A 1928E $2 Legal Tender Star Note graded PMG Choice Uncirculated 64 EPQ will appear at auction when Stack’s Bowers Galleries presents its U.S. Currency Rarities Night sale on March 12.

At first glance, it may resemble a typical small-size $2 bill. Yet the note tells a far deeper story. Its rarity stems from a perfect storm of factors: a short-lived signature combination, replacement-note status, and exceptional preservation.

For advanced collectors, this piece represents far more than a denomination novelty. It stands among the most elusive survivors of its kind.

The Enduring Appeal of the $2 Note

The $2 note has always occupied a special place in American currency collecting.

Although millions entered circulation over the decades, the denomination never achieved the everyday familiarity of the $1 or $5 bill. As a result, collectors developed a lasting fascination with the note.

However, the importance of this example begins with its series.

The Series of 1928 introduced the first reduced-size U.S. paper money. The government adopted the smaller format to reduce printing costs and simplify handling. Consequently, the issue marked the beginning of the modern era of American currency.

Collectors today often seek high-grade examples from these early small-size issues.

A Signature Pairing That Barely Lasted a Year

The historical story behind this note centers on its signatures.

The note carries the engraved signature of Treasurer of the United States W.A. Julian, who served from 1933 to 1949. Julian’s tenure set a record for length of service. During those years, he worked with multiple Treasury Secretaries under two presidential administrations.

One of those officials was Fred M. Vinson of Kentucky.

President Harry S. Truman appointed Vinson as Secretary of the Treasury in 1945. Yet his time in the position proved brief. In 1946, Truman nominated Vinson to become Chief Justice of the United States.

The Senate confirmed the appointment. Vinson therefore joined a small group of Americans who served in all three branches of the federal government.

Because of this transition, the Julian–Vinson signature combination appeared on currency for less than a year, between 1945 and 1946.

Naturally, that short window limited the number of notes produced.

Replacement Star Notes Are Always Scarcer

This particular note becomes even more desirable because it is a replacement star note.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing issued star notes only when it needed to replace defective sheets during production. These substitutes carried a star symbol in the serial number instead of a letter suffix.

Because of this process, replacement notes always exist in smaller quantities than regular issues.

The Series 1928E $2 Legal Tender Notes themselves are scarce. In fact, the entire printing represents only about 4.4% of the total number produced for the preceding Series 1928D.

Precise replacement totals remain unknown. Still, collectors understand that very few star notes emerged from such a limited production.

An Elite Survivor in Remarkable Condition

The rarity of this note becomes even clearer when examining population data.

According to Track & Price, only 32 examples appear in their database. Meanwhile, the PMG Population Report lists just 30 graded examples across all grades.

This particular note carries the grade PMG Choice Uncirculated 64 EPQ.

Even more remarkable, PMG reports only three notes at this level with none graded higher.

Auction records also tell a striking story. Only two examples at this grade have appeared publicly in the past twenty years.

In other words, collectors seldom receive an opportunity like this.

A Building Block for an Elite Collection

Serious currency collectors often search for notes that combine multiple layers of rarity.

This example delivers exactly that combination.

It features:

• The widely collected $2 denomination
• A first-generation small-size issue from 1928
• The short-lived Julian–Vinson signature pairing
• Replacement star note status
• Exceptional preservation

Taken together, these attributes create a note that few collectors will ever encounter in person.

When the hammer falls on March 12 at Stack’s Bowers Galleries, bidders will compete not simply for a $2 bill, but for one of the finest known survivors of a remarkable chapter in U.S. paper money history.

The post An Excessively Rare 1928E $2 Star Note Comes to Auction appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

In the mid-1970s, the United States celebrated 200 years of independence from Great Britain. As a result, the nation released a wide range of patriotic and numismatic items. Among them, one issue stands out: the Series 1976 $2 Federal Reserve Note.

Collectors recognize this note as the first $2 Federal Reserve Note (FRN). Moreover, it introduced the reverse design that remains in use today. Best of all, most examples remain accessible and affordable.

The Bicentennial and U.S. Currency Redesign

The Bicentennial inspired numerous numismatic releases.

First, the United States Mint began striking Bicentennial medals in 1972. Then, in 1973, President Richard M. Nixon signed legislation authorizing commemorative reverse designs for the quarter, half dollar, and dollar coin. The law also mandated the dual date “1776–1976” for coins struck in 1975 and 1976.

Today, collectors can still find Bicentennial coinage in circulation, although locating high-grade examples has become more difficult.

At the same time, officials approved a redesign of the $2 note. In late 1975, the Treasury authorized production of a new $2 Federal Reserve Note to coincide with the Bicentennial celebration.

Treasury Approval and Official Announcement

On November 3, 1975, Treasury Secretary William E. Simon announced that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) would produce $2 Federal Reserve Notes for the first time.

Although the Bicentennial inspired the new design, the government did not classify the Series 1976 $2 note as a commemorative issue. The New York Times clarified this point on November 9, 1975:

“[T]he bill is not a ‘special’ Bicentennial‐year issue; it will continue on as a permanent part of the nation’s circulating paper currency.”

Therefore, the note entered circulation as a regular-issue Federal Reserve Note.

How the Series 1976 $2 Bill Differs from Earlier Issues

The Series 1976 note marked an important transition.

Previously, the government issued $2 notes in the 1960s as Legal Tender Notes. Those notes carried red Treasury seals and red serial numbers. Since the 1860s, the denomination had also appeared as National Bank Notes, Silver Certificates, Treasury Notes, and Federal Reserve Bank Notes.

However, the Series 1976 issue became the first $2 Federal Reserve Note. As expected, it featured a green Treasury seal and green serial numbers.

The obverse retained the familiar portrait of President Thomas Jefferson. In contrast, the reverse underwent a complete redesign.

The Declaration of Independence Reverse

The BEP replaced Jefferson’s Monticello with a vignette based on John Trumbull’s 1817 painting, Declaration of Independence. BEP engraver Peter Cocci adapted the artwork for the note.

Importantly, this marked the first appearance of the Trumbull design on the $2 denomination. However, it did not represent the painting’s debut on U.S. paper money. The image had previously appeared on the back of $100 National Bank Notes in 1863.

The reverse displays the denomination as numerals in each corner. Scrollwork frames the written denomination at the bottom. Additionally, the words “TWO DOLLARS” appear vertically on both sides of the central vignette.

Trumbull’s painting also appeared on Bicentennial commemorative postage stamps, issued in four sections.

Production Figures and Signatures

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing produced 590,720,000 Series 1976 $2 bills between 1976 and 1978.

Each note bears the signatures of:

• Treasury Secretary William E. Simon
• Treasurer of the United States Francine Irving Neff

Officials released the notes on April 13, 1976, Thomas Jefferson’s birthday.

Star Notes – Scarcity – Error Notes

Most Series 1976 $2 notes remain common. Nevertheless, certain varieties command attention.

The scarcest Star note in the series carries the Friedberg catalog number F-1935-J* (Fr. 1935-J*). Minneapolis Star notes also rank among the more elusive issues.

Collectors seek Star notes because the BEP used them as replacements for misprinted notes. Consequently, they appear in smaller quantities.

Public Reception and Circulation

Before release, some observers predicted strong commercial acceptance. An April 11, 1976, New York Times article projected that the $2 note could replace half of the $1 bills in circulation. Officials estimated annual printing savings between $4 million and $7 million.

However, widespread circulation never materialized. In fact, many Americans treated the denomination as unusual or even suspicious. Over the years, some retailers have questioned the legitimacy of $2 notes. In rare instances, authorities even arrested individuals attempting to spend them.

As a result, the denomination remains uncommon in daily commerce.

Stamped First-Day Issues: A Bicentennial Collectible

Release day created a unique collecting opportunity.

On April 13, 1976, many Americans brought newly issued $2 bills to local post offices. They affixed Bicentennial commemorative stamps directly to the notes. Then, postal clerks canceled the stamps with official postmarks.

This crossover collectible appeals to both notaphilists and philatelists. Although most stamped notes trade near face value, collectors sometimes pursue examples from specific hometowns or meaningful locations.

Art Friedberg, co-author of Paper Money of the United States (22nd edition, 2021), recalled strong demand at the time:

“It was different, it was collectible, people loved it. We made a lot of money.”

Robert Azpiazu, owner of First City Coins and Collectibles and author of Collector’s Guide to Modern Federal Reserve Notes: Series 1963–2009 (2011), noted:

“There are some cancellations that are very valuable but only to a small group of eclectic collectors.”

Appearances in U.S. Mint Products

The Series 1976 $2 note also appears in official U.S. Mint products. Notably, the 1994 Thomas Jefferson 250th Anniversary Coinage and Currency Set includes a Series 1976 $2 bill paired with a Satin Finish Jefferson Nickel.

Grading Population and Market Values

As of July 10, 2024, Paper Money Guaranty (PMG) reports 18,830 total grading events for Series 1976 $2 notes across all 12 Federal Reserve districts. Of those, 6,040 represent Star notes.

In today’s market:

• Circulated examples typically trade at or near face value.
• Uncirculated notes often sell for $3 to $4.
• Star notes command higher premiums.
• High-grade examples and collectible serial numbers bring stronger prices.

For example, Friedberg 1935-L with serial number 1 realized $21,150 at a Heritage auction on January 8, 2016. The note retained its original BEP brick label.

Why Collectors Still Pursue the Series 1976 $2 Bill

The Series 1976 $2 Federal Reserve Note holds lasting appeal.

• First, it represents the first $2 FRN in U.S. history.
• Second, it introduced the Declaration of Independence reverse that remains in use today.

Finally, collectors can acquire most examples for little more than face value.

Therefore, the Bicentennial $2 bill offers history, artistry, and affordability in one iconic American note.

The post The Bicentennial $2 Bill – First of a Kind appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

(Editor’s note: This article discusses and depicts historical language and imagery that some collectors may find offensive. We present it to preserve historical context and to document the scholarship that followed.)

On the eve of the 20th century, the United States placed a Native American portrait on the face of a $5 Silver Certificate. Collectors now call the note the “Chief” or “Indian Chief” note. Importantly, this issue marked the first time a Native American appeared as the central subject on American paper money.

Collectors have debated the identity of the man for more than a century. He appeared on the note as Ta-to’-ka-in’-yan-ka, commonly known as Running Antelope. That debate never faded. Auction prices and decades of commentary prove it.

In 1978, Coins magazine called the notes “the high point in US paper money design.”[1] Later, Coin World called the design “the most familiar image of a Native American on a piece of U.S. paper money.”[2] Heinz Tschachler, an Austrian professor of American Studies, described the portrait as “an icon of American nationalism.”[3]

Native Americans appeared on U.S. currency long before 1900. Still, the Series 1899 $5 Silver Certificate landed at the intersection of powerful forces in American history.

Early Collector Speculation and a Long-Running Misunderstanding

In 1967, the Society of Paper Money Collectors journal Paper Money published an article titled “A Tenderfoot Tracks Onepapa.” George Traylor wrote it. He speculated on “the perils of Indian hunting in 1967,” or “the ‘why’ of Running Antelope’s appearance on a Series 1899 $5 Silver Certificate.”[4]

Traylor suggested that a conscience-stricken senator might have wanted to atone for the 1890 massacre at Wounded Knee Creek. He imagined that placing a Sioux likeness on “regular currency” might ease national guilt. Then he leaned into stereotypes and joking violence:

Traylor wrote that Running Antelope might have been chosen for “convenience or accessibility,” and even floated the idea that officials could have found him in a federal prison. Then he  joked that a peace pipe and peace medal posed less danger to a photographer than “knife or tomahawk.”[4]

Traylor then lamented misunderstandings around Running Antelope. At the same time, he praised the chief’s “manly appearance and ethnic reputation for virility.”

He ended with questions that later scholarship would answer with more care:

• Why did officials select a Sioux?
• Why did they select Tatokainyanka (Running Antelope) in particular?
• What shaped his life?
• Why did his portrait stand alone on U.S. paper money?
• Did he lead as a chief, or not?[5]

Speculation and Acuracy

Traylor’s piece admitted speculation. It still got key points wrong. He correctly noted that “Onepapa” misnamed Running Antelope and that convenience shaped the choice. However, he omitted crucial context. He also repeated ethnic chauvinism and the “vanishing Indian” trope.

Notably, paper money collectors did not hold a monopoly on curiosity. In The Inconvenient Indian, Thomas King wondered why currency did not “immortalize” leaders such as Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, Geronimo, Chief Joseph, or Osceola. He concluded, “Perhaps one Indian was more than enough.”[6]

A Better Account Emerged in 1969

Two years after Traylor, Paper Money published a more detailed analysis in 1969.[7] That issue identified the portrait subject as Ta-to’-ka-in’-yan-ka (spellings vary). It also located him historically as a Hunkpapa Lakota chief. Furthermore, it framed his appearance on the $5 note as a symbolically powerful decision shaped by the political realities of the late 1890s.

Many stories converge in the Series 1899 $5 note. Two dominate:

• Running Antelope’s life
• The rise of Silver Certificates in U.S. monetary policy
• Told together, they clarify the subtext behind the portrait.

Running Antelope’s Early Life on the Northern Plains

Ta-to’-ka-in’-yan-ka entered the world in 1821 in South Dakota, near what people today call Grand Forks.[8] He belonged to the Hunkpapa Lakota. That tribal identity later fueled the long-running naming error. Many collectors called him “Onepapa,” which simply offered another spelling of “Hunkpapa.” The variant “Oncpapa” also appeared, including in Littleton Coin Co. advertisements.

The Hunkpapa Lakota ranged over the Northern Plains. In the 18th century, European fur traders introduced firearms and trade to many Plains groups.[9] Around the same time, many Northern Plains tribes developed deep horsemanship skills.

Large-scale Euro-American settlement did not surge until the mid-19th century. The California Gold Rush drove much of that movement.[10] By Running Antelope’s youth, outsiders still moved through a landscape anchored by trading posts. However, the mid-century brought rapid change.

The Gold Rush transformed U.S. coinage and Indian policy alike. Silver prices rose as western gold flooded markets. The Mint lowered silver coin weights, and the episode exposed a core weakness in bimetallism. Congress also outlawed circulation of world coinage in an effort to draw silver into domestic channels. Meanwhile, settlers kept pouring west.

As a result, violence and negotiation increased. The First Treaty of Fort Laramie (1851) affirmed Indian claims to an enormous territory and promised safer travel for westward migrants.[11] The Lakota joined roughly 30 tribes in signing the treaty. That same year, Running Antelope became one of four “shirtwearers” of the Hunkpapa, a major leadership role.[12]

Conflict, Diplomacy, and a Reputation as an Orator

Violence shook the Plains in the 1850s and 1860s. Some groups accepted reservation life and tolerated travel corridors. Others resisted.

A retrospective newspaper account published in The Bossier Banner in 1879 claimed that Running Antelope saved an Army scout’s life in 1857. The account described an Army unit stumbling into a large Hunkpapa camp. Running Antelope supposedly intervened during a confrontation and declared, “This is a fine day to die,” meaning he would die for his friends. He tried to escort the soldiers away as fighting broke out. The account also claimed that he returned emptyhanded so his people would not think he saved whites to rob them.[13]

In 1867, Running Antelope described his relationship to American colonizers in blunt terms:

“Since the days when we first allied ourselves with the whites I have been faithful to them at all times and all places. The skin of my body is red but my flesh is white, since for many years I have eaten the bread of the whites.”[14]

Running Antelope embraced reservation life in the way federal officials wanted. He farmed. But he also spoke with force and purpose. Government records and newspapers repeatedly mentioned his skill as an orator.

The 1868 Treaty and a Peace Medal That Echoed into Currency Design

After Red Cloud’s forces handed the U.S. Army a series of defeats, the government signed the Second Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868). The treaty established the Great Sioux Reservation. Hunkpapa Lakota warriors fought alongside Red Cloud. Running Antelope signed the treaty. His signature took the form of a running antelope. He received a peace medal bearing President Andrew Johnson’s likeness.

That detail mattered. Years later, his visit to a later president would help place his likeness on American paper money.

Still, not all Hunkpapa accepted the treaty. Sitting Bull refused to sign.[15] In 1869, he became the leader of all non-treaty Lakota.[16] He later fought alongside Crazy Horse.

1872: Washington, Alexander Gardner, and the Photograph Behind the Note

In 1872, officials invited Running Antelope to Washington to meet President Ulysses S. Grant. During that visit, photographer Alexander Gardner took two images: a profile and a frontal portrait.

Gardner’s career mattered here. He photographed Civil War battlefields and served as the official photographer for the Union-Pacific Railroad beginning in 1867. Interestingly, Gardner and Running Antelope both began life in 1821.

In the images, Running Antelope wore traditional Hunkpapa attire. He wore three long feathers and a peace medal that accounts link to the one he received in 1868. The Bureau of Ethnology archived the portrait as part of a larger effort to document Native Americans in what photographers and researchers considered traditional clothing.

Running Antelope did not stop in Washington. He also visited St. Louis, Cincinnati, and New York. A 1921 Saturday Evening Post article described a party on Coney Island hosted by an opera singer. A veteran reporter claimed the Native visitors traveled east “to bewail their wrongs.”[17]

The Black Hills, Custer, and the Last Push onto Reservations

Treaty violations continued. Tensions rose as gold seekers poured into the Black Hills after the 1874 discovery, despite the 1868 treaty’s promises.

A Bismarck Tribune article from 1874 claimed Running Antelope predicted the seizure of the Black Hills. It also claimed that he and other leaders tried to keep young men home while Custer’s expedition operated.[18]

Running Antelope met George Armstrong Custer in the summer of 1874.

After the U.S. Army lost Custer’s 7th Cavalry at the Little Bighorn in 1876, federal resolve hardened. In 1877, Sitting Bull and many non-treaty Hunkpapa fled into Canada.

The government forced the Hunkpapa onto reservations late in the process. After Sitting Bull moved his band into what people today call Saskatchewan, they eventually surrendered in 1881.

Running Antelope joined the party that met Sitting Bull and escorted him back to the reservation.[19]

Sitting Bull reportedly disliked Running Antelope. He “regard[ed] him as a fool” because of his cooperation with whites.[20]

Reservation Leadership, Conflict with Agents, and the Buffalo’s Collapse

Federal officials pushed reservation communities toward farming. By the 1880s, Running Antelope held the post of district farmer. The Standing Rock Reservation divided into 20 farming districts, each led by a district farmer who oversaw agricultural programs. Running Antelope’s name appeared often in newspapers from the 1870s through the 1920s. An 1889 federal register listed him as a district farmer earning $120.[21]

Yet conflict did not disappear.

