US Coin design

[Figleaf]

I have questions. Statue of liberty, fine. Libertas is on lots of Roman coins BUT is this liberty? On Roman coins, liberty does not have a torch or a sun crown. The only personification with a torch I remember is the Colossus of Rhodes and the only deity with a sun crown I remember (not counting some of the later emperors) is Zeus. Yet, the NY liberty is definitely female. Is my memory deficient?

Very similar observation on the PA quarter. Virtue, liberty, independence - fine, the first two appear frequently on Roman coins and indepenedence overlaps liberty. However, the attribute the statuesque lady has looks like a legionnaire standard to me. That's another thing you can see on Roman coins, but it is usually in the hands of a soldier. Another instance of sex change?

Peter

[Prosit]

That liberty on the PA quarter is actually a depiction of the statue Commonwealth.

The statue Commonwealth was designed by New York sculptor Roland Hinton Perry. It is a bronze-gilded 14' 6" high female form that has topped Pennsylvania's state capitol dome in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania since May 25, 1905. Her right arm extends in kindness and her left arm grasps a ribbon mace to symbolize justice.

Dale

[Figleaf]

The statue Commonwealth was designed by New York sculptor Roland Hinton Perry.

That name brought clarity, thanks to Auntie Google. Perry and Bartholdi lived in about the same time span and the two statues are about 25 years apart. Perry studied in Paris when Bartholdi was a recognised artist and had a workshop there (I think it is still there and open to the public; I visited it a few decades ago). Perry must have known at least Bartholdi's work. Note that Bartholdi's mother modelled for Ms. Liberty, while Perry's daughter was the model for Ms. Commonwealth. It smells a bit like a (mutual?) admiration society.

Evidently, Bartholdi liked his classical heroes to be female and took liberties with liberty's attributes and Perry followed suit. Not surprising at all. I speculate that Bartholdi wanted to add the torch for its visual effect, recycled his earlier design of "Egypt Carrying the Light to Asia", in turn inspired by the Colossus and therefore named his statue "Liberty Enlightening the World", which explains the otherwise strange torch.

BTW, a Roman scepter is a staff most often without top or topped by a globe (ball), an attribute of Zeus. The WoC group saw a large collection of them in Rome. The eagle is typically a military sign. Note a study by Perry, that carries a staff with a historically correct globe-topped ribbon here. My speculation is that Perry rejected the globe because he felt it wouldn't stand out enough in a distance. The arm movement is also interpreted differently in different texts.

In conclusion, two neo-classical statues by like-minded sculptors who were not too perfectionist with attributes but cared about their visual effect. Now, I am off to read about St Gaudens...

Peter

[Prosit]

To the left of the statue commonwealth is a building rock...a Keystone. Pennsylvania is nicknamed the keystone state.
Why? Well I guess because everyone likes to feel important

The US Constitution, Declaration of Independence and Gettysburg Address were written in Pennsylvania.
I guess that is fairly key in U.S. history.

Dale

[Figleaf]

As you know, a keystone is a neat invention that keeps other stones in an arch in their place. It symbolises something indispensable. A constitution looks pretty indispensable (the British might disagree )

On architecture, one intriguing fact I dug up is that Bartholdi was at one time a student of French architect Viollet-le-Duc. Viollet-le-Duc was in favour of "style over accuracy", restoring e.g. Notre Dame de Paris in the style of what he thought a gothic cathedral ought to look like, rather than as much as possible what it actually looked like at any time. That attitude towards historical accuracy fits in well with that of Bartholdi and Perry.

Peter

[Prosit]

I have always been a believer in Form follows Function although there have been many notable architects that reversed that.
Frank Lloyd Wright in the US did some beautiful structures that had leaky roofs and furniture that looked great but was uncomfortable.

In spite of believing in Form following Function, I never much cared for industrial style.

