusive in medium to high grade, and, quite surprisingly, pops more often in its proof version rather than the bullion one..

Wow great condition