In 1878, Running Antelope and other Native Americans abducted Indian agent William T. Hughes. They brought him to the Missouri River and planned to row him across.[22] Hughes claimed they meant to drown him. Running Antelope denied that claim.

In 1880, another agent, Joseph A. Stephans, tried to cancel Sioux religious ceremonies. A confrontation nearly sent Stephans into the river too. The territorial press praised Running Antelope and attacked Stephans with ethnic and religious slurs.[23]

In 1882, accounts say Running Antelope joined the last Great Buffalo Hunt. By then, systematic bison extermination had devastated the herds. That same year, Stephans testified to the Dawes Senate Committee Investigation and labeled Running Antelope a “politician Indian,” “all soft soap and smoothness.”[24]

In 1883, the Bismarck Tribune interviewed Running Antelope and called him “the silver-tongued orator of the Sioux nation.”[25] When asked about the buffalo slaughter, he predicted that if it continued, “buffalo will not last more than two years.”[26]

Then Congress passed the Dawes Act (1887). The act authorized surveyors to parcel reservation land into individual allotments. It also opened “surplus” lands to purchase by non-tribal members when officials deemed them “advantageous for agricultural or grazing purposes.”[27] Running Antelope later became involved in land purchases, or thefts, linked to that system.

1890: Sitting Bull’s Death and Wounded Knee’s Aftermath

Sitting Bull died during an altercation with Indian police at his home on the Grand River. He died on December 15, 1890. Running Antelope reportedly attended the funeral.

Sitting Bull’s death set the stage for Wounded Knee. After the shooting, some of his followers left Standing Rock to join Spotted Elk at Cheyenne River. Spotted Elk’s group, along with some Miniconjou and 38 Hunkpapa, traveled toward the Red Cloud Agency. The 7th Cavalry intercepted them on December 29, 1890. A scuffle followed. The cavalry opened fire and killed hundreds. Some historians point to Wounded Knee as the end of the “Indian Wars” and the closing of the frontier.

David Treuer, in The Heartbeat of Wounded Knee: Native America 1890 to the Present, described the policymakers behind the events culminating in Wounded Knee as “feckless, cruel, shortsighted, hypocritical, and shameful…,” and he argued that “the ways of life that had evolved over thousands of years were gone.”[28]

Running Antelope did not go to Wounded Knee. He lived out his final years at Standing Rock. By 1892, his health failed. He died near what people today call Little Eagle, South Dakota, sometime between June 1896 and June 1897.

In that 1883 interview, he spoke with frustration:

“The Indians to whom the buffalo belong are poor; if they were allowed to kill the buffalo they would save every bit of the meat for their families. I have done the best I can for the white man and I do not see why the Great Father cannot do me the favor of stopping the whites from killing our game.”[29]

Currency Policy and the Road to Silver Certificates

U.S. money policy shifted dramatically during Running Antelope’s lifetime. The Civil War consolidated federal control over paper money. Demand Notes and United States Notes reshaped American currency in the 1860s. Early federal issues did not feature Native Americans. Later designs did. Those later vignettes also carried an ideology that would later absorb Running Antelope’s portrait.

Then came the Coinage Act of 1873, often called the “Crime of ’73.” The law adjusted silver weights to align with the metric system, eliminated some denominations, and demonetized silver. Mining and banking interests in the West, plus farmers and others who favored free silver, rallied behind the Free Silver Movement.

In 1878, Congress passed the Bland-Allison Act. Silver dollars returned. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing then issued Silver Certificates, paper notes redeemable in silver.

In 1890, the Sherman Silver Purchase Act expanded federal silver purchases. It increased silver dollar and Silver Certificate production. It also introduced Coin Notes in 1890–1891. Those notes became the first to feature Philip Sheridan, one of Running Antelope’s predecessors on the $5 Silver Certificate.

Sheridan’s biography carried sharp edges. He served as a Civil War general and then went to the frontier in 1868 after the Johnson administration punished him for his aggressive Reconstruction enforcement as military governor of Texas and Louisiana.[30] He had fought Indian wars in the Pacific Northwest in the 1850s. Accounts describe him hanging Indian warriors and exporting that aggression west.[31] He led campaigns between 1868 and 1876 marked by brutality and atrocity.

The Educational Series and the Decision to Use Running Antelope

In 1896, the Treasury introduced the Educational Series of Silver Certificates. These notes preceded the Series 1899 designs. The Series 1896 $5 Silver Certificate placed two portraits on the back: Ulysses S. Grant at left and Philip Sheridan at right.

Grant’s presence followed a decade-long pattern of depicting former presidents on paper money. Sheridan’s presence matched his long military record and reputation as an “Indian fighter.” Roy Morris Jr. even reported that Sheridan advocated medals for buffalo hunters that depicted a dead bison and a “discouraged Indian.”[32]

The Educational notes proved short-lived. Designers sought a new look. They chose Running Antelope as the central design motif for the $5 denomination.

In November 1899, engraver George F. C. Smillie translated Gardner’s 1872 photos into engraving for the $5 Silver Certificate. During that process, Smillie altered the headwear dramatically.

The Warbonnet Problem and the “Pawnee” Headdress Debate

Running Antelope wore a three-feather headdress in Gardner’s photos. That headdress rose too high to fit the note’s portrait frame. Smillie faced a choice. He could select a different subject. He could let the feathers break the frame. Instead, he found an image of a large feathered warbonnet and superimposed it over the original headdress.

Many writers describe the substituted warbonnet as Pawnee in origin. However, scholars of Native American dress do not speak with certainty.

Therefore, the note immortalized Running Antelope in the regalia of a culture that likely did not belong to him.

A large Roman numeral V appeared at left in blue ink. That blue signaled Silver Certificate status. A large Treasury Seal appeared at right. On the back, ornate borders framed another V and text explaining the legal basis for the note. Smillie designed the back as well.

The Series 1899 $5 Silver Certificate outlasted its Educational predecessor. Running Antelope remained on the note until 1923. Collectors identify eleven signature combinations, produced between fiscal years 1900 and 1926, with no production in fiscal years 1919 or 1920.

In 1923, Abraham Lincoln replaced Running Antelope on the $5 Silver Certificate. Designers placed Lincoln’s portrait inside a thick black frame that resembled a ship’s window. Collectors later called those notes “Porthole Notes.”

Why Did the BEP Choose Running Antelope?

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing could have chosen countless other Native American subjects in the late 1890s. Chiefs such as Red Cloud and others visited Washington in May 1872, and many sat for Gardner’s camera. The Bureau of Ethnology held thousands of images.

So why did the BEP return to Running Antelope? Did officials choose the most photogenic portrait? Or did they choose a life story that aligned with federal priorities?

Philip Deloria’s Playing Indian describes American appropriation of Native imagery since the Revolution. Deloria explained how Americans used Indian garb to “negotiate” meanings and identities.[33]

“Playing Indian” on Money Began Long Before the United States

Americans “played Indian” in currency design even before the Union.

In 1690, Massachusetts Bay Colony issued bills of credit in 5, 10, and 20 shillings and in 5 pounds. Those notes displayed a Native American figure from the colonial seal, a seal dating to 1629.[34] Heinz Tschachler later noted the similarity between that early Native figure and the European “Wildman” motif found on early modern coinage.[35] Wildman imagery often showed long hair, muscular bodies, and an uprooted tree used as a club or staff.

Those similarities reveal a deeper pattern. Colonial designers forced unfamiliar peoples into a European cultural frame. They did not treat Native Americans as discrete peoples. Instead, they cast them as incarnations of a “savage” archetype.

Tschachler described how early modern Europeans racialized “savagery” and cast their mission as domesticating it.[36]

Two long-term tendencies emerged:

• Designers essentialized Native physical appearance.
• Designers fixated on “civilizing the savage.”

Over time, those tendencies produced stereotypes about strength and “virility.” They also encouraged misuse of Native cultural objects.

Tschachler also described an inverse relationship between Native presence and Native imagery on money. As Native peoples faced displacement, depictions of them increased on Obsolete Banknotes.[37] Many such notes show Native figures watching “progress” unfold through farms and railroads. Some depict “enlightenment.” Others show quiet disappearance through the “Vanishing Indian” trope.

Federal paper money continued those symbolic habits. Eventually, those habits culminated in Running Antelope’s appearance on the Series 1899 $5 Silver Certificate.

Coinage Joined the Pattern: The Indian Princess Motif

Coin designs followed a related path. In 1854, the U.S. Mint introduced Liberty wearing a Native American headdress on the $1 and $3 gold pieces. Collectors now call this design the Indian Princess motif. It depicts Liberty, often read as white, wearing an Indian headdress. The motif spread widely. Similar portraits appeared on the $1 and $3 gold pieces, the cent (1859–1909), and the gold eagle (1907–1933).

Deloria argued that American identity always used Native imagery as a mirror. Around the turn of the 20th century, he wrote, Americans faced upheaval from monopolies, strikes, competition, and reform movements. That upheaval fueled attempts to “salvage” an older, disappearing America.[38] Native symbols offered a link to that imagined past.

Silver, Gold, and Racialized Ideas of Value

Running Antelope’s portrait also intersected with monetary politics over silver and gold. Michael O’Malley’s Face Value described how many Americans conflated precious metals with race well into the 20th century. “Goldbugs” treated gold as “civilized” money. They often framed the gold standard with Social Darwinist rhetoric.

O’Malley wrote that goldbugs believed “gold formed the ‘natural’ money of the Anglo-Saxon races” while “Pagan Asiatics” and Latin Americans used silver.[39] Gold advocates also distrusted paper money from the Civil War through the Great Depression. Many of them gathered around “Redeemer” ideology after the Civil War, a movement that fought Reconstruction and upheld white supremacy.

O’Malley traced “carpetbagger” language to carpet valises used by bank representatives who introduced paper currency in the Antebellum period.[40] He then argued that many Americans retreated into “twin forms of essentialism”: ferocious racism and “fantastic” beliefs about gold’s properties.[40] He further connected the gold standard to renewed white supremacy.[41]

Therefore, paper money, especially paper redeemable in silver, carried stigma in that worldview.

1900: The New York Times Notices “Indian Bills”

A New York Times article published on June 26, 1900 noted the new Silver Certificates. It misidentified Running Antelope as “Red Jacket.” Additionaly, article then joked that “Indian bills” would appeal to “Tammany men,” while noting that some of those men “have no objection to any kind of bills.”[42]

That line targeted fraternal societies and political organizations that adopted Indian symbols, including Tammany Hall, the New York political machine. Deloria explained that after the Revolution, groups remade “Indian Others” to build identities that fit early Republic politics.[43] The Tammany Society used “the Indian” to build a political party shaped by class and ethnic inflections.[44]

In other words, white Americans often used “Indianness” for domestic political ends. The Times and the BEP likely understood at least some of those meanings.

Furthermore, Bigelow-era ideas about metal hierarchy made the Times’ joke sharper. The article implied that Tammany men would accept “worthless” paper currency. That implication linked (real or faux) Indian identity with silver and paper money.

Gold Coins Adopted Native Portraits Too, and Controversy Followed

Between 1908 and 1929, gold quarter eagles and half eagles carried distinctly Native portraits. Bela Lyon Pratt designed them. Pratt studied under Augustus St. Gaudens, created sculpture for major expositions, and taught at the School of the Museum of Fine Art in Boston. He produced a recessed design that placed a Native American head on the obverse and an eagle on the reverse.

The Native portrait drew criticism. The Red Book reported that some numismatists “condemned loudly” the artistry.[45]

In December 1908, The Numismatist predicted “strong differences of opinion” about placing a “red Indians’ head” on coins. The article described the portrait with “strong characteristic virile features of our aboriginal race.”[46] Again, writers emphasized strength and virility.

In contrast, designers voiced no comparable public worry in 1899 when officials selected Running Antelope for a Silver Certificate. Still, the debate over Pratt’s gold coins later swept the $5 Silver Certificate into its orbit.

Theodore Roosevelt’s Praise

In February 1909, The Numismatist published President Theodore Roosevelt’s praise for St. Gaudens’ Liberty design, which depicted a white woman wearing a Native headdress. Roosevelt argued that the Indian “finely symbolizes freedom.” He rejected “hackneyed” conventions for Liberty.[47] He then called it “eminently fitting” for such a head to wear a “purely and characteristically American headdress.”[48]

Roosevelt conflated American identity with Native symbolism. He also endorsed a white Liberty “playing Indian.”

S.H. Chapman responded sharply in the same issue. He dismissed the Pratt portrait as “without artistic merit,” and complained that the portrait showed an “emaciated” Indian “totally unlike” “big, strong Indian chiefs.”

He called the coins a “disgrace” and hoped officials would recall and remelt them,[49] then  argued that recessed designs would trap dirt and disease, calling them “the most unhygienic [coins] ever issued.”[50] He advocated a committee to review designs and warned that bad designs would “degrade” public taste.[51]

William Sturgis Bigelow replied. Bigelow advised Roosevelt and supported Pratt. Bigelow said a “recent photograph” provided the portrait and claimed the subject enjoyed excellent health. He suggested Chapman preferred a “fatter but less characteristic type” sometimes seen on reservations.[52] Bigelow also dismissed the hygiene critique by claiming hygiene related more to silver than gold, since silver circulated “into dirtier pockets.”[53]

Hollow Horn Bear and the Persistent Misidentification Myth

The gold coin debate produced a new misidentification of Running Antelope. In February 1909, The Numismatist published “Living Indians Portrayed on Money.” Edgar H. Adams claimed the Series 1899 $5 portrait “is said to be” Hollow Horn Bear, a “well-known Sioux chief” who spoke in Congress in 1889.[54]

Hollow Horn Bear did address Congress in 1889. However, he did not appear on the 1899 $5 Silver Certificate.

Hollow Horn Bear’s life paralleled Running Antelope’s in notable ways. He entered the world in the early 1850s. He served as a U.S. Army scout around 1874. A 1962 South Dakota historical marker stated that he had once “fought the whiteman wherever he could find them in Wyoming and Montana.”[55]

He served as a “Police Captain” on the Rosebud Reservation beginning around 1881.[56] He arrested Crow Dog after Crow Dog killed Spotted Tail, an episode tied to Ex parte Crow Dog. He served as a leading orator and negotiator during the Sioux Land Commission in 1889.

An 1895 New York Times article praised his “excellent record” of service. He rode in Theodore Roosevelt’s inaugural parade in 1905 and Woodrow Wilson’s in 1913.[57]

Other Publications Also Got It Wrong

Other publications repeated the error. The Aberdeen Democrat reported on February 5, 1909, about an annuity payment supposedly made in Series 1899 $5 Silver Certificates. The paper praised Hollow Horn Bear’s looks and called him “the handsomest and most typical Indian in the country.”[58] It described him as adept at the “white man’s game,” meaning conversation. It also claimed he could talk “a few hundred thousand” out of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.[59]

The article claimed the BIA withheld about $300,000 from his tribe, money the tribe believed should go to minor children. It also claimed Hollow Horn Bear hoped to take home about 50,000 copies of his picture on the $5 certificates.[60]

The annuity’s reality remains unclear in that account. Still, the framing matters. The article cast Hollow Horn Bear as a smooth-talker trying to swindle the government, even though fraud in Indian affairs often flowed the other direction.

The misidentification continued. A 1913 obituary in The National Magazine repeated it.[61] Hollow Horn Bear caught pneumonia during the opening ceremony for the National American Indian Memorial and while riding in Wilson’s inaugural parade. A New York Times announcement described the “tall, bronzed Indians from the west…” who marched in the parade.[62]

Today, the myth persists. Hollow Horn Bear’s Wikipedia page has claimed that “a number of sources report Hollow Horn Bear as the basis for a US five-dollar bill,” citing The Numismatist.[63]

Hollow Horn Bear did appear on stamps and military payment certificates. However, he did not appear on $5 Silver Certificates from 1899 to 1922.

A “Particular Look” and the Logic Behind the Portrait Choice

The language in The Numismatist debate and in regional press coverage reveals racialized expectations about a “proper” Native appearance. Writers demanded a particular “look.” They praised supposed “virility,” while discounted accuracy, and then blurred distinct tribal identities.

That pattern helps explain Running Antelope’s portrait transformation. If the original headdress did not fit, designers substituted another. They prioritized a generalized “Indian” look over cultural specificity.

Running Antelope’s biography also fit federal desires. He embodied the assimilation narrative that politicians and military leaders promoted: settled farming, diplomacy, and accommodation of expansion. He posed no threat as a symbol of indigenous resistance.

Moreover, the medium mattered. Many Americans ranked Silver Certificates below gold-backed money. Therefore, appropriating Running Antelope’s likeness onto silver paper money did not challenge “hard money” assumptions about hierarchy and value. At the same time, the portrait evoked a recent frontier past and offered a “simpler time” fantasy that reinforced racial hierarchy. As Tschachler put it, depicting Native Americans as “exotic people” foregrounded and reinforced white superiority.[64]

1922 Newspaper Storytelling and the Myth-Making Machine

In 1922, newspapers across the country ran a story about Running Antelope titled “Stories of Great Indians – Running Antelope’s Views of Indian Agents.” Elmo Scott Watson, a journalism professor, recounted Running Antelope’s 1874 meeting with Custer.

Watson claimed Running Antelope came to Custer to beg for food and accused Indian agents of dishonesty. Then Watson mocked him at dinner, describing him “gorging” and sweeping food into his robe like a “capricious haversack.”[65]

Next, Watson pivoted. He excused Running Antelope’s lack of table manners, then called him a “first-class fighting man.” Watson described an 1856 war with the Arikara and credited Running Antelope with participation. Watson concluded by admiring a “record of systemic homicide,” which he suggested boosted Running Antelope’s warrior reputation.[66]

Watson’s contradictions illuminate something important. White audiences often wanted Running Antelope to play multiple roles at once: hungry and formidable, crude and noble, threatening and safe. The story ignored the far larger violence committed against indigenous peoples by Custer and the nation he served. Instead,it focused instead on qualities that helped white readers define a “great Indian.”

Philip Sheridan famously voiced the “only good Indian” mindset. Yet the BEP found an Indian “good enough” for Silver Certificates.