Dale

As you know, a keystone is a neat invention that keeps other stones in an arch in their place. It symbolises something indispensable. A constitution looks pretty indispensable (the British might disagree )

On architecture, one intriguing fact I dug up is that Bartholdi was at one time a student of French architect Viollet-le-Duc. Viollet-le-Duc was in favour of "style over accuracy", restoring e.g. Notre Dame de Paris in the style of what he thought a gothic cathedral ought to look like, rather than as much as possible what it actually looked like at any time. That attitude towards historical accuracy fits in well with that of Bartholdi and Perry.

Peter

[Figleaf]

On to Saint Gaudens. He was older than Bartholdi and Perry, but his $20 piece was designed 1905-1907, which is after the statue of liberty was unveiled. He also studied in Paris. Bartholdi was not yet well known and an army officer serving away from Paris towards the end of the period Saint Gaudens was in Paris. They may or may not have met. Perry came to Paris years after Saint Gaudens had left.



The liberty figure on his $20 piece (Libby S) looks quite different from Bartholdi's liberty (Libby B) and it is, but they are more alike than you'd think at first sight. Libby S takes energetic strides, but if Libby B would have done that she'd have toppled over long ago. Then, there is that torch. Where did Libby S get that torch? Why, from Libby B, of course. Saint Gaudens got rid of the sun crown, but what's that behind Libby S? Yup. The sun. What's really new is the branch she is holding. I can't make out the fruits, if any so I m not sure if it is laurel (victory) or olive (peace). Neither is a natural for Libertas.

It looks like Saint Gaudens was influenced by the statue of liberty, rather than by Bartholdi, but still, Saint Gaudens, Bartholdi and Perry are a remarkable trio.

See this thread for even more French and US Liberties.

Peter

[gpimper]

Peter, I will say, that is a beautiful coin.  Very interesting subject.  I do appreciate history.

[Figleaf]

Thank you Greg. I was making a convoluted and probably too intransparant argument to look at coins differently.

Take this example. The Texas and the Missouri are two battleships that are still around. I have been on both. The Missouri is a really elegant design. The Texas is a clunker in comparison. Correct? Well, you are looking at different technologies and different insights. Texas was built to sail in a fleet in the first world war. It would have been a star, had it been able to participate in the battle of Jutland. Missouri was built to operate in a small, very fast task group, give cover against air attacks on a carrier with its around 100 AA guns and do shore bombardments with its giant guns. All very useful in the second world war, but with those guns, and no guided weapons, she would have been virtually useless in any recent conflict.

It's like that with coins. They are designed by artists, who are children of their time. Therefore the coins are children of their time. The women on the coins above wear a long dress. That is not a coincidence, but a direct consequence of Napoleon trying to occupy Egypt and that is not a joke. France was a leading power when it came to design at this time. When Napoleon went touristy in Egypt, he unchained an art fashion, classicism, that conquered the world. This fashion explains everything from the symbol of a bank being a Greek temple, to churches (the Madeleine in Paris) and other buildings meant to impress with broad stairs, huge doors and lots of pillars to statues and coin design with ladies in long dresses.

While in Western Europe, classicism was succeeded by imitation medieval style as fashion (e.g. Notre Dame de Paris and Hohkönigsburg, but also Walter Scott and Bram Stoker), it remained fashionable in the US. Compare UK coins, always heavy on regalia, shields and heraldry. The coins discussed are quintessentially American, even though produced decades apart. This is part of why you, as an American, even a travelled American, like coins with a classicist theme. A Western European does not necessarily see the same coins the same way. The theme may be without significance at best, colonialist at worst to your average Asian.

So much about form. I haven't even started on function yet.

Peter

[brandm24]

I like this conversation very much. Tying coin designs to history and specific people are things I've thought about very little. I'm getting an education here, so please continue.