Conclusion: Regret, Metaphor, and a Portrait That Outlived Its Subject

Running Antelope seems to have regretted his accommodation later in life.

Forrest W. Daniel’s 1969 account described an 1888 visit by a federal commission to Standing Rock to discuss land purchase under the Dawes Act. Daniel paraphrased Running Antelope’s words. Running Antelope compared the government’s promises to trading for a cow:

He said the government offered a calf for land but never delivered it. Later, it offered a heifer, then a fine cow, and again failed to deliver. Finally, he said the government drove in an old, dried-up animal with a frozen-off tail and broken horns, and the Sioux no longer wanted to trade.[67]

died without knowing that officials would revive his 1872 photograph, alter it to satisfy BEP aesthetics, and place it on a form of currency many Americans distrusted. Americans searching for identity during rapid modernization deployed Native imagery to evoke an imagined past. In that antiquarian frame, Running Antelope became a powerful symbol. The BEP could “play Indian” while avoiding a portrait of resistance.

Collecting the “Chief Note” Today: Demand, Rankings, and Prices

Running Antelope’s likeness still carries symbolic weight, and collectors pay for it. The 100 Greatest American Currency Notes ranked the Series 1899 $5 Silver Certificate at #10.[68]

Collectors pursue the note aggressively. Notes with low serial numbers, unusual serial numbers, replacement status, or major errors often bring strong premiums. Even common circulated examples often sell for hundreds of dollars.

Thomas King, who wondered why other leaders did not appear on currency, admitted that he wanted one for his office wall until he discovered that a nice example can cost thousands.[69] Coin World described the note in 1994 as “one of the most popular notes among collectors of US paper money and consequently is expensive.”[70]

Recent auction results support that claim. Then n January of the year referenced in the original research, a PCGS Gem New 66 PPQ example sold for $6,600, and another note in the same grade sold in April 2018 for the same amount.[71] A PCGS Gem New 67 PPQ example sold in August 2017 for $22,912.50.[72]

Littleton Coin Co. sells the notes and markets them as “beautiful and historic.” The listing calls them “the only series of U.S. notes to feature a Native American as its main theme” and says, “An issue no collector should be without!”

Collectibles followed. In 1977, the BEP issued ANA World’s Fair of Money convention souvenirs featuring the Series 1899 $5 face. Then in 1988, the International Paper Money Show issued a similar card featuring the back. Finally in 2001, the U.S. Mint included a BEP-made replica 1899 $5 Silver Certificate in a set with 2001-D American Buffalo Commemorative silver dollar examples. The set also included a Red Cloud stamp issued in 1987. The sets sold out within a week.[73]

The design even appears on magnets.

In 2013, The Numismatist noted that collectors “do not tire of the dignified image of the chief … even if it is not accurately portrayed.”[74]

Collectors have traded stories about the “handsome” Indian on the note’s face for decades. Auction catalogs continue to praise the note’s beauty and history. Numismatic writers still publish corrections to long-running errors.

Consequently, Running Antelope’s symbolic power, along with the complicated history behind it, continues to live on in collections, publications, and wherever the $5 Silver Certificate appears.

Citations Part 1-10

Citations Part 11-20

Citations Part 21-30

Citations Part 31-40

Citations Part 41-50

Citations Part 51-60

Citations Part 61-70

Final Citations

• “ADVENTURES OF A SCOUT: Interesting Stories of Indian Adventure by One of Custer’s Scouts.” The Bossier Banner. March 6, 1879. LINK.
• Bowers, Q. David, and David Sundman. The 100 Greatest American Currency Notes. 1. First ed. Vol. 1. Atlanta, GA: Whitman Publishing, 2006.
• Cozzens, Peter. The Earth Is Weeping: The Epic Story of the Indian Wars for the American West. 1. 1st ed. Vol. 1. New York, NY: Vintage Books, 2016.
• Daniel, Forrest W. “Running Antelope – Misnamed Onepapa.” Paper Money 8, no. 1, 1969.
• Deloria, Philip J. Playing Indian. New Haven and London, CT: Yale University Press, 1998.

Additional Resources

• ———. “From ‘Wildman’ to ‘True Native American’: Images of American Indians on Paper Money.” ANA Journal 2, no. 1 (2007): 9–21.
• “FURTHER ALLEGED IRREGULARITIES: Investigation at Standing Rock of General Carlin’s Charges Against Agent Hughes.” Daily Press and Dakotaian . July 27, 1878. LINK.
• Gibbs, Bill. “Hunkpapa Sioux Leader’s Image on Silver Certificate.” Coin World, December
  19, 2016. https://www.coinworld.com/news/precious-metals/hunkpapa-sioux-leaders-portrait-on-silver-certificate.html.
• Gilkes, Paul. “American Buffalo Set Sells Out.” Coin World 42, no. 2151, July 2, 2001.
• Government Printing Office, 1 Official Register of the United States Containing A List of the
  Officers and Employees in the Civil, Military, and Naval Service on the First of July,
  1889; Together with List of Vessels Belonging to the United States § (1889). LINK.
• Hessler, Gene. “Design Features of MPCs Appear on Other Notes.” Coin World 35, no. 1772, March 28, 1994.
• “Hollow Horn Bear at Indian Bureau.” The Aberdeen Democrat. February 5, 1909. LINK.
• “Indian to Be Orator.” The New York Times. February 20, 1913, LXII, No. 20,116 edition.
• Larson, Robert W. Gall: Lakota War Chief. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2012.
• Lord, Chester S. “Coney Island in the Seventies.” Saturday Evening Post. 1921, Vol. 194
  edition. LINK.
• Morris, Roy. Sheridan: The Life and Wars of General Phil Sheridan. New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group, 1992.
• Nelson, C.B. “South Dakota State Historical Markers.” history.sd.gov. South Dakota State
  Historical Society, April 2017. LINK.
• The New York Times. June 26, 1900, Vol. XLIX, No. 15,745 edition.
• “NUGGETS.” The Bismarck Tribune. August 26, 1874. LINK.
• O’Malley, Michael. Face Value: The Entwined Histories of Money and Race in America. Chicago and London, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2012.
• Roosevelt, Theodore, Samuel Hudson Chapman, William Sturgis Bigelow, and George H King. “New U.S. Gold Series Criticized and Defended.” The Numismatist 22, no. 2, February 1909. https://archive.org/details/TheNumismatist1909Vol22/page/n49/mode/2up.

More Resources

• “THE SIOUX VISITORS: An Interview with Running Antelope, the Orator.” The Bismarck Tribune. February 16, 1883. LINK.
• Smith, Andy. “Artistic License.” The Numismatist 126, no. 9, September 2013.
• Thrapp, Dan L. Encyclopedia of Frontier Biography. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1991.
• Traylor, George. “A Tenderfoot Tracks Onepapa.” Paper Money 6, no. 4, 1967.
• Treuer, David. The Heartbeat of Wounded Knee: Native America from 1890 to the Present. New York, NY: Riverhead Books, 2019.
• Tschachler, Heinz. The Numismatist 132, no. 9, September 2019.
• Utley, Robert M. Sitting Bull: The Life and Times of an American Patriot. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company, 2014.
• Watson, Elmo Scott. “Stories of Great Indians: Running Antelope’s Views of the Honesty of Agents.” The Bolivar Democrat. June 24, 1922.
• https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn87065645/1922-06-24/ed-1/seq-6/.
• “WHY IS THIS THUS?: An Investigation at Standing Rock Agency Wanted.” Bismarck Tribune. July 9, 1880. LINK.
• Wood, Howland. “The Bigelow-Pratt Gold Pieces – New $2.50 and $5.00.” The Numismatist 21,
  no. 12, December 1908.
• Yeoman, R.S. A Guide Book of United States Coins 2011. 1. 64th ed. Vol. 1. Atlanta, GA:
  Whitman Publishing, 2010.
• Zerbe, Farran. “A Consideration of Our New Gold Coins.” The Numismatist 21, no. 1, January 1908.

The post Running Antelope and the 1899 $5 Silver Certificate appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Most importantly, this note represents the first small-size $10 gold certificate ever issued. When combined with its replacement note designation, the issue occupies a distinct position within the gold certificate series.

A Landmark Issue in Small-Size Currency

The Series 1928 redesign marked a major shift in U.S. paper money. The $10 gold certificate introduced the smaller format still familiar today. It also debuted several defining visual elements.

Most notably, the note features a yellow-gold Treasury seal and matching serial numbers. These characteristics identified the bill as redeemable in gold at the time of issue and clearly separated it from Federal Reserve Notes and other paper money types.

The design also introduced Alexander Hamilton to the $10 denomination for the first time. While Hamilton had long appeared on U.S. currency, 1928 marked his debut on this specific value, adding long-term historical significance to the series.

The note carries the signatures of Treasurer W. O. Woods and Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon, firmly placing it within the early small-size era.

The Significance of the Star Note Designation

The asterisk in the Friedberg number Fr. 2400* identifies the note as a replacement, or “star,” note. These notes replaced defective or damaged examples discovered during production.

Because the Bureau of Engraving and Printing printed replacement notes in much smaller quantities, star notes remain significantly scarcer than standard serial number issues. As a result, collectors consistently assign them a substantial premium, especially in higher grades.

Current Market Value and Pricing Range

As of February 2026, market data shows that a 1928 $10 Gold Certificate Star Note graded MS 63 typically sells for $2,250 to $2,500.

Prices across the series vary widely depending on condition. Lower-grade star notes can sell for around $200, while high-grade examples have reached as much as $15,000.

The premium becomes even clearer when compared to non-star notes. A regular 1928 $10 Gold Certificate in MS 63 condition often sells for approximately $480 to $1,000, underscoring the rarity of replacement issues.

Recent public listings support these figures. High-grade star notes have appeared on major online platforms, including eBay, with asking prices near $2,388.88.

What Choice Uncirculated 63 Indicates

A Choice Uncirculated 63 grade confirms that the note never entered circulation. However, the grade allows for minor handling characteristics.

Margins may show slight misalignment. In addition, faint counting marks or light surface distractions may be present. Importantly, the note displays no folds, creases, or bends, which preserves its uncirculated status.

For the 1928 $10 Gold Certificate series, uncirculated examples remain particularly difficult to locate. Most notes saw heavy use or redemption shortly after issuance, sharply limiting the number of survivors in high grade.

The Impact of the 1933 Gold Recall

The production window for these gold certificates proved brief. In 1933, the federal government issued the Gold Recall Order, which required citizens to surrender gold coins and gold-backed paper money.

Following the recall, authorities destroyed millions of gold certificates. While exact survival numbers remain unknown, the destruction significantly reduced the available population. Consequently, surviving examples — especially star notes in uncirculated condition — remain scarce today.

A Key Issue for Advanced Collectors

The 1928 $10 Gold Certificate Star Note combines multiple layers of collector appeal. It represents a first-of-type small-size issue, introduces a major design milestone, and survives in limited numbers due to historical events beyond its control.

When paired with a Choice Uncirculated grade, those factors help explain the note’s sustained demand and long-standing market premium. For collectors focused on U.S. gold certificates or replacement notes, Fr. 2400* remains a cornerstone issue within the series.

This Note is for sale at the Stack’s Bowers Spring 2026 Showcase Auction  Session 6 – U.S. Currency – Mar 12, 2026  – Lot 6157

* * *

Want more stories like this? Sign up for the CoinWeek newsletter and never miss a rare discovery, auction highlight, or collector deep-dive.

The post The 1928 $10 Gold Certificate Star Note: Rarity, Value, and Historical Importance appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

ANS Acquires an 1880 Contemporary Counterfeit Five-Dollar Note

The American Numismatic Society (ANS) has added an 1880 contemporary counterfeit five-dollar United States Note to its collection. The acquisition is notable. The Society first reviewed this note nearly forty years ago and declined it then.

The note, now cataloged as ANS 2024.37.1, entered the collection in 2024 after a new examination revealed it was counterfeit and had an unusually well-documented history.

An Unlikely Artifact in the Trinity Church Archives

The counterfeit note came from the Trinity Church Archives. The archives preserve records documenting the history of Trinity Church and its parishioners. Located at the head of Wall Street, Trinity Church has played an important political and social role in New York City for more than three centuries.

The collection includes baptismal, marriage, confirmation, and burial records dating back to 1749. Alexander Hamilton is among the notable figures buried in the churchyard. Genealogical material makes up most of the archive. For that reason, the presence of a counterfeit five-dollar bill stands out.

A 1986 Inquiry, and a Missed Identification

In February 1986, Trinity parish Archivist and Curator Phyllis Barr contacted the ANS. She wrote to Richard Doty, then Curator of Modern Coins and Paper Money. Barr enclosed a black-and-white Xerox copy of a five-dollar bill she had found in the archives.

Barr described the note as being in “fragile condition.” She added that it appeared to be “splitting in two as if it were in two layers.” She asked whether the note had any monetary value.

Doty replied that the bill was not worth much because of its poor condition. Based on the surviving correspondence, the black-and-white photocopy likely prevented a proper identification. Doty did not recognize the note as a contemporary counterfeit at that time.

Reexamination and Donation in the 2020s

Nearly four decades later, Marissa Maggs, Director of Trinity Church Archives, offered the note and the 1986 correspondence to the ANS as a donation.

Upon examination, Dr. Jesse Kraft, Resolute Americana Assistant Curator of American Numismatics, identified the bill immediately as a circulating counterfeit. The Society added the note to its reference collection of forgeries, fakes, and counterfeits, often referred to as the “black trays.” Items with clear historical context hold particular research value within this collection.

Physical Construction and Visual Clues

Collectors often refer to this type of counterfeit as a “woodchopper.” The engraving quality is poor. The portrait of Andrew Jackson at left appears crude. The central vignette of a pioneer family, man, woman, baby, and dog, is present but barely defined.

Barr’s original description from 1986 proved accurate. The counterfeit consists of two separately engraved sheets adhered together. This construction explains the layered appearance and the tendency to split.

The motive for this method cannot be confirmed. However, the added thickness may have helped imitate the weight and feel of a genuine note.

The obverse design provides the clearest evidence of counterfeiting. Aside from the red seal and blue serial numbers, the note lacks tonal variation. It appears almost entirely black and white. Genuine notes display subtle grayscale effects produced by advanced engraving techniques. The counterfeit does not. This difference reflects the simpler printing methods used by counterfeiters.

Historical Background of the Five-Dollar United States Note

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing first issued United States Notes in 1862. These Legal Tender Notes remained in production until 1971. As a result, they represent the longest-running form of U.S. paper money.

In 1869, the five-dollar denomination adopted a new design. It featured Andrew Jackson’s portrait at left and a pioneer family vignette at center. The series changed again in 1875. That redesign introduced the reverse seen on the ANS counterfeit example.

A Warning Against the Crime It Represents

The reverse includes a forceful legal warning. It threatens fines of up to $5,000, imprisonment of up to fifteen years at hard labor, or both for counterfeiting-related offenses.

The warning targeted organized counterfeiters, often called “coneymen.” These groups operated across specific regions of the United States during the nineteenth century.

Enforcement, Circulation, and Final Preservation

The United States established the Secret Service in 1865 to combat counterfeiting. The agency did not assume responsibility for presidential protection until after the assassination of President William McKinley in 1901.

Despite these efforts, this counterfeit five-dollar note circulated successfully for some time. The exact circumstances remain undocumented. It is possible the note entered Trinity Church through a Sunday collection. It may also have arrived as a holiday donation, such as a Christmas or Easter gift. Given the note’s purchasing power at the time, either scenario would have involved a meaningful sum.

What is certain is its long archival life. The note remained at Trinity Church for nearly a century. It now resides permanently in the ANS collection, where scholars can study it as part of the broader history of American paper money and counterfeiting.

* * *

* * *

The post The Curious Case of the Counterfeit Five Dollar Bill from the Trinity Archives appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Certified PMG Gem Uncirculated 66 EPQ, this example stands alone at the top of the census. Although researchers long recorded a three-note serial number run as Crisp Uncirculated, modern third-party grading has clearly separated this note from its peers. Of the 22 examples of Friedberg 1219e certified by PMG, only four achieve an Uncirculated grade. One stands at Choice Uncirculated 63. Two reach Choice Uncirculated 64. This note, however, rises above all others as the only Gem Uncirculated 66 EPQ, with no equals and none finer.

Consequently, this Gold Certificate now defines the top of the market for the entire Friedberg number. For advanced collectors, that distinction carries enormous weight. In elite numismatics, condition rarity often outweighs absolute scarcity. This note proves that principle without compromise.

Design That Defines an Era of American Finance

Issued in 1907, the $1,000 Gold Certificate ranks among the most visually commanding notes ever produced by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. At the center, Alexander Hamilton anchors the face with a bold, engraved portrait that reflects his enduring influence on the nation’s financial system. Meanwhile, rich gold overprints frame the design at left and right, reinforcing the authority of gold-backed currency.

Large “1000” counters dominate each corner, while engraved signatures of Treasury officials Teehee and Burke appear crisply below the portrait. Turn the note over, and the visual impact intensifies. A brilliant orange-gold reverse displays the Great Seal of the United States at center, supported by sharp counters in each corner. Together, these elements create one of the most striking backs in American paper money.

Not surprisingly, Q. David Bowers and David M. Sundman ranked this issue #75 in 100 Greatest American Currency Notes, reflecting both rarity and enduring collector demand.

Condition, Provenance, and Ultimate Status

Beyond rarity and design, condition elevates this note into a category of its own. Generous margins, precise centering, and vividly saturated gold overprints define the face. Likewise, the reverse shows remarkable depth of color and sharpness of detail. The EPQ designation confirms fully original paper quality and embossing. Simply put, few Gold Certificates approach this level of technical and aesthetic perfection.

Equally important, the provenance matches the note’s stature. The pedigree traces through Ossie’s Fixed Price List (1976), Frank Levitan, Lyn Knight’s 1998 sale, Jay Parrino’s 1999 offering, and ultimately the legendary Pogue Collection.

Ultimately, the $264,000 result confirms what seasoned collectors already understood. This note occupies a class of its own. For those pursuing the highest echelon of United States currency, the finest known 1907 $1,000 Gold Certificate does not merely represent excellence, it defines it.

The post A Singular Survivor: The Finest Known 1907 $1,000 Gold Certificate appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

The United States issued $500, $1,000, $5,000, and $10,000 notes to support large commercial and interbank transactions. While these notes remain legal tender today, their scarcity and history make them far more valuable as collectibles than as spending money, even in circulated condition.

Among these, the $1,000 note stands out for its long production history, evolving designs, and enduring appeal to collectors.

A Short History of the $1,000 Bill

The story of the $1,000 bill begins during the American Civil War. Congress first authorized high-denomination paper money following the Act of February 25, 1862, commonly known as the Legal Tender Act of 1862. This landmark legislation reshaped the nation’s monetary system at a moment of national crisis.

By 1861, the Civil War had pushed the federal government into severe financial distress. Military expenses soared as the Union armed soldiers, built infrastructure, and sustained prolonged campaigns. At the same time, traditional revenue sources, taxation and borrowing, failed to meet these extraordinary demands.

The United States still relied heavily on gold and silver coinage under the specie standard. However, widespread hoarding and shortages of precious metals disrupted commerce and made it difficult for the government to pay soldiers or creditors. Ordinary Americans also struggled to conduct everyday transactions.

In response, Congress and President Abraham Lincoln embraced a more flexible monetary solution. The Legal Tender Act authorized the issuance of paper currency, soon nicknamed “greenbacks”, that citizens and businesses had to accept for most debts and transactions.

The First $1,000 Paper Money

The Legal Tender Act empowered the U.S. Treasury to issue $150 million in United States Notes. These notes represented fiat currency backed by the credit of the federal government rather than by gold or silver. By the end of the war, Congress approved hundreds of millions more.

Although these notes qualified as legal tender for most public and private debts, the government still required payment in specie for customs duties and interest on federal bonds. Even so, the legislation marked a decisive departure from the traditional gold standard.

The Treasury issued three distinct $1,000 Legal Tender Note designs. The first featured a portrait of Robert Morris, the financier of the American Revolution. Later designs replaced Morris with a portrait of DeWitt Clinton, the former mayor of New York City. These large, imposing notes reflected the extraordinary financial demands of wartime America.

From Greenbacks to the Federal Reserve

The rapid expansion of fiat currency proved inflationary. After the Civil War ended, the United States required more than a decade to resume full payment in specie. By that time, however, paper money had become a permanent fixture of American life.

For much of the late 19th century, banks issued many notes. Eventually, a series of financial reforms returned the responsibility for issuing paper money to the federal government. These reforms laid the groundwork for the modern currency system and, ultimately, for Federal Reserve Notes.

The $1,000 Federal Reserve Note

Congress authorized the first $1,000 Federal Reserve Notes under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The law followed the financial panic of 1907 and created the Federal Reserve System as the nation’s central bank.

Early Federal Reserve Notes measured 7-3/8 by 3-1/8 inches. Collectors often call these large-format notes “horseblankets” because of their size. The large-size $1,000 Federal Reserve Note featured a portrait of Alexander Hamilton, the same portrait later used on the small-size $10 bill.

These notes are rare in all conditions and across all series. Collectors recognize three signature combinations: Burke–Glass, Burke–Houston, and White–Mellon. An example such as the one illustrated above commands a value of roughly $40,000.

The 1929 Size Reduction and New Design

In 1929, the Federal Reserve reduced U.S. currency to its current dimensions of approximately 6.14 by 2.61 inches. Production of $1,000 notes continued in this smaller size, with issues released by Federal Reserve Bank branches in cities including New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Philadelphia.

The first small-size $1,000 notes, known as the Series of 1928, bear the signature combination of Woods and Mellon. In circulated condition, these notes begin at about $3,000, while crisp uncirculated examples often exceed $10,000.

The new design introduced several changes. The portrait of Hamilton gave way to President Grover Cleveland, and engravers made the guilloché patterns on both sides more intricate. Production continued through 1946, with the final authorized signature combination being Julian and Snyder.

According to Bureau of Engraving and Printing records, only 1,368 notes with this final combination were produced, and none have ever appeared publicly. The previous Julian–Morgenthau series continued through 1945.

Discontinuation and Modern Collecting

Although the government last printed $1,000 Federal Reserve Notes in 1945–46, banks continued to distribute them for decades. On July 14, 1969, the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve System announced the immediate discontinuation of $500, $1,000, $5,000, and $10,000 bills due to a lack of use.

Collectors quickly recognized the opportunity. Anyone who set aside these high-denomination notes preserved a tangible piece of American monetary history.

The $1,000 Federal Reserve Note remains legal tender today, but inflation has sharply reduced its purchasing power. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, $1,000 in 1945 equals approximately $17,847 today.

Market Values and Buying Advice

Collectors should approach purchases carefully. Buying from a reputable currency dealer or selecting notes certified by PMG or PCGS Banknote helps ensure authenticity and guards against alterations. With proper due diligence, the $1,000 Federal Reserve Note remains one of the most historically rich and visually impressive U.S. paper money collectibles available.

CoinWeek Article Updated January 19, 2026

* * *

Want more stories like this? Sign up for the CoinWeek newsletter and never miss a rare discovery, auction highlight, or collector deep-dive.

The post $1,000 Federal Reserve Notes are Popular Collectibles With a Long History appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Collectors often refer to Large-Size United States paper money as “Horse Blankets,” and for good reason. Before the introduction of today’s smaller notes beginning with Series 1928, American currency carried significantly larger dimensions. Among these iconic issues, one note continues to spark fascination, debate, and strong collector demand: the Series 1923 $5 Silver Certificate, better known as the Lincoln Porthole.

This installment of Notable Notes focuses on one of the most popular and recognizable large-size notes of the 20th century. Thanks to its unusual design and enduring historical resonance, the Lincoln Porthole $5 Silver Certificate holds a permanent place in the upper tier of U.S. paper money collecting.

Abraham Lincoln and the $5 Bill Tradition

The Series 1923 $5 Silver Certificate features a portrait of Abraham Lincoln, a statesman who has long defined the $5 denomination. Lincoln served as the 16th president of the United States and guided the nation through its darkest chapter during the Civil War. His leadership helped preserve the Union, but his life ended tragically when John Wilkes Booth assassinated him on April 14, 1865, at Ford’s Theatre in Washington, D.C.

In the years following his death, Americans honored Lincoln with countless tributes. Artists and engravers placed his likeness on coins, postage stamps, and eventually paper money. During the late 19th century, Lincoln appeared posthumously on Fractional Currency and Silver Certificates, establishing a legacy that continued into the 20th century.

Therefore, when Treasury officials prepared a new issue of Silver Certificates in 1923, they selected Lincoln as the obvious choice for the $5 denomination.

The “Lincoln Porthole” Controversy

Despite Lincoln’s popularity, the note’s portrait design immediately drew criticism. Designers placed Lincoln’s likeness inside a perfectly circular frame, a bold departure from earlier rectangular vignettes. Unfortunately, many members of the public reacted negatively.

At the time, critics argued that the circular frame resembled the view through the barrel of a gun. As a result, controversy erupted, and public sentiment turned sharply against the design. However, as years passed, the uproar gradually faded.

Eventually, collectors and historians embraced a far less ominous nickname: the Lincoln Porthole. The name referenced the round windows found on ships, and it reframed the design as distinctive rather than disturbing. Today, that once-controversial feature stands as the note’s defining characteristic.

Rarity, Survival, and Collector Demand

Today, the Lincoln Porthole $5 Silver Certificate ranks among the most desirable large-size U.S. notes. Although thousands originally circulated, experts estimate that only about 5,000 examples survive across all grades. Moreover, high-grade specimens remain especially scarce, which drives intense competition among advanced collectors.

Recently, one outstanding example entered the PCGS Banknote grading room. The note earned a PCGS 55PPQ grade, indicating only light circulation wear along with exceptional paper quality and eye appeal. As a result, it represents an impressive survivor from a century-old issue.

Collectors interested in professional grading and encapsulation can learn more by visiting www.PCGS.com/banknote
or by calling PCGS Customer Service at (800) 447-8848.

From Rare Coin Market Report

This article originally appeared in the March – April 2020 issue of Rare Coin Market Report. Readers who wish to explore the full issue can access the digital edition by logging in with the email address associated with their PCGS account. All current PCGS Collectors Club members receive complimentary access.

Collectors may also purchase individual issues or annual subscriptions through the RCMR Homepage. Those who are not yet members can join the PCGS Collectors Club by visiting www.pcgs.com/join

The post Notable Notes: The “Lincoln Porthole” $5 Silver Certificate appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Paper money may look uniform and precise, but every note begins life as a physical object moving through massive, high-speed printing presses. Like coin striking, that process invites mechanical stress, misfeeds, folds, and ink failures. Even with exceptional quality control at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP), perfection remains impossible.

As a result, dramatic paper money errors escape into circulation every year, sometimes unnoticed for decades. Some scream for attention. Others whisper to those who know what to look for. Collectors prize them all for one reason: they represent genuine mistakes in a system designed to avoid them.

Here are five dramatic paper money errors you can still find in circulation, often hiding in plain sight.

Misalignment Error

A Misalignment Error occurs when an entire sheet of notes fails to seat correctly in the printing press. When that happens, the printed design shifts off-center, sometimes dramatically.

Instead of a perfectly framed portrait, part of the design disappears beyond the edge of the note. In extreme cases, the press prints part of a neighboring bill onto the wrong note, creating a surreal overlap of designs.

These errors range from subtle margin shifts to jaw-dropping off-center prints. They can affect the face, the back, or just one side, making every example unique.

Collector tip: The more design missing (or extra design visible), the stronger the premium.

Gutter Fold Error

Gutter Fold Errors appear far more often than most collectors realize. They happen when the paper wrinkles or folds before entering the press.

The result looks like a blank stripe running across the note, sometimes narrow, sometimes wide. Because the folded area never receives ink, it remains unprinted once the sheet unfolds.

Multiple folds do exist, but they remain rare. Most examples show a single clean “gutter” where the press skipped the paper entirely.

Collector tip: True gutter folds show no ink in the blank area, ever.

Printed Fold Error

Printed Fold Errors push the drama up a notch.

In this case, one side of the note prints normally. Then the sheet folds before the next printing pass. When the press strikes again, it prints over the fold, creating overlapping, distorted design elements once the note flattens.

Collectors love these errors because you can see one side’s design printed onto the other, often at strange angles. The folded shape usually remains visible, adding another layer of visual impact.

Collector tip: Look for crisp printed detail on top of another design, not just blank paper.

Ink Error (Ink Smear)

Ink Errors result from pure mechanical failure. Either the ink jet releases too much ink or the wiper malfunctions and drags wet ink across the surface.

Unlike alignment or folding errors, ink smears don’t alter the structure of the note. Instead, they leave behind bold streaks, blobs, or pools of ink that interrupt the design.

Because each smear forms differently, no two ink errors look alike. Some barely intrude on the portrait. Others overwhelm entire sections of the note.

Collector tip: Random ink blobs differ from normal printing artifacts, size and irregularity matter.

Offset Printing Error

Offset Printing Errors occur when the impression roller contacts the inked plate without paper between them, a paper money equivalent of a coin die clash.

The roller picks up the inked design and transfers it onto the next sheet. Most examples appear as a mirror-image impression of the opposite side, floating faintly over the intended design.

These errors reward careful inspection. At first glance, they look ghostly or accidental. Under closer study, they reveal precise design elements in reverse.

Collector tip: Flip the note over, offset images often match details from the opposite side.

Why Collectors Love Paper Money Errors

Error notes tell stories of machinery, motion, and momentary failure inside one of the most controlled production environments on Earth. They prove that even modern money-making leaves room for chance.

Best of all, you don’t need a dealer or an auction catalog to find one. Many still circulate at face value, waiting for a sharp-eyed collector to rescue them.

So the next time you receive change, take a second look. That “ordinary” bill might be anything but.

The post Five Dramatic Paper Money Errors You Can Find in Circulation appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Stack’s Bowers Galleries is pleased to announce the results of the recently concluded November 2025 Showcase Auction, which realized more than $28 million. Two sessions devoted exclusively to United States currency featured 407 lots that totaled $1,867,392. (All prices include the buyer’s premium.)

In Session 6, rarities saw impressive realizations above pre-auction estimates.

A Remainder attributable to the “Imperial Government of Norton I” proclaimed by the mad vagrant Joshua Abraham Norton achieved $21,600 (lot 6056) against an estimate of $8,000 to $12,000.

A high-grade 28 Shillings note printed by Paul Revere and pedigreed to the John J. Ford, Jr. Collection (lot 6027) realized $13,200 against an initial estimate of $3,000 to $5,000.

Additional results from Session 6 include:

• Lot 6025: MA-166. Massachusetts. August 18, 1775. 10 Shillings. PCGS Banknote Choice Extremely Fine 45. Realized $12,600.
• Lot 6045: CC-9. Continental Currency. May 10, 1775. $20. PMG Choice Very Fine 35. Realized $10,800.
• Lot 6192: San Jose, California. $10 1874. Fr. 1148. Farmers National Gold Bank. Charter #2158. PMG Very Fine 20. Realized $10,200.
• Lot 6197: Stockton, California. $10 1873. Fr. 1146. First National Gold Bank. Charter #2077. PMG Choice Fine 15. Realized $9,000.
• Lot 6228: St. Louis, Missouri. $100 1902 Red Seal. Fr. 686. Fourth NB. Charter #283. PMG Very Fine 25. Realized $9,000.
• Lot 6019: MD-75. Maryland. July 26, 1775. $2 2/3. PMG Very Fine 25. Realized $8,400.

From Session 7 a series of type notes attracted strong interest from bidders.

One of the finest known Fr. 341 Series of 1880 $100 Silver Certificates of Deposit realized $132,000 (lot 7117). A Fr. 1179 Series of 1905 $20 Gold Certificate (lot 7139), uneclipsed in the PMG Population Report, achieved $120,000, well in excess of the pre- auction estimate of $70,000 to $90,000.

Additional results from Session 7 include:

• Lot 7129: Fr. 831. 1918 $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note. St. Louis. PCGS Banknote Choice Uncirculated 63. Realized $50,400.
• Lot 7140: Fr. 1180. 1905 $20 Gold Certificate. PMG Choice Uncirculated 64 EPQ*. Realized $31,200.
• Lot 7076: Fr. 119. 1901 $10 Legal Tender Note. PCGS Banknote Superb Gem Uncirculated 67 PPQ. Realized $28,800.
• Lot 7119: Fr. 344. 1891 $100 Silver Certificate. PMG Very Fine 30. Realized $28,800.
• Lot 7047: Fr. 2405 1928 $100 Gold Certificate. PCGS Banknote Gem Uncirculated 65 PPQ. Realized $26,400.
• Lot 7050: Fr. 2407. 1928 $500 Gold Certificate. PMG About Uncirculated 53. Realized $26,400.

Complete results for the Stack’s Bowers Galleries November 2025 Showcase Auction are available at StacksBowers.com.

For information about consigning to one of the firm’s Showcase or Online auctions
call 800- 458-4646 or email Consign@StacksBowers.com.

The post Strong Results Follow Important Paper Rarities in the Stack’s Bowers November 2025 Showcase Auction appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

$2 bills hold a special place in the hearts of many Americans due to their unusual value and their uncommon appearance in circulation. Despite this, $2 Federal Reserve Notes continue to be printed by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) and can be acquired at face value at practically any bank.

They also provide an interesting area for collecting, whether you are new to the hobby or a sophisticated collector. In our recent survey of eBay results, we discovered three $2 bill listings that have sold for sizable premiums.

What Is a $2 Bill and Why Are They (Sometimes) Valuable?

The $2 bill is a circulating Federal Reserve Note that has been produced intermittently since March 1862. The design of the $2 bill has changed dramatically over time, with portraits of Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson appearing on the note’s face.

The famous Series 1896 $2 bill featured an allegorical vignette depicting Science presenting steam and electricity to Commerce and Manufacture on the front, while on the back, portraits of steamboat inventor Robert Fulton and telegraph pioneer and morse code inventor Samuel Morse are seated amidst a bold green guilloché pattern.

In more recent times, Jefferson’s portrait has been framed in the center of the note, making the nation’s third President synonymous with the seldom-used United States currency note.

1953 $2 Bill “Yellow Seal” Star Replacement Note in Uncirculated Condition

Sometimes collecting paper money requires one to pay tuition in the school of Lessons Learned. eBay seller discount_rare_currency_bills offered this chemically-altered $2 Legal Tender Note. When the note left the BEP, the seal and the serial numbers were printed in red ink. These altered Series 1953 Red Seal Notes have been promoted in the hobby as “errors” for quite a long time and some sellers are even up front that the notes have been altered. Sadly, these fake errors sell for big premiums because buyers are not familiar with the scam. Besides these notes being unlisted in any paper money reference, one will see that no examples have been certified by the leading currency grading services. This note cost an unknowledgeable buyer $406; imagine if he or she would have spent a fraction of that money on books.

One wonders why this seller would price such a spurious note at over $400, given their obvious experience selling other notes and errors. Only the occasional listing references the notes as being altered. Apparently, eBay doesn’t police this issue.

Series 1918 $2 National Currency Note of the Federal Bank of Chicago Battleship Note

The $2 “Battleship Note” is one of the most iconic small-size Federal Reserve Notes ever issued. This design is ranked high in Q. David Bowers and David M. Sundman’s 100 Greatest American Currency Notes (2005), and it’s not hard to see why. Featured on the back of this note is a vignette emblematic of the U.S. Navy’s New York Class Battleships, which were built from 1911-1914 . Bowers writes that the engraving was likely based on USS New York, which saw action in both World Wars.

The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago issued three varieties of this note; the $2 bill that sold on eBay for $1,202 after 56 bids features the third signature combination of Elliot-Burke-Cramer-McDougal.

Fancy, low, binary, Serial Number 2 Dollar Bill PMG EPQ 67

Lucky numbers are a popular niche for paper money collectors. This fancy serial number shows three zeroes followed by two fives and then three more zeroes. This is known to paper money specialists as a “Radar Note“. “Radar” is a word that can be spelled forwards or backwards and radar notes feature a sequence of numbers that do the same. This note was issued by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Georgia, and is from Series 2009 featuring the signature combination of Rosie Rios and Timothy Geithner. Graded EPQ 67 by Paper Money Guaranty (PMG), this high grade note sold for $375.

In our opinion, this is a reasonable retail price for a $2 bill of this quality and unusual serial number on eBay.