Bruce

[gpimper]

I do see the analogy with the Texas and Missouri (beautiful ship, by the way) and can see how Europeians may view some simbles differently.  Good insight.  In my experience there is a very different out look between eastern and western Europe...just an observation.  For instance, while in Romania I noticed monuments that were much more modern but while in Marseilles  they were old world.  Interesting subject.

[Figleaf]

Good observation, Greg and I can use it for discussing the different functions of the two coins. As for Bruce, I am a sucker for encouragements, but hard to shut up, so watch out.

Marseille was until quite recently a sleazy second rate port playing second fiddle to Monaco. Monaco would thrive on playing unfair. It received ships from the Southern Mediterranean, not just for repairs, but also for slave trading. It had no problems with pirates from both sides, liked gambling, alcohol and not paying taxes. Napoleon (him again) occupied the site and stamped out the abuses. When he was gone again, only gambling and not paying taxes remained and Monaco was a French vassal. That left Marseille free to develop. In the second world war, Marseille remained in the free French zone. It was not a naval base, it did not offer resistance to anyone. It was spared destruction. Its monuments are decorations that survived the development of the city.

Bucharest was completely different, living through a number of periods of turmoil and upheaval. As the capital, it was the centre of the rebellion against the royal house. Ceaucescu, once a liberator, ended like a mad dog in Timisoara, but not without first tyrannising the country with the Securitate, razing the city centre for a megalomaniacal palace and running the economy in the ground. When he started, royal monuments fell like autumn leaves. When he departed, communist monuments were removed. Many buildings were so neglected they could only be demolished. The monuments of Bucharest are the newfangled decorations put in place by the latest rulers. And yet ... look at the old Bucharest stock exchange. It was opened in 1882 and closed in the Ceaucescu years. That building could fit in seamlessly in Marseille.

So how does that apply to coins? Well, look at the two coins above again. The first objective of the quarters was to educate. Therefore they needed a picture that was emblematic and easy to recognise, even on a small coin. The two statues fit the bill. Note that both are pictures of statues that already existed. The second objective, overlapping with the first, was that the quarters should circulate, Therefore they had to have the same specifications as the Washington quarter, That is the reason they coins were small.

The $20 piece is quite another story. Its objective was not to circulate, but to be hoarded. And yet, the designer was a sculptor of the same school as the sculptors who made the statues on the quarters. The lady on the $20 coin is not a statue. She is what the old Bursa in Bucharest is to the monuments in Marseille you remember: similar, but from and in a different background. More significant, Saint Gaudens the sculptor had not grasped the hoarding function of the coin. His first attempt had way too much relief, making it difficult to pile the coins and necessitating a dozen strikes or so before the fine detail was transferred to the coin. A coin meant to be hoarded must inspire confidence. If you have held one of them, you must have noticed how thin it is for its size. This is how it impresses. By size. That may have been what gave Saint Gaudens the impression he could treat it as a medal.

Peter

[gpimper]

I had a chance to see the stock exchange in Bucharest and I would agree.  I could see that in any number of southern France or northern Italian cities.  I do find it fascinating how different forms of governance effects how currency was designed.  You can see it over thousands of years.  Fun (and very deep) topic!

[brandm24]

Well, I'm a good listener, Peter, especially to those who are knowledgeable in many areas. Unfortunately, I've never traveled overseas, so my perspective is limited to what I've read or been told. Not only am I  a good listener, but I have at least some interest in nearly everything. I just like to know things. I've learned a lot on this forum already, so please don't stop talking now.

Bruce

[Prosit]

In 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt sought to beautify American coinage. This was in reaction to a long period of Barber coins ( Charles E. Barber, Chief Engraver) whose coins most agreed were functional but lacked artistic merit. Roosevelt proposed Gaudens to do new coins although he the artist had no experience with coins. I am sure Barber was indignant and outraged at the insult.

Therefore Gaudens considered it a mandate to make the coins artistic. Gaudens's artistic coins would be function follows form just the opposite of Barber coins. No wonder the first coins were of too high a relief.

Dale