* * *

This article just scratches the surface of the exciting field of paper money collecting. For more about what you can find on a Federal Reserve Note, check out this primer.

* * *

The post Three $2 Bills Worth Money on eBay appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Each November, as Americans gather to celebrate Thanksgiving, numismatists have a unique way of commemorating this historical holiday, through coins, commemoratives, medals, and even rare banknotes that reflect the traditions, treaties, and journeys that mark its origins.

While the modern holiday often centers around turkey dinners and family gatherings, its deeper meaning is embedded in themes of gratitude, resilience, and cultural intersection. These same themes echo across America’s numismatic landscape, captured in striking detail through expertly designed and historically rich issues.

Thanksgiving traces its roots to 1621, when the Wampanoag people and the Pilgrims of Plymouth Colony shared a harvest meal after forging a fragile alliance amid hardship and survival. Over the centuries, this story became a cultural touchstone, and artists, engravers, and legislators alike found inspiration in its message of cooperation and hope.

The U.S. Mint and Bureau of Engraving and Printing have honored this legacy through carefully crafted imagery, from the clasped hands of a treaty on a modern dollar coin to a somber Pilgrim ship departure on a century-old currency note.

For collectors, Thanksgiving-themed numismatics offer more than aesthetic appeal, they serve as tangible connections to our national narrative. Whether in silver, bronze, or inked paper, these pieces are windows into the values and struggles of a young and evolving country.

Below are four numismatic pieces that embody the spirit of Thanksgiving.

2011 Native American $1 Coin – Wampanoag Treaty

The 2011 issue of the Native American $1 Coin series commemorates one of the most significant events leading to the first Thanksgiving: the 1621 treaty between the Wampanoag people and the Pilgrims of Plymouth Colony.

The reverse design features the crossed hands of Governor John Carver and Massasoit, the Wampanoag chief, symbolizing their mutual pledge of peace and cooperation.

This treaty was the first formal written agreement between colonists and Native Americans, laying the groundwork for what would become a fragile but foundational relationship in colonial America.

While many Thanksgiving portrayals romanticize this event, the coin brings a solemn recognition of diplomacy and shared survival.

Highlights:

• Designer: Richard Masters (Reverse), Phebe Hemphill (Sculptor)
• Obverse: Sacagawea with child (series standard)
• Reverse: Hands clasped in alliance, with “WAMPANOAG TREATY 1621”
• Issued in: Satin Mint and Business Strike versions
• Edge Lettering: “E PLURIBUS UNUM” and date

The coin challenges us to consider the broader story of Thanksgiving, not just one of celebration, but of fragile trust and early nation-building.

Pilgrim Tercentenary Half Dollar (1920 & 1921)

Authorized by Congress in 1919, this classic commemorative half dollar marked the 300th anniversary of the Pilgrims’ landing at Plymouth in 1620. Minted in both 1920 and 1921, it holds the distinction of being one of the earliest U.S. commemoratives and the only coin directly tied to the Thanksgiving origin story.

The obverse features Governor William Bradford, a key Pilgrim leader, holding a Bible, symbolizing religious freedom and spiritual guidance.

The reverse depicts the Mayflower, the ship that carried the Pilgrims across the Atlantic. Its dramatic profile slicing through stylized waves stands as a powerful metaphor for perseverance and destiny.

Originally intended as a fundraiser for the Pilgrim Tercentenary Commission, many coins remained unsold and were later returned and melted, making pristine examples more collectible today.

Highlights:

• Designer: Cyrus E. Dallin
• Obverse: Portrait of Governor Bradford
• Reverse: The Mayflower ship
• 1920 Mintage: ~152,000; 1921 Mintage: ~20,000
• Legal Tender: Yes (50¢), though never widely circulated
• Metal: 90% silver

This coin captures a monumental moment in American heritage, the search for religious freedom, early colonial hardship, and the seeds of Thanksgiving itself.

2020-W Gold $10 Mayflower 400th Anniversary Reverse Proof

To commemorate the 400th anniversary of the Mayflower’s historic 1620 voyage, the United States Mint released an elegant $10 gold coin struck in Reverse Proof finish at the West Point Mint.

The obverse depicts a Wampanoag family on the shoreline of what is now Massachusetts, known as Patuxet to the native population, as they witness the arrival of the Mayflower from foreign shores.

The reverse features portraits of a Pilgrim man and woman looking forward toward their future in the New World, symbolizing the transition towards a democratic society. A pair of mayflower blossoms flank the design.

This coin was struck in .9999 fine 24-karat gold and released in a limited mintage, offering both collectors and historians a richly symbolic artifact of America’s early colonial story. The reverse proof finish enhances its artistic depth, giving a soft, frosted foreground and polished background that highlight the emotional storytelling.

Highlights:

• Denomination: $10 (face value)
• Composition: 1/4 oz. .9999 fine gold
• Finish: Reverse Proof
• Mint: West Point (W mint mark)
• Mintage Limit: 5,000 (individual issue)

Unlike traditional commemoratives, the 2020-W gold $10 coin breaks new ground in both design and symbolism.

1918 $10,000 Federal Reserve Note – “Embarkation of the Pilgrims”

Among the most majestic and elusive pieces of American currency is the 1918 $10,000 Federal Reserve Note, issued exclusively for interbank transfers. While this note was never intended for public circulation, it features one of the most historically and emotionally resonant Thanksgiving-themed vignettes ever engraved on U.S. paper money.

The reverse design is based on Robert W. Weir’s iconic 1844 painting, “Embarkation of the Pilgrims,” which hangs in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda. This scene depicts the Pilgrims aboard the Speedwell, gathered in solemn prayer and reflection before departing Holland for the New World in 1620. It’s an intimate and poignant rendering of faith, courage, and thanksgiving, an overt spiritual moment that serves as a prelude to the holiday we now commemorate.

The engraving captures Governor John Carver, Elder William Brewster, and others, hands clasped, heads bowed, illuminated by the symbolic Light of Divine Providence shining through the ship’s window.

The level of detail is masterful, thanks to the expert hand of U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing artisans, making it not only a rare note, but a museum-worthy work of numismatic art.

Highlights:

• Series: 1918 Federal Reserve Note
• Denomination: $10,000
• Usage: For internal U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve Bank transactions only
• Reverse Design: “Embarkation of the Pilgrims,” after Robert W. Weir
• Obverse: Portrait of Salmon P. Chase, U.S. Treasury Secretary and Chief Justice
• Engraving Detail: Exceptional classical realism with historical fidelity
• Rarity: Extremely scarce; most specimens reside in institutions

Though practically unobtainable, the 1918 $10,000 note offers a powerful lens into the spiritual legacy of Thanksgiving, reminding us that before the feast came faith, and before the harvest came the voyage.

The post Thanksgiving Day Reflections Through Numismatics appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

Stack’s Bowers Galleries is proud to present its November 2025 Showcase Auction of United States Currency, presented in two sessions, both to be held on Thursday, November 13th.

Session 6 United States Currency

Starting at 12 PM PT, offers a selection of Colonial-era notes and a variety of Obsolete issues. Included is a rarely offered Remainder attributable to the “Imperial Government of Norton I” (Lot 6056) that likely went unissued owing to the “Emperor’s” death in 1880. Also of note is a Treasury Warrant issued by the Territory of Jefferson (now Colorado) during the 1850s (Lot 6067), which was last offered in the John J. Ford Collection, Part XX, in 2007.

Other highlights from Session 6 include:

• Lot 6044: VT-1. Vermont. February 1781. 1 Shilling. PMG Very Fine 20 Net. Severed & Reattached, Repaired. (Estimate $8,000 – $10,000).
• Lot 6045: CC-9. Continental Currency. May 10, 1775. $20. PMG Choice Very Fine 35. (Estimate $8,000 – $12,000).
• Lot 6192: San Jose, California. $10 1874. fR. 1148. Farmers National Gold Bank. cHARTER #2158. pmg VERY FINE 20. (Estimate $8,000 – $12,000).
• Lot 6197: Stockton, California. $10 1873. Fr. 1146. First National Gold Bank. Charter #2077. PMG Choice Fine 15. (Estimate $10,000 – $15,000).
• Lot 6228: St. Louis, Missouri. $100 1902 Red Seal. Fr. 686. Fourth NB. Charter #283. PMG Very Fine 25. (Estimate $8,000 – $12,000).

Session 7 – impressive assortment of type notes

From an exceptional pair of $100 Silver Certificates issued under the Series of 1880 (Lot 7117 & lot 7118) to one of the finest PMG graded $20 Gold Certificates issued under the Series of 1905 (Lot 7139), bidders will have no shortage of exciting opportunities when live bidding begins at 3 PM PT on Thursday afternoon.

Highlights from Session 7 also include:

• Lot 7047: Fr. 2405. 1928 $100 Gold Certificate. PCGS Banknote Gem Uncirculated 65 PPQ. (Estimate $30,000 – $50,000).
• Lot 7051: Fr. 2408. 1928 $1000 Gold Certificate. PMG Extremely Fine 40 EPQ. ($30,000 – $50,000).
• Lot 7076: Fr. 119. 1901 $10 Legal Tender Note. PCGS Banknote Superb Gem Uncirculated 67 PPQ. (Estimate $30,000 – $50,000).
• Lot 7090: Fr. 212. 1864 $50 Interest Bearing Note. PMG Very Fine 20. (Estimate $60,000 – $80,000).
• Lot 7129: Fr. 831. 1918 $50 Federal Reserve Bank Note. St. Louis. PCGS Banknote Choice Uncirculated 63. (Estimate $40,000 – $60,000).

The entire November 2025 Showcase Auction is available online for viewing and presale bidding at StacksBowers.com. To consign to a Stack’s Bowers Galleries auction call       800-458-4646 or email Consign@StacksBowers.com.

More coverage of Stack’s Bowers Auctions on CoinWeek

The post Fine Selection of U.S. Paper Rarities to be Offered in Stack’s Bowers Galleries’ November 2025 Showcase Auction appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

A Rare Survivor of America’s Ultra-High Denomination Currency, the 1934 $5000 Federal Reserve Note to be sold by GreatCollections

Overview & Description

The 1934 $5,000 Federal Reserve Note, being sold in the upcoming GreatCollections auction, cataloged as Fr. 2221-C (CA Block), is among the most elite and elusive issues in all of American currency. Issued by the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank and bearing the signatures of Treasurer W.A. Julian and Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, Jr., this note represents the zenith of high-denomination U.S. paper money ever produced for circulation.

Graded PMG About Uncirculated 50, this particular example offers collectors a rare opportunity to acquire a piece of monetary history that straddles the line between practical policy and numismatic legend. The note features bold ink, crisp paper, and only light evidence of handling,  placing it firmly within the upper tier of surviving $5,000 notes.

Historical Background

The $5,000 denomination has its roots in the 19th century but was most famously printed during the Series of 1934, amid the economic uncertainty following the Great Depression and in the lead-up to World War II. Alongside its even more mythical sibling, the $10,000 note,  the $5,000 bill was never intended for general public use. Instead, these notes were used strictly for large interbank transactions, typically moving behind the scenes between Federal Reserve Banks, commercial banks, and the U.S. Treasury.

Issued under the authority of Executive Order 6102, which removed the gold standard and centralized financial control during the Roosevelt administration, the 1934 high-denomination notes were part of an effort to modernize and regulate the banking system. Ironically, despite their colossal face value, these notes were printed in relatively modest numbers, and far fewer still have survived.

Today, fewer than 300 examples of the 1934 $5,000 note are known in all grades, with a much smaller subset bearing the “C” Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia designation and CA block letters. No 1928 series examples are known from Philadelphia, and this piece alongside only four other compatriots have come to light of the original 3,000 note issuance.

A very pleasing specimen bearing no axial folds or pulls. The noted minor restoration points to the piece having been flattened at some point to restore some edge folding apparent in the top and bottom back margins. This was done with some care and clearly helped preserve the integrity of the edges.

A piece combining the appeal of a high denomination and the rarity of a difficult district the opportunity to obtain this example should not be missed as one may not come again for the foreseeable future.

About the Note: PMG AU-50

This GreatCollections example, certified About Uncirculated 50 by PMG, retains excellent color and crispness, with only minor handling keeping it from a higher uncirculated designation. The margins are well-centered, the green Treasury seal is vibrant, and the serial number, CA00000197A, indicates it was among the earliest sheets printed for the Philadelphia district.

AU-50 examples are rare and highly desirable, offering a balance between quality and affordability in a space where uncirculated examples can command well into six-figure territory. Importantly, many of the known survivors have been permanently withdrawn from the market and rest in long-term institutional collections or private vaults.

Monumental Money in a Digital World

The $5,000 note is, quite literally, a monument to a bygone era of American finance — when paper currency was king, and physical money still served as the backbone of the financial system. It represents a time when massive monetary transactions had to be executed physically, not electronically.

But beyond its economic function, the Fr. 2221-C note tells a story of evolution in both currency and trust. In the years after World War II, high-denomination notes became obsolete with the advent of wire transfers and digital banking. By 1969, the Treasury officially discontinued these notes due to lack of use, and many were destroyed in federal burnings to prevent hoarding, theft, or illicit financial use.

That destruction is precisely what makes this surviving PMG AU-50 Philadelphia note so extraordinary. Not only did it avoid the shredder, but it also emerged in a condition that speaks to careful preservation, either by a forward-thinking bank executive or an astute collector who recognized the future importance of such a rarity.

Today, this note stands as a trophy piece, not just for currency specialists, but for any collector drawn to the finest examples of American fiscal history.

Conclusion

Whether viewed as a tangible link to Roosevelt-era financial policy or a numismatic crown jewel, the 1934 $5,000 Fr. 2221-C Philadelphia note in PMG AU-50 condition is a museum-caliber artifact. It evokes awe, curiosity, and reverence, all the qualities that define the upper echelons of collectible paper money.

This GreatCollections Offering is one of the finest and most visually striking survivors from an almost mythical denomination, it holds a well-earned place among the most legendary issues in U.S. currency history.

This $5000 Note will be sold By GreatCollections on Sun, Nov 23, 2025 7:54:18 PM (Pacific Time) GC Item ID 1985042

* * *

Want more stories like this? Sign up for the CoinWeek newsletter and never miss a rare discovery, auction highlight, or collector deep-dive.

The post 1934 $5,000 Philadelphia Note (Fr. 2221-C CA Block) to be sold by GreatCollections Nov 23rd appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.

By Heinz Tschachler …..

When in the early 1990s the United States was getting ready to commemorate the quincentennial of Christopher Columbus first landing on the Caribbean island of Guanahani, a bill was proposed that would eliminate the cent and the half-dollar and create a new small-dollar coin bearing a portrait of the discoverer (Wilcox, 1006-7).

Nothing ever came of this, though in November 1991 the United States Mint announced its plan for a “500 Years of Discovery Medal” for the U.S. Christopher Columbus Quincentenary Jubilee Commission. A year later, the Mint released a half-dollar commemorative coin. Designed by T. James Ferrell, the coin’s obverse shows Columbus at landfall; in the background is the Santa Maria and a smaller ship with the crew disembarking. The coin’s reverse shows Columbus’ flotilla of three ships.

The half-dollar is part of a set of three commemorative coins–a silver dollar designed by John Mercanti, which shows, on the obverse, a standing Columbus with a banner in his right hand and a scroll in his left; on the reverse, designed by Thomas D. Rogers, Sr., is a jarring juxtaposition of the Santa Maria and the Space Shuttle Discovery; a half eagle (a $5 gold coin) bears a Columbus profile bust against the eastern shoreline of the Western hemisphere on the obverse (created by T. James Ferrell) and a chart with a compass rose overlapping the western Old World with the date 1492, and Columbus’ coat of arms on the reverse (the work of Thomas D. Rogers, Sr.) (Vermeule, 206).

Emitting the coins at best was a half-hearted endeavor, done in order not to fall behind international practice (Spain, Portugal, and Italy–as well as the Bahamas, Colombia, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Cuba, Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, and other Latin American countries already had produced their commemoratives^[1]).

Worse, sales figures were more than modest: of the six million pieces minted, only some 600,000 were sold to the public. Most of the coins were later melted down. The economic failure of the coin shows that in the United States there was not then much to write home about Columbus’ numismatic presence, and the 1992 commemorative did little to improve the situation^[2].

The quincentennial of Columbus’ death, in 2005, did not occasion any numismatic activity on the part of the Mint, and the six-hundredth anniversary of Columbus’ birth, presumably in 1451, seems too far in the future to make any predictions.

You won’t find it in the public literature surrounding the quincentennial, but Columbus had been a popular motif on coins, currency, and medals (almost 270 altogether) in the 19th century. And beginning with Independence, he became a cultural investment throughout the new nation, an ideal founding figure visible in the arts, literature and, lest one forgets, place and event names, from the Columbia River to the World’s Columbian Exhibition in Chicago in 1892.

How, then, to explain the flagging interest in the great discoverer?

In the remainder of this essay, I will probe the following two reasons for Columbus’ decline in the American nation’s collective memory.

One, there is not a single portrait of Columbus that was taken from life. Portraits that generally passed for those of the discoverer were either pictures of his son Don Diego Columbus or purely fantasy products. Moreover, by the middle of the 19th century, the use of photographs became standard for illustrations in printed media and banknote and coin production. Increasingly, designers would think twice about using purely imaginary Columbus portraits–especially on new notes. As of the 1920s, there was no longer a place on American currency for the discoverer, whose portrait had appeared together with George Washington’s on a one-dollar note of 1869.

Two, the problem of an authentic Columbus portrait was, however, a minor issue in comparison with larger societal and cultural trends. Columbus was a Genoese in the service of the Spanish crown. By the end of the 19th century, this fact was being held against the discoverer. Strong nativist sentiments had emerged against newcomers from Southern and Eastern Europe, and concomitantly, Columbus’ status as an important figure of social cohesiveness was challenged.

And opposition to Columbus Day, which began in earnest with the quincentennial of 1892, has not gone away. As of the final years of the 20th century, the opposition, initially led by Native Americans and later expanded upon by left-leaning activists, has decried the actions taken, both by Columbus and other Europeans, against indigenous populations in the Americas. This opposition reached a new peak in June 2020, when protesters damaged Columbus statues in Richmond, Virginia; Boston, Massachusetts; and St. Paul, Minnesota.

The Problem of an Authentic Portrait of Christopher Columbus

American author Washington Irving, who in 1828 published an authoritative Columbus biography that secured the explorer’s place in narratives of America’s historical progress, had found to his chagrin that the portraits that generally passed for those of Columbus were actually portraits of Columbus’ son Don Diego.^[3].

Irving then settled, half-heartedly, for a portrait painted by one Antonio Moro. The portrait, from an old volume of Italian engravings, was favored by Irving’s contacts in Spain, which included Martín Fernández de Navarrete, the author of a collection of Columbus-related documents called Colección de los viajes y descubrimientos, and the Duke of Veragua. Irving included the painting in the abridgment published by Murray of London in 1830^[4].

Irving’s next finding, in 1829, was a late 16th-century portrait by one Aliprando Caprioli; he had it copied but was equally unconvinced about the “authenticity of the likeness”^[5].

The problem of an accurate likeness concerned Irving for the next twenty-some years.

Writing to William Cullen Bryant in December of 1851, he discusses more than half a dozen alleged Columbus portraits, though he adds a note of resignation:

“I know of no portrait extant which is positively known to be authentic.”

He finally settled for a portrait by the Spanish artist Juan de Borgoña, knowing full well that this likeness, too, might have been “purely imaginary”^[6].

Depictions of Columbus on 19th-century currency notes likewise were fantasy products, including those based on a 16th-century portrait by Francesco Mazzola Parmigianino or on a 17th-century painting by Mariano Maella^[7].

At the time, use of photographs had become standard for banknote production (President Lincoln’s portrait, based on Christopher S. German’s photograph, in an engraving by Charles Burt, had appeared on $10 Demand notes in 1861)^[8], so why print “purely imaginary” Columbus portraits on new notes?

In the long run, Columbus gradually disappeared from currency notes.

However, as the quatercentenary of 1892 was approaching, an early 16th-century painting of a beardless man of learning, attributed to Lorenzo Lotto, was accorded something like official support, possibly because it somehow matches the description by Columbus’ second son and biographer Fernando^[9]. It was thought that Lotto’s portrait of 1512, which had served for a Spanish medal, was to be the choice for the American half dollar.

Yet neither this likeness (which shows a cleanshaven man with an almost monk-like appearance who holds, in one hand, a conically projected map of Brazil) nor a plumper one by Sebastiano del Piombo was taken from life. Instead, they are thought to be copied after the sketch of an unknown artist working in Rome about 1500. A claim by the Chicago businessman C. F. Gunther that the Antonio Moro painting in his possession was the only genuine portrait of Columbus in existence was ignored.

The dilemma was resolved when the United States Mint forwarded an etching by F. Focillon, which in turn was based on a painting by Bartolomeo Suardi (aka Bramantino), in the possession of a Dr. di Orchi of Como, and hung in the Naval Museum, Madrid^[10].

Also in 1892, a Henri-Emile Lefort published an etching titled Christophorus Columbus (New York: M. Knoedler, 1892). The etching, presumed to be based on an anonymous portrait in the Naval Museum at Madrid (it does look similar to the Focillon etching), was later used as the frontispiece for the Complete Works edition of Irving’s A History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus^[11].

Until the Civil War, depictions of Columbus on banknotes were mostly based on Parmigianino’s painting.

One reason is that once a vignette was engraved, it was offered to as many banks as possible in order to make up for the original outlay.

Gene Hessler, in “Capturing the True Columbus”, has identified bills from 10 states that used the Parmigianino portrait as a model:

• The Ansonia Bank, Seymour, CT ($5, H-CT-5-G8 and G8a, 1862)
• The Bank of America ($5, not listed in Haxby) and the Tolland County Bank, Tolland, CT ($10, H-CT-430-G64, 1840s)
• Bank of Augusta, Augusta, GA ($1, H-GA-30-G26, mid-1840s to early ’50s) and Exchange Bank, Brunswick, GA ($10, H-GA-95-G8, 1840s)
• New Orleans Canal & Banking Company, New Orleans, LA ($10, H-LA-105-G22a, late 1840s)
• Kenduskeag Bank, Bangor, ME ($5, H-ME-85-G36, late 1840s)
• Cochituate Bank, Boston, MA ($100, H-MA-130-G16, 1849 to early 1850s); Suffolk Bank, Boston, MA ($5, H-MA-370-G100 and G100b, late 1850s 1860s)
• Piscataqua Exchange Bank, Portsmouth, NH ($5, H-NH-285-G8, 1840s to ’60s)
• Bank of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ ($1, H-NJ-345-G2a and G20a-d, early 1850s, and see below); Somerset County Bank, Somerville, NJ ($50, H-NJ-500-G14 and G14c, 1848-1860s); and State Bank of Elizabeth, Elizabeth, NJ ($5, H-NJ-120-G40 and G40b, 1850s-1860s)
• Bank of Owego, Owego, New York ($1, H-NY-2155-G22 and G22a-d, late 1840s-’60s, and see below); Henry Keep’s Bank, Watertown, NY ($1, H-2860-G2 and G2a, 1840s); Commercial Bank of Troy, Troy, NY ($50, H-NY-2690-G28 and G28a-b, 1840s-1860s)
• Lehigh County Bank, Allentown, PA ($5, H-PA-20-G8, early 1840s) and The Miners Bank of Pottsville, Pottsville, PA ($20, H-PA-575-G32, 1840s-1850s, and see below)
• Mechanics Bank, Providence, RI ($20, H RI-340-G36, 1850s); New England Commercial Bank, Newport, RI ($2, H-RI-155-G40, 1850s); and National Bank, Providence, RI ($10, H-RI-360-G58 G58a-b, 1860s)

Small engravings of the so-called “Muñoz portrait“–so-named after its first appearance as the frontispiece in Juan Bautista Muñoz’ Historia del Nuevo-Mundo (Madrid, 1793)–were also used on a number of obsolete bank notes, including:

• The Real Estate Bank of the State of Arkansas, Columbia, AR ($10, H-AR-5-G32)
• The Commercial Bank of Florida, Apalachicola, FL ($2, H-FL-5-G4, 1830s)
• The Augusta Insurance & Banking Company, Augusta, GA ($100, H GA-35-G50, ca. 1828-’40s) and The Merchants and Planters Bank, Augusta, GA ($100, H GA-65-G52)
• The New Jersey Manufacturing & Banking Company, Hoboken, NJ (H-NJ-210: $1, G4 and G4a-b; $3, G26; $5, G38 and G38a; $10, G42 and G42a; $20, G44a and G46; $50, G50; $100, G54, all from the 1820s; the image is reversed on the $20, $50, and $100 notes)
• The Mississippi & Alabama Rail Road Company, Brandon, MS ($5, H-MS25-G8 and G8a-b, late 1830s)^[12]

The portrait, which Mariano Maella probably painted about a century after Columbus’ death, shows a bearded man in armor and a ruff of the 17th century. Bearing no resemblance to descriptions of Columbus’ person, it is just as fanciful as others of its kind^[13].

A great many currency notes bearing Columbus’ portrait came from banks that bore Columbus in their names. Early examples are $5 notes issued by the Columbiana Bank of New Lisbon, New Lisbon, Ohio, in the 1830s. The central vignette, which depicts an agrarian scene, is flanked by unidentified portraits of Columbus^[14].

In the 1840s, the Columbian Bank, Boston, Massachusetts, issued Columbus notes in several denominations: the $5 notes had as their central vignette the landing of Columbus, a motif that was also used, from the late 1850s, for the $500 notes; on the $10 notes, an unidentified portrait of Columbus appears at right; the identical portrait was used, with an additional portrait of George Washington at left, for the $100 notes in the 1860s^[15].

The landing of Columbus also appeared on $1 notes issued in the late 1850s by the Bank of Columbus, Columbus, Wisconsin. Other denominations from this bank also bear portraits (after Parmigianino) of the seafarer^[16].

A large number of banks had “Columbia” or similar denominations as part of their names, though they did not necessarily issue notes depicting Columbus: the fraudulent, possibly non-existent Columbia Bank, Washington, D.C. (H-DC-195); The City Bank of Columbus, Columbus, Ohio (H-OH-170); the Bank of Columbus, Columbus, Georgia (H-GA-105), etc.

Still other banks had no reference to the seafarer in their names though they printed Columbus on their notes. Some of these banks have been mentioned, but prime examples, especially on account of the striking orange coloring on the back and the Parmigianino portrait in the center, were the $100 notes from the Citizen’s Bank of Louisiana (on the notes’ front a decidedly “Roman” bust of George Washington is surrounded by three scantily clad female allegories).

Less spectacular examples came from the Market Bank, Boston, MA, which in the 1830s issued $50 notes bearing an unidentified portrait of Columbus at right, with the numeral 50 above and below^[17].

Also in the 1830s, the Bank of Grenada, Mississippi, and the Bank of Wilmington and Brandywine, Wilmington, Delaware, emitted $100 notes bearing as their central vignette Columbus standing, with his crew and Native Americans at a huge cross^[18].

A Parmigianino portrait also graced $5 notes from the Tolwanda Bank, Tolwanda, Pennsylvania, in the 1840s. A framed Parmigianino portrait of a Renaissance-type Columbus, flanked by two females, appeared on $1 notes from the Bank of Owego, Owego, New York, during the 1840s and ’50s. The same portrait was printed on $1 notes from the Bank of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, and the Peoples Bank, Carmi, Illinois, both in the early 1850s.

Unidentified framed portraits of Columbus also appeared on $2 notes from the Newport Bank, Newport, Rhode Island, in the 1820s and ’30s; from the Brunswick Bank, Brunswick, Maine, in the late 1840s; from the Mechanics & Traders Bank, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, the Warwick Bank, Warwick, Rhode Island, the White River Bank, Bethel, Vermont and the Bank of Brattleboro, Brattleboro, Vermont, in the 1850s; and from the Monadnock Bank, Jaffrey, New Hampshire, in the 1850s and ’60s^[19].

Likewise in the 1840s, the Canal Bank, New Orleans, Louisiana, issued $10 notes bearing a Parmigianino portrait of Columbus at left, with the numeral 10 placed above and below^[20].

Finally, the Boylston Bank, Boston, Massachusetts, in the 1840s and ’50s issued $10 notes with portraits both of George Washington and Christoph Columbus. Washington (flanked by a winged angel) and Columbus (after Parmigianino) were likewise put on $20 notes from the Miners Bank of Pottsville, Pottsville, Pennsylvania; in the 1860s, the Columbian Bank, Boston, Massachusetts, issued $100 notes with the identical double fare^[21].

$100 notes from the Lime Rock Bank, East Thomaston, Maine, had ONE HUNDRED written across the numeral 100, with an unidentified portrait of Columbus below^[22]. The identical design appeared on $100 notes from the Wrentham Bank, Wrentham, Massachusetts, in the 1840s-’50s^[23].

A rare fractional note, emitted by the Keystone Mills, Highland, Florida, likewise shows a Parmigianino portrait of Columbus:

After the era of private money, the new national currency–a wartime expediency–was to show scenes that would represent noteworthy events from the still-young nation’s founding history. All designs were to put as much distance between the country’s hard-won independence and its former British rule.

In the eyes of the authorities, Christopher Columbus symbolized the New World, not the Old. The discoverer was an ideal founding figure, and representations of him–portraits as well as historical scenes–can be found on several types of federal notes^[24]. National Banknotes (and National Gold Banknotes of California) showed, in chronological order, Columbus discovering land and the landing of Columbus.

Another Columbus scene appeared on the $5 National Bank Notes, Original Series (1863-1875) and Series 1875 (1875 to 1902), and the $5 National Gold Bank Notes, Original Series. The vignette on the front is like the one on the 1869 United States note, and it is also called “Columbus in Sight of Land” (however, the engraving is by Charles Burt, after Charles Fenton’s design; more of this anon). The discovery of new land is at left. The vignette (which Louis Delnoce engraved after Charles Fenton) shows Columbus as the principal figure on deck of his caravel, thus depicting the moment of dramatic climax in the explorer’s life. At right, we see Columbus introducing America in the form of an Indian female to her three sisters of the Old World—Europe, Asia, and Africa (W.W. Rice adapted a painting by T.A. Liebler, America Presented to the Old World).

On the back of the notes is James Bannister’s version of John Vanderlyn’s The Landing of Columbus at the Island of Guanahani, West Indies, October 12, 1492, the monumental history painting from the national Capitol that shows the seafarer and discoverer standing in a triumphant pose on the beach of Guanahani, surrounded by his men^[25]. The bills became tremendously popular.

However, they were counterfeited so widely (an estimated $200,000 were in circulation before the forgers were caught) that the Treasury Department initiated a design change with the Second Charter in 1882. On the new notes, Columbus was replaced by James Garfield, who had been assassinated in 1881.

$1,000 United States notes (Series of 1869, 1878, 1880) likewise depicted Columbus. In these instances, he is shown in his study, seated, his legs crossed, and dressed in what were thought to be contemporary garments–a tunic, tights, and cloak. He is holding a piece of paper in one hand, while he contemplates the earth on the ground to his right. Next to the terrestrial globe is a map and a magnifying glass. The vignette, placed at left on the note’s face, conveys an image of learning and erudition, together with Columbus’ abilities as a navigator, his visionary courage and genius, and his conviction that the earth was not flat.

Columbus’ virtues, the note suggests, lived on in DeWitt Clinton, United States Senator, Mayor of New York City, and Governor of New York, in which capacity he was largely responsible for the construction of the Erie Canal, finished in 1825. His portrait is in the note’s center^[26].

Probably the most compelling Columbus note is the $1 United States (Legal Tender) Note from 1869. Known among collectors as the “Rainbow” note because of its blue-tinted paper and colorful overprintings of red and light green, it carries a portrait of George Washington (engraved by Alfred Sealey from the famous Athenaeum painting by Gilbert Stuart) and a vignette showing Christopher Columbus in sight of land. The Columbus vignette was done by Joseph P. Ourdan after a painting by Christian (sometimes called Charles) Schussele, Columbus, Discovery of Land. It shows a bearded captain among his crew. Columbus is wearing a tunic, knee breeches, and a mantle. A few of the sailors are jubilant, if not ecstatic, pointing toward the land in the background. Others are on their knees, praying, their eyes on the captain. Columbus is depicted in an upright position, looking dignified and self-confident, his right hand over the heart. The emphasis in the representation clearly is on Columbus’ heroic character as well as on the epochal moment of discovery.

The $1 United States note of 1869 is an artistic and technical success, justly chosen for the cover of Q. David Bowers’ Whitman Encyclopedia of U.S. Paper Money. But it was its ideological message which proved tone-setting. The note’s composition—Washington’s portrait in the center, looking at Columbus at left—suggests both a chronological and a causal relationship between the face of the nation and the momentous event of October 12, 1492.

Claudia Bushman has termed this relation the “Columbus-Washington-Connection”. The “connection” constitutes the basis of a larger cultural narrative, with Columbus and Washington as the main protagonists.

Put simply, the narrative suggests that Washington became the Father of His Country because Columbus had discovered the New World for the Americans^[27]. The narrative continued to be an important element in the popular imagination, as the design was kept for subsequent series, in 1874, as well as for several series from 1875 to 1917 (all with the “sawhorse reverse”, so-called because the inscription “United States of America” was set in a flattened “X” reminiscent of a sawhorse).

It also had a spectacular comeback on the back of the $5 Federal Reserve Note, series 1914, and on the Federal Reserve Bank Note, series 1915 and 1918 (on these notes, we see Columbus in sight of land at left, and the landing of the Pilgrims at right; the front is graced by a portrait of Lincoln)^[28].

The arrangement, in 1869, of Founding Father of the new nation (an American of the present) and discoverer of the continent (a man of the European past) provided ideological stability and comfort for a nation that had been ravaged by the Civil War. The beginning of the “Columbus-Washington-Connection” must be sought in the War of Independence, though. Then Columbus was used to legitimize the rebellion against England, the mother country. Although the navigator himself had been convinced that he had reached India, he was nonetheless found serviceable as the protagonist of a counter-narrative against prevailing myths–of pious puritans as well as of noble cavaliers. Thus, the discoverer in the service of the Spanish kings transmogrified into an “American” hero, if not a messiah^[29]. His voyages along the coasts of the Americas came to both reflect and anticipate the settlement, putatively ordained by God, by the English colonists.

Columbus was popular not just in numismatics and banknote production. He became a cultural investment throughout the new nation. As early as 1792, the Tammany Society of New York and the Massachusetts Historical Society in Boston celebrated the 300th anniversary of Columbus’ landing. Five years before, in 1787, the poet Joel Barlow published his epic poem The Vision of Columbus (it grew into the much more expansive Columbiad by 1807). William Dunlap’s play The Glory of Columbia was first performed in 1803^[30]. Noah Webster’s American Spelling Book ended with two pages of important dates in American history, beginning with Columbus’ discovery of America in 1492 and ending with the Battle of Yorktown in 1781. Horatio Greenough’s 12-ton marble statue of George Washington was commissioned in 1832, the year of the centennial of the founder’s birth. Small flanking figures of an American Indian and Christopher Columbus represent the New and the Old World^[31].

By 1850, three major biographies and histories of Columbus had been published, attesting to the discoverer’s prestige. The books’ authors–Washington Irving (1828), George Bancroft (1834), and William Hickling Prescott (1837)—did not see Columbus as a man of a remote past, but rather as a romantic hero and pioneer, one to help legitimate westward expansion, a harbinger of civilization and the modern era.

Irving’s History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus became spectacularly successful, especially among the general public. New editions were published almost every year until 1850, then about every two or three years. Altogether, there were about 175 editions from 1828 until 1900, some of them expressly for the use as schoolbooks^[32]. And that is not counting the many translations–into Spanish, French, German, Dutch, Greek, Italian, Polish, Swedish, and Russian–made before Irving’s death in 1859.

By the time Columbus was being prepared for Irving’s Complete Works edition in 1980, the biography had seen almost 200 editions.

“Few books in modern times,” Andrew Burstein writes, “have had such a reach, or such an impact.”^[33] The work, especially the one-volume abridgment of it that Irving first published in 1829, was the most popular biography of Columbus in the English language until the publication of Samuel Eliot Morison’s Admiral of the Ocean Sea in 1942^[34].

Name-giving was another cultural investment.

“Columbia” had been a poetic denomination already for the North American colonies. Following the colonists’ victory at Yorktown, New York’s “King’s College” was renamed “Columbia College” (it became Columbia University in 1896). South Carolina’s new capital became Columbia. The area of the new federal capital became “Territory of Columbia”, later “District of Columbia.” There are other place names galore, such as Columbus, Mississippi, or Columbus, Ohio; and there is the Columbia River, reached by Lewis and Clark in 1805. New York’s Columbia Avenue was opened in 1892. In the same year, the World’s Columbian Exposition was dedicated in Chicago (it opened only in 1893, because of delays)^[35].

On the occasion of the World’s Columbian Exposition, the United States Mint produced a half-dollar coin bearing a portrait of Columbus. It was the very first U.S. coin bearing the portrait of a historic person as well as the first official commemorative coin.

The Columbus half-dollar, of which some five million examples were struck for the Exposition, was a complete failure.

The coins would be sold for $1 each and were expected to raise some $10 million. While many were sold at the fair, countless others remained in Treasury vaults and subsequently had to be released for circulation at their face value.

Already before the coins were even designed, there had been objections. Senator John Sherman of Ohio claimed that the enormous number of the coins “would destroy their value as souvenirs.” Senator William Allison of Iowa surmised that too many “children would cry for them, and the old men would demand them,” so that the coins would be “withdrawn from circulation and fall into a condition of innocuous desuetude.”^[36]

Artistically, there also is not much to write home about. Both the obverse (designed by Olin Lewis Warner and engraved by Charles E. Barber) and the reverse (created by George T. Morgan) display the academicism fostered by the Mint in Philadelphia.

The public reception too was anything but glowing. “… it will pass,” was all that the New York Press had to say, while the Boston Globe observed that to look at the coin will make one “regret that Columbus wasn’t a better looking man.” The Philadelphia Ledger noted, “If it were not known in advance whose vignette adorns the Columbian souvenir half dollar, the average observer would be undecided as to whether it is intended to represent Daniel Webster or Henry Ward Beecher.”^[37]

But if the 1892 half-dollar was “a great disappointment” as a work of art, then the official medal for the Chicago fair was its exact opposite.

The obverse, the creation of no less an artist than Augustus Saint-Gaudens, who completed the design only at the fair’s closing in November 1893, shows an exuberant Columbus striding ashore on an island in the New World. Yet unlike Ourdan’s vignette on the 1869 note, on the Saint-Gaudens obverse, the other participants are kept away from the center, appearing at lower right (there are three male figures, one bearing an unfurling banner, and above are them the Pillars of Hercules [the Straits of Gibraltar] with three Spanish caravels and the inscription plus ultra, “more beyond”). The medal is dominated by a transfigured Columbus, arms extended, palms turned upward, and eyes to the sky.

With all the details centered around the powerful emotions of the discoverer, the composition becomes a complete entity, breathing, in the words of art historian Cornelius Vermeule, “mastery of the human figure over a limited area made interesting by variations in surface planes.”

Saint-Gaudens also created a reverse design, though his models were rejected–the combined result, the sculptor’s son later explained, of Victorian naughtiness and prudery. Instead, Charles E. Barber’s design was chosen for the reverse^[38].

At the Chicago fair, Columbus also was commemorated through a replica of the Santa Maria anchored in the lake, a copy of the convent of La Rabida, a triumphal arch topped by a quadriga showing Columbus standing in a Roman chariot drawn by four horses, as well as any number of elongated souvenir coins and, to display the United States’ technological progress, medals and tokens made from aluminum^[39].

Numismatic tributes to the quincentennial also came from around the world.

A French medal, modeled by W. Mayer after the U.S. Columbian two-cent stamp, depicts the landing on its obverse. Clad in armor, Columbus wields a sword in his right hand; a group of his fellow adventurers stands behind him. The inscription reads “Dedicated to the American People in Honor of the 400th Anniversary of the Discovery of America” and, below, “United We Stand Divided We Fall.” The reverse features a high-relief bust of Liberty encircled by stars, with the 1892 date below^[40].

Another medal was produced in Milan, Italy. Known as the Milan medal, the original issue of this rare beauty was 102 mm in diameter and struck in bronze and white metal. It portrays a bust of Columbus on its obverse with allegorical figures of an Indian Princess and a draped Liberty around the sides clasping hands under a globe. The inscription “Cristoforo Colombo” surrounds the bust. The reverse shows the shields of a number of American states around a scene filled with allegorical figures. The United States Capitol at Washington and the Brooklyn Bridge can be seen in the background^[41].

Questioning Columbus’ Significance

The years of the Columbian celebrations are customarily regarded as the apex of the explorer’s popularity. In 1892, 400 years after Columbus’ first voyage, President Benjamin Harrison first proclaimed Columbus Day a national holiday.

Yet 1892 also was the year when Columbus’ descent began.

Howard Kretschmar’s monumental Columbus statue at Lakefront Park (today’s Grant Park) had been unveiled with much fanfare, yet it was almost immediately considered offensive and eventually taken down, replaced by a statue of William McKinley, the martyred president.

In other respects, too, Columbus was at best the eminence grise of Chicago. Already at the fair, which was attended by more than 27 million people between May 1 and October 30, 1893, the significance of the seafarer and his discovery for the progress of the American nation was being questioned by historians like Justin Winsor, Eugene Lawrence, and Charles Francis Adams. In their wake, the discovery itself was credited to any number of individual explorers or groups—from Leif Ericson to the Portuguese to the Chinese to the Basques^[42].

In themselves, these questionings were only symptoms of a deeper social conflict: the growing ethnic and cultural diversity of American society during the era of the New Immigration, 1880-1925, when some 25 million people arrived in the U.S^[43]. During those years, strong nativist sentiments emerged against newcomers from Southern and Eastern Europe; concomitantly, Columbus’ status as an important figure of social cohesiveness was challenged. While the Italian community continued to claim him as their hero, his significance for the symbolic constitution of the American nation was in steady decline at the same time as an emphasis on a distinctly American past was given more and more weight.

“Emphasis on a distinctly American past” was the hidden or not-so-hidden agenda in the great currency reform of the 1920s.

The figures are impressive: between 1863 and 1929 more than 160 different types, classes, and varieties of federal banknotes were put in circulation. By 1929, the number was cut in half; as of 1930, only 15 were left. As for portraits, they were limited to those of “the Presidents of the United States”. This was the work of a special committee installed by Treasury Secretary Andrew W. Mellon, which had decided that such portraits “have a more permanent familiarity in the minds of the public than any others.”^[44]

Never mind that the word “presidents” is somewhat of a misnomer, as neither Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, nor Salmon P. Chase ever served as president. What is important is that by 1929, “all historical scenes of national significance had disappeared from American paper money and with them all depictions of Columbus’ great discovery.”^[45]

Instead, the currency, the “state’s calling cards”^[46], mirroring the values the state represents, such as stability, continuity, and resilience to crises, was graced by national heroes—such as Lincoln, whose portrait replaced Columbus on the $5 Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve Bank notes (until 1929, the back still showed Columbus’ landing, juxtaposed to the landing of the Pilgrims; it was then replaced by the Lincoln Memorial, which had been opened in 1922).

It is not that Christopher Columbus–or Cristoforo Colombo, as the Italians knew him–was completely eliminated from America’s cultural memory.

Columbus may have lost his status as an American national hero, but the Italian American community in particular considered Columbus’ landing as part of their heritage.

There had been private celebrations of a “Festa di Colombo” in Chicago in the 1840s, though the first public celebration was held in New York City on October 12, 1866^[47]. Celebrating the achievements of the “Almirante de la Mar Océana” (the “Admiral of the Ocean Sea”, a title Columbus had received from King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, Los Reyes Católicos) continued. Columbus Day was first enshrined as a legal holiday in the United States through the lobbying of Angelo Noce, a first-generation Italian American, in Denver. Colorado governor Jesse F. McDonald proclaimed it a statewide holiday in 1905; it was made a statutory holiday in 1907. Again in 1907, a Columbus Memorial was commissioned in Washington, DC, thanks to the persistent lobbying of the Knights of Columbus.

Designed by sculptor Lorado Z. Taft of Chicago, the monument consists of a semi-circular fountain, at the center of which is a pylon crowned with a globe supported by four eagles connected by a garland. A 15-foot statue of Columbus, facing the U.S. Capitol and wrapped in a mantle, stands in front of the pylon. Flanking Columbus are two seated allegorical figures representing the Old and the New World.

The inscription reads:

“TO | THE MEMORY OF CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS | WHOSE HIGH FAITH | AND INDOMITABLE COURAGE | GAVE TO MANKIND | A NEW WORLD.”

The monument was unveiled on June 8, 1912, under the presence of President William Taft^[48]. Since then, the National Columbus Day Celebration Association and the National Park Service have been honoring Columbus’ achievements by co-hosting a Columbus Day celebration at the Memorial.

The Knights of Columbus continued to be active in other avenues as well, annually emitting a medal to be sold to those joining in the parade in celebration of Columbus Day in Massachusetts. Columbus Day had been established as a holiday in that state in 1910. The 1911 medal, for instance, has a square tablet topped by a Columbus bust on its obverse; at left are the three caravels, at right a modern ocean steamer, an airplane above it, symbolic of the changed conditions of navigation. The medal’s reverse shows a laurel wreath enveloping a lighted torch, entwined with a ribbon scroll with 1492 at left and 1911 at right. Below is the inscription: COLUMBUS DAY | MASSACHUSETTS | OCTOBER 12, 1911^[49].

In 1934, President Franklin D. Roosevelt designated the Giornata Nazionale de Cristoforo Colombo, that is, October 12, as Columbus Day. In 1966, Mariano A. Lucco, from Buffalo, New York, founded the National Columbus Day Committee, which lobbied to make Columbus Day a federal holiday. These efforts were successful, and October 12 became a federal holiday in 1968. This was changed in 1971 when Columbus Day was set on the second Monday in October (it is purely coincidental that in 2020 that day is October 12; next year’s Columbus Day will be celebrated on October 11).

Columbus Day is generally observed nowadays by banks, the bond market, the U.S. Postal Service and other federal agencies, most state government offices, many businesses, and most school districts. Actual observance, however, varies in different parts of the United States, and most states do not celebrate Columbus Day as an official state holiday. Some states, among them Hawaii and South Dakota, have replaced it with celebrations of Indigenous People’s Day.

American cities too are eschewing Columbus Day to celebrate Indigenous People’s Day. Beginning with Berkeley, CA, in 1992, the year of the quincentennial, the list now includes Austin, TX; Boise, Idaho; Los Angeles; Portland, Oregon; Seattle; and dozens of other cities. Two surveys conducted in 2013 and 2015 found that 26 to 38 percent of American adults are not in favor of celebrating Columbus Day.

Opposition to Columbus Day dates back to at least the late 19th century when anti-immigrant nativists fought its celebration because of its association with immigrants from Catholic countries, most notably Italy, as well as with the American Catholic fraternal organization, the Knights of Columbus. Anti-Catholics like the Ku Klux Klan opposed celebrations of Columbus or monuments about him because they believed that it would increase Catholic influence in the United States.^[50].

But by far, the most widespread opposition began in the final years of the 20th century.

This opposition, which decries the actions taken by Columbus and other Europeans against the indigenous populations of the Americas, was initially led by Native Americans and later expanded upon by left-leaning activists. It was at a gathering of Native Americans in Davis, California, that October 12, 1992, was declared to be the “International Day of Solidarity with Indigenous People“^[51].

Columbus Day celebrations and the myths surrounding the discoverer, some critics have said, only mask the ongoing actions and injustices against Native Americans. Anthropologist Jack Weatherford even declared, in 2016, that on Columbus Day, Americans celebrate “one of the greatest waves of genocide known in history.”^[52]

Columbus’s character also did not escape criticism.

He was certainly a brilliant navigator, yet Columbus never hesitated to exploit and enslave the indigenous population.

Washington Irving in 1829 could still exempt Columbus from the charge of the discoverers’ “excesses”, laying the blame on his followers–villains like Roldán, Bobadilla, and Porras^[53]. Norman Solomon, in Columbus Day: A Clash of Myth and History (1995), has no patience for Irving’s “double standard”, which upheld the myth of Columbus’ “sound policy and liberal views”.

Solomon quotes from Columbus’ initial description in his logbook (“They would make fine servants …”) and, at greater length, from Bartolomé de las Casas’ multivolume Historia de las Indias, which describes the discoverers as driven by “insatiable greed,” leading to “killing, terrorizing, and torturing the native peoples” with unspeakable cruelty^[54]

Criticism of Columbus reached a new peak when on June 9, 2020, protesters tore down the Columbus statue in downtown Richmond, Virginia, following a peaceful demonstration outside of the statue in honor of indigenous people. The statue was ripped from its foundation, spray painted, set on fire, and subsequently thrown in a lake.

Statues of Columbus were also damaged in other places. Outside the State Capitol in St. Paul, Minnesota, protesters tied ropes around the statue’s neck and yanked it from its pedestal, while in Boston, the head of a Columbus statue was removed overnight. But these acts need to be seen in the context of the wave of protests initially set off by the murder of George Floyd.

Directed at first toward monuments to the Confederacy, the rage expanded to encompass a swath of imperialist or genocidal Europeans, including Columbus^[55] Predictably, President Trump’s response has been a bellicose executive order and aggressive intimidation of people who would “impede the purpose or function” of the monuments, memorials, and statues.

The issue is more complicated, though. As Susan Tallman recently argued, it is impossible to limit public art to works “whose subjects and styles are in lockstep with our own ethics; our museums would be empty if we did.”

On the other hand, it is equally impossible to ignore the reality that “certain forms of public display act as endorsements of the values of those who erected them. Classical sculptures could only be loved by Christians once the gods they represented had died. Robert E. Lee is not yet a dead god.”^[56]

Nor, of course, is Christopher Columbus.

But is Columbus Day really about the historical person? Or is it rather about the momentous, world-changing event that took place on a small island in the Caribbean on October 12, 1492?

Professor of History and Italian Studies William J. Connell thinks that the latter is the case, adding that what Columbus gets criticized for nowadays are “attitudes that were typical of the European sailing captains and merchants who plied the Mediterranean and the Atlantic in the 15th century.”^[57]

While these words are hardly sufficient to assuage the anger and sense of injustice among indigenous people, it is nevertheless true that Columbus Day does not commemorate Columbus’ birthday (as was the practice for Presidents Washington and Lincoln, and as is still done for Martin Luther King, Jr.). Nor does it commemorate his death date (which is when Christian saints and martyrs are memorialized), but rather the date of his arrival in the New World.

And that, Connell adds, was precisely the intention of the people who put together the Columbus Day celebrations of 1892.

When President Benjamin Harrison in that year proclaimed Columbus Day a national holiday, praising Columbus as “the pioneer of progress and Enlightenment”, it was part of a wider effort–after the massacre by U.S. troops of about 200 Lakota Sioux at Wounded Knee on December 29, 1890 and the March 14, 1891, lynching in a New Orleans prison of 11 Italians by a mob led by prominent Louisiana politicians–to placate Native Americans and Italian Americans. President Harrison in his opening speech did not allude to either the massacre or the lynching, though he made it clear that October 12, 1892, would be a national holiday recognizing both Native Americans, who were here before Columbus, and the many immigrants–Italians included–who were just then coming to the United States in astounding numbers. It was to be a national holiday that was not about the Founding Fathers or the Civil War, but about the rest of American history, about the land and all its people^[58]

During the anniversary in 1892, teachers, the clergy, poets, and politicians made use of various rituals to inculcate in people the ideals of patriotism. There were themes such as citizenship boundaries, social progress, and the importance of loyalty to the nation, brought to prominence by Francis Bellamy’s “Pledge of Allegiance”.

And there were parades.

In New York, about 12,000 public school students grouped into 20 regiments. The boys marched in school uniforms, while the girls, dressed in red, white, and blue, sat in bleachers. Also present were military drill squads and marching bands, some 5,500 students from the Catholic schools, as well as students from the private schools. These included the Hebrew Orphan Asylum, the Italian and American Colonial School, the Dante Alighieri Italian College, and the Carlisle Indian School in Pennsylvania. A college division brought together students from New York University and Columbia College (it was not yet Columbia University), who marched in white hats and white sweaters, with a message on top of their hats that spelled out “We are the People.”

For Connell, what follows from this is that “Columbus Day is for all Americans. It marks the first encounter that brought together the original Americans and future ones. A lot of suffering followed, and a lot of achievement too.”^[59]

One wonders: if Columbus Day really is for all Americans, then why are some groups not part of the picture? There surely has been enough suffering loaded upon them, much as there has been achievement.

* * *

Notes

[1] See Rulau, “Numismatic Recognition of the New World, 1770-72”, 1856-58.

[2] For the sake of completeness, the American Numismatic Society (ANS) produced a tasteful medal (available in silver, lead, and bronze), which showed, on the obverse, one of Columbus’ ships mirrored in a raised globe, and, on the reverse, an American eagle hovering over the globe: http://numismatics.org/collection/1992.136.1. The St. Augustine/St. Johns County (Florida) Columbus Commission also sanctioned a medal in recognition of the quincentennial. The obverse shows Columbus’ three ships heading out to sea; the reverse features, inter alia, a portrait of Don Pedro Menendez, a Spanish soldier who founded and named St. Augustine, the oldest city in North America. See The Numismatist, October 1992, 1365-66. In fact, the American Numismatic Association (ANA) dedicated the entire issue to the quincentennial. Apart from many feature articles, the front cover showed Charles Burt’s engraving of the 1892 coin as well as the Franklin Mint’s bronze 1992 calendar/art medal. Worth mentioning is also the 1992 souvenir card program of American Banknote Commemoratives (ABNC), which included many issues featuring Columbus bank notes, stamp dies, and admission tickets to the Chicago Fair of 1893. See ibid., 1387-88, and, for an illustration of admission tickets, some of which bore a portrait of Columbus, Schefler, “The World’s Columbian Exposition,” 58. For an authoritative book about Columbian Exposition paper memorabilia, see Doolin, 1893 Columbian Exposition Admission and Concession Tickets.

[3] Irving to Lady Granard, Madrid, May 7, 1827, CW-Letters, 2:235.

[4] Ibid., and 237n9.

[5] Irving to Prince Dmitri Dolgorouki, Seville, February 4 and March 11, 1829, ibid., 2:377- 78, 388; see also Irving’s letter to John Murray, his publisher, of February 14, 1829, ibid., 383.

[6] Irving to Bryant, December 26, 1851, ibid., 4:283. See a. Irving’s lengthy letter to Bryant of December 20, 1852, in Pierre M. Irving, The Life and Letters of Washington Irving, 4:93-96, as well as Ben Harris McClary, Washington Irving and the House of Murray (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1969), 115, and John Boyd Thacher, Christopher Columbus, His Life, His Work, His Remains, 3 vols. (1903-1904; repr. New York: AMS Press; 1967), 1:69- 70.

[7] Vermeule, Numismatic Art in America, 87-88, 230, and Hessler, “Capturing the True Columbus,” 1436-39. In the late 1850s, the “Parmigianino” Columbus was identified as the condottiere Galeazzo Sanvitale of Fontanello, Province of Parma:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:(formerly_thought_to_be)_Christopher_Columbus, _1451_-_1506_RMG_RP6231.jpg. For a fanciful illustration by F. O. C. Darley for a projected illustrated volume of Irving’s Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus, see The Worlds of Washington Irving, 54; the drawing, which shows a hardened and warlike Columbus kneeling on the beach of Guanahani, is available from the New York Public Library, Manuscript and Archives Division in the Duyckinck, Hellman, Seligman’s collections and Washington Irving Papers.

[8] Tschachler, The Greenback, 111.

[9] “The Admiral was a well-built man of more than average stature, the face long, the cheeks somewhat high, his body neither fat nor lean. He had an aquiline nose and light-colored eyes. His complexion too was light and tending to bright red. In youth his hair was blond, but when he reached the age of thirty, it all turned white.” Ferdinand Columbus, The Life of the Admiral Christopher Columbus by His Son Ferdinand, 9.

[10] Vermeule, Numismatic Art in America, 87-88, 230, and Curtis, Christopher Columbus, item 25; for a different genealogy of the portrait used for the Columbian half dollar, see Schefler, “The World’s Columbian Exposition,” 55-56. The Musei Civici di Como, Italy, also holds a portrait by an unknown artist, which is similar to but not identical with the Lotto portrait; and it is dated 1516: http://www.cristoforocolombo.com/ritratti-co lombo/ritratto-cristoforo-colombo-anonimo-ai-musei-civici-como/, accessed September 15, 2020.

[11] See Irving, CW-Columbus, viii, and view the etching at the Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/resource/pga.02005/, accessed June 29, 2020. For more on Columbus por traits, see Lester, “Looks Are Deceiving”, 221-27, Annaloro, “Man of Mystery”, 33 (both on the Lotto portrait), and Oliver and Kelly, “Columbus Controversy”, 98-99.

[12] Hessler, “Capturing the True Columbus”, 1,439. Haxby in his Standard Catalog of United States Obsolete Bank Notes (2:1113) mistakenly identified the portrait on the notes from the Mississippi & Alabama Rail Road Company as Fernando de Soto’s.

[13] Maella’s original was in the possession of the Duke of Veragua, a descendant of Columbus. Veragua did not think much of the Muñoz, favoring, in his correspondence with Washington Irving, the Antonio Moro portrait. A copy of the Muñoz hangs in the Archives of the Indies at Seville. Another copy was presented to the Philadelphia Academy of Arts in 1818 but disappeared a few years later and has remained untraceable. “Report of the United States Commission to the Columbian Historical Exposition at Madrid, 1892-1893”, 237. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=ucm.5325305690&view=1up&seq=10

[14] Haxby, OH-320-G40.

[15] Haxby, MA-140-G66, G-122, G-84, and G-118.

[16] Haxby, WI-95-G2, G2a, and R5 ($3b notes raised from the G2 series); for the $2 notes, see G4, G4a, and R7 ($5 notes raised from the G4 series).

[17] Haxby, MA-265-G50.

[18] Haxby, MA-265-G50, MS-80-G20 and DE-85-G56; for good illustrations, see Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of Obsolete Paper Money, 7:399 and 8:46. Another bank issuing notes with the identical vignette was the Farmers Bank of the State of Delaware, Dover, Delaware (Haxby, DE-15-G90a and G90b).

[19] Haxby, PA-650-G4, NY-2155-G22, G22a through G22d, NJ-345-G2a, G20a and G20b, IL-115-G2, RI-160-G20 (illustration in Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of Obsolete Paper Money, 5:88), ME-125-G8, NH-265-G10, RI-545-G30 (illustration in Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of Obsolete Paper Money, 5:288), VT-20-G8 (illustration ibid., 5:326), VT35- G24, and NH-135-G6 and G6b. $5 notes from the City Bank of Troy, Troy, New York, also bore the identical vignette (Haxby-NY-2735-G36 and G36a-b, 1840s-’60s), as did $20 notes from the Mechanics Bank, Providence, RI (Haxby, RI-340-G36, 1850s).

[20] Haxby, LA105-G20.

[21] Haxby, MA-120-G10, PA-575-G32, MA-140-G118 (illustration in Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of Obsolete Paper Money, 3:90).

[22] Haxby, H-ME-275-G72.

[23] Haxby, MA-1335-G86.

[24] Altogether, between 1863 and 1929, four different representations of Columbus and his landing appeared on five types of federal currency, in 14 different series. For an overview of the development of America’s paper money since the Civil War, see Lauer, “Money as Mass Communication”, 121–24.

[25] Vanderlyn’s painting was inspired by the description of the landing in Washington Irving’s biography. Loock, “Goodbye Columbus, Hello Abe!”, 87-89 and for illustrations, Friedberg and Friedberg, Paper Money of the United States, 80, 332, 339, and Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of U.S. Paper Money, 217, 219, and 223.

[26] Loock, “Goodbye Columbus, Hello Abe!”, 86; for illustrations and brief descriptions, see Friedberg and Friedberg, Paper Money of the United States, 32-33, 325, and Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of U.S. Paper Money, 734-37.

[27] Bushman, America Discovers Columbus, 53. On the “Columbus-Washington-Connection” on the national currency, see Loock, “Goodbye Columbus, Hello Abe!”. On Columbus’ influence on the rewriting of America’s national origin myth, see Kubal, Cultural Movements and Collective Memory.

[28] Bowers, Whitman Encyclopedia of U.S. Paper Money, 111-16 (for the $1 notes), 253-61 (for the Federal Reserve notes), and 262-65 (for the Federal Reserve Bank notes).

[29] On Columbus as an American “messiah”, see Boorstin, The Discoverers, 232.

[30] Smorag, “From Columbia to the United States of America”, 74-75, and Schlereth, “Columbia, Columbus, and Columbianism”, 937-68.

[31] Greenough’s statue was on display in the Capitol Rotunda from 1841 to 1843, when it was relocated to the east lawn. In 1908 Congress transferred the statue to the Smithsonian Institution, where it was exhibited in the Smithsonian Castle until its relocation to the new National Museum of American History in 1964. It has resided on the second floor of the Museum ever since. When the Museum reopened November 21, 2008, the Washington statue became the signature artifact for a section in the west wing of the museum focused on American lives. National Museum of American History, “Landmark Object: George Washington Statue, 1841.”

[32] According to Andrew Burstein, Irving’s Columbus generally was “the most commonly owned book” in American libraries in the mid-19th century and “undeniably influenced how American school-children were taught their country’s origins.” Burstein, The Original Knickerbocker, 196. For the 1833 recommendation by the New York State Legislature that Irving’s Columbus be used as a textbook for the common schools, see Myers, The Worlds of Washington Irving, 73.

[33] Burstein, The Original Knickerbocker, 205.

[34] On the popularity of Irving’s Columbus, see a. Williams, Life of Irving, 1:355, 2:304.

[35] For a history of the fair, see Larson, The Devil in the White City, and Loock, Kolumbus in den USA, 85-91, 118-39.

[36] Schefler, “The World’s Columbian Exposition”, 55-56, quotations 55.

[37] All press comments qtd. in The Numismatist, January 1943, 20.

[38] Vermeule, Numismatic Art in America, 90-92, quotation 90. Saint-Gaudens had rendered a nude male youth representing the Spirit of America in his initial design for the reverse. Both this and two more proposals were turned down. Instead, Charles E. Barber’s uncontroversial (and cluttered) design was selected. The decision infuriated Saint-Gaudens, who later savaged Barber’s accepted design.

[39] Virginia Culver, “The Medal Collectors’ Corner”, The Numismatist, July 1968, 395. For an illustration of the quadriga, see Loock, Kolumbus in den USA, 131.

[40] Ibid.

[41] Medals from recut dies and a new obverse were 59 mm in diameter and were struck in bronze, white metal, and aluminum. The new obverse deleted the allegorical figures around Columbus’ bust, “Cristoforo” was anglicized to “Christopher”, and the inscription around the rim became “Memento of the World’s Fair, Chicago 1893”. Culver, “The Medal Collectors’ Corner”, 395.

[42] Loock, Kolumbus in den USA, 348-51 and 361-81.

[43] Higham, Strangers in the Land, 64-65, 87-96.

[44] United States Bureau of Engraving and Printing (USBEP), “U.S. CURRENCY FAQs”. On the currency reform, see Tschachler, George Washington on Coins and Currency, 123-28.

[45] Loock, “Goodbye Columbus, Hello Abe!” 91.

[46] Deutsche Bundesbank, “Das besondere Objekt” [“The Special Object”], web document: Not simply “ein Gegenstand des täglichen Gebrauchs für jedermann … als Werbeträger sollte sie ein Spiegelbild der Werte sein, die sie repräsentiert, wie Stabilität, Kontinuität und Krisenfestig keit. […] Daher wird die Banknote gelegentlich auch als Visitenkarte eines Staates bezeichnet.”

[47] In this and the following paragraphs I have drawn on Loock, Kolumbus in den USA, 244-45, 309-45.

[48] See Schenkman, “Mementoes of the Columbus Memorial”, 75.

[49] For further details, see Anon., “A Columbus Day Medal”, 207.

[50] Loock, Kolumbus in den USA, 23-37.

[51] As if in (a somewhat awkward) response to the declaration, American schoolchildren designed a pattern dollar showing a bust of Columbus on the obverse and an Indian head and tree on the reverse: http://numismatics.org/collection/1992.13.1?lang=en.

[52] Weatherford, “Examining the Reputation of Christopher Columbus”, web document; the article originally appeared in the Baltimore Evening Sun on October 20, 2016.

[53] Irving, History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus, CW-Columbus, 353.

[54] Solomon, “Columbus Day: A Clash of Myth and History”, (1995). References to Irving’s “double standard” and Columbus’ purportedly “sound policy and liberal views” are to Hazlett, “Literary Nationalism and Ambivalence in Washington Irving’s The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus”, 567.

[55] NBC12 Newsroom, “Christopher Columbus Statue torn down, thrown in lake by protesters”, and Johnny Diaz, “Christopher Columbus Statues in Boston, Minnesota and Virginia Are Damaged”.

[56] Tallman, “Who Decides What’s Beautiful?”, 16, 20.

[57] Connell, “What Columbus Day Really Means”.

[58] Ibid.

[59] Ibid.

[60] Ibid.

Bibliography

Annaloro, Victor. “Man of Mystery”, The Numismatist (October 2004): 33.

Anon. “A Columbus Day Medal”, American Journal of Numismatics 45 (1911): 207.

Boorstin, Daniel J. The Discoverers. New York: Random House, 1983.

Bowers, Q. David. Whitman Encyclopedia of Obsolete Paper Money. 8 vols, to date. Atlanta, GA: Whitman, 2014-.

———. Whitman Encyclopedia of U.S. Paper Money. Atlanta, GA: Whitman, 2009.

———. Obsolete Paper Money Issued by Banks in the United States, 1782-1866. Atlanta, GA: Whitman, 2006.

Bundesbank, Deutsche. “Das besondere Objekt” [“The Special Object”]. November 24, 2010. Web. December 2, 2014.

Bushman, Claudia L. America Discovers Columbus: How an Italian Explorer Became an American Hero. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1992.

Columbus, Ferdinand. The Life of the Admiral Christopher Columbus by His Son Ferdinand. Trans. Benjamin Keen. New Brunswick, NJ: Greenwood Press, 1959. Spanish edn. Historia del almirante Don Cristóbal Colón … [1604], 2 vols. Madrid: T. Minuesa, 1892.

Connell, William J. “What Columbus Day Really Means”, The American Scholar. October 4, 2012. Web. February 13, 2017.

Culver, Virginia. “The Medal Collectors’ Corner”, The Numismatist (July 1968): 395.

Curtis, William Elroy. Christopher Columbus: His Portraits and His Monuments. Chicago: Lowdermilk, 1893. Internet Archive, 2014. September 15, 2020.

Diaz, Johnny. “Christopher Columbus Statues in Boston, Minnesota and Virginia Are Damaged“, The New York Times, June 10, 2020, updated July 24, 2020. Web. September 26, 2020.

Doolin, James. 1893 Columbian Exposition Admission and Concession Tickets. Dallas, TX: Doolco, 1981.

Eglit, Nathan N. Columbiana: The Medallic History of Christopher Columbus and the Columbian Exhibition of 1893. Chicago: Hewitt Brothers, 1965.

Friedberg, Arthur L., and Ira L. Friedberg. Paper Money of the United States. 16th Edition. Clifton, NJ: The Coins and Currency Institute, 2001.

Haxby, James A. Standard Catalog of United States Obsolete Bank Notes, 1782-1866. 1988. 4 CD-ROMS. Iola, WI: Krause Publications, 2009.

Hazlett, John D. “Literary Nationalism and Ambivalence in Washington Irving’s The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus”, American Literature 55.4 (1983): 560-75.

Hessler, Gene. “Capturing the True Columbus”, The Numismatist 105:10 (October 1992): 1436-39.

Higham, John. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925. 1955; New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1988.

Irving, Pierre M. The Life and Letters of Washington Irving, 4 vols. New York: Putnam, 1862-1864.

Irving, Washington. The Complete Works of Washington Irving: The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus. Ed. John Harmon McElroy. Boston: Twayne, 1981. Abbrev. as CW-Columbus.

———. The Complete Works of Washington Irving: Letters. Ed. Ralph M. Aderman, Herbert L. Kleinfield, and Jenifer S. Banks. 4 vols. Boston: Twayne, 1978-1982. Abbrev. as CW-Letters.

Kubal, Timothy. Cultural Movements and Collective Memory: Christopher Columbus and the Rewriting of the National Origin Myth. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Larson, Erik. The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair that Changed America. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003.

Lauer, Josh. “Money as Mass Communication: U.S. Paper Currency and the Iconography of Nationalism.” The Communication Review 11 (2008): 109–32.

Lester, Paul Martin. “Looks Are Deceiving: The Portraits of Christopher Columbus.” Visual Anthropology 5 (1993): 221-27.

Littleton Coin Company. “Discovering Christopher Columbus on Coins and Currency.” October 2018. Web. August 27, 2019.

Loock, Kathleen. “Goodbye Columbus, Hello Abe! – Changing Imagery on U.S. Paper Money and the Negotiation of American National Identity”, Almighty Dollar: Paper and Lectures from the Velden Conference. Ed. Heinz Tschachler, Eugen Banauch, and Simone Puff. American Studies in Austria, Vol. 9. Wien-Münster: LIT Verlag, 2010. 81-101.

———. Kolumbus in den USA: Vom Nationalhelden zur ethnischen Identifikationsfigur. Bie lefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag, 2014.

Myers, Andrew B. The Worlds of Washington Irving, 1783-1859. Tarrytown, NY: Sleepy Hollow Restorations, 1974.

National Museum of American History. “Landmark Object: George Washington Statue, 1841.” N.d. Web. February 27, 2017.

NBC12 Newsroom. “Christopher Columbus Statue torn down, thrown in lake by protesters.” June 10, 2020. Web. September 17, 2020. https://www.nbc12.com/2020/06/09/christopher-columbus-statue-torn-down-thrown-lake-by-protesters/.

Oliver, Nancy, and Richard Kelly. “Columbus Controversy”, The Numismatist 126:11 (November 2013): 98-99.

“Report of the United States Commission to the Columbian Historical Exposition at Madrid, 1892-1893”, The Executive Documents of the House of Representatives for the Third Session of the Fifty-Third Congress, 1894-1895, vol.31 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1895).

Rulau, Russell. “Iconography: Numismatics”, The Christopher Columbus Encyclopedia. Ed. Silvio A. Bedini. 2 vols. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1992. 1:325-27.

———. Discovering America: The Coin Collecting Connection. Iola, WI: Krause, 1989.

———. “Numismatic Recognition of the New World”, The Numismatist (November 1989): 1768-72 and 1856-59.

Schefler, Erik. “The World’s Columbian Exposition: A Fair of Firsts”, The Numismatist (June 2011): 54-58.

Schenkman, David E. “Mementoes of the Columbus Memorial”, The Numismatist (July 2003): 75-76.

Schlereth, Thomas J. “Columbia, Columbus, and Columbianism”, Journal of American History 79 (December 1992): 937-68.

Smorag, Pascale. “From Columbia to the United States of America: The Creation and Spreading of a Name”, American Foundational Myths. Ed. Martin Heusser and Gudrun Grabher. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 2002. 67-82.

Solomon, Norman. “Columbus Day: A Clash of Myth and History” (1995). Archived in WebArchive.org. October 8, 1998. September 20, 2020.

Tallman, Susan. “Who Decides What’s Beautiful?”, The New York Review of Books LXVII, Number 14 (September 24, 2020): 16-20.

Tschachler, Heinz. George Washington on Coins and Currency. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2020.

———. The Greenback: Paper Money and American Culture (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2010.

United States Bureau of Engraving and Printing (USBEP). “U.S. CURRENCY FAQs.” N.d. Web. July 7, 2014.

Vermeule, Cornelius C. Numismatic Art in America: Aesthetics of the United States Coinage. 2nd edn. Atlanta, GA: Whitman, 2007.

Weatherford, Jack. “Examining the Reputation of Christopher Columbus“, Documents of Taino History and Culture. N.d., September 20, 2020.

Wilcox, Rick. “Columbus Not Appropriate for Proposed Dollar Coin”, The Numismatist (July 1991): 1006-1007.

Williams, Stanley T. The Life of Washington Irving. 2 vols. New York: Oxford University Press, 1935.

* * *

The post Christopher Columbus: His Decline in Numismatics and the Nation’s Collective Memory appeared first on CoinWeek: Rare Coin, Currency, and Bullion News for Collectors.