Early Copper Experts - Help me grade this 1808 Classic Head Cent

Very pleased with the overall appearance of this 1808 Classic Head.
Three varieties are known for the year, this one is S-277, Rarity-2. The others, S-278 and S-279 are R-3 and R-2 respectively.

The coin appears to be in an advanced state of the dies. State VII is my estimation with the die breaks which first appeared in state IV now extending arc-like into 'S' and also into the field above ONE. The surfaces are excellent for a Classic Head (notable for bad planchets). The patina is nice and even, only broken in a few places. Clash marks are also present.

It is surmised the dies were misaligned when many S-277's were struck. This resulted in a weak lower obverse border, and causes the first start to disappear on many examples. In my example the first star is present only in ghost form.

Well, enough of that. How would you guys grade this cent?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Beautiful coin, love the die cracks on it.

 

Great example. Should grade problem free VF25 or 30.

 

It seems intuitive to me that the obverse weakness is a direct function of the reverse crack, which had to have sunk or warped somewhat albeit not becoming an actual retained cud. This is evidenced by the fact that some - but not all - examples with this weakness show misalignment, meaning the die was removed and misaligned at one point, and a full retained cud would have dropped away then. Perhaps it was removed from the press for the specific purpose of determining if it was still in one piece, and returned to service when it was found to be so. A survey of die states to misaligned examples - I didn't look at enough of them for this post to have drawn conclusions - might shed some light.

Fascinating coin, lovely planchet, probably mid-VF by the "usual" grading rules. An EAC grade is out of scope for me.

 

Thank you Mat, C-B-D and SuperDave for your comments.

You may be right, Dave, who knows.
However, concerning the obverse weakness of S-277, Breen states the following in his encyclopedia: '' First star may be visible or invisible in any die state depending on striking quality and wear. This is partly from axial mis-alignment. The (obverse) weakness is not a function of the die state'.

So Breen at least thought the weakness on the lower obverse, and disappearance of the 1st star (on some examples) was due to misaligned dies, not to reverse die failure.

 

Yet the (few) more properly-aligned ones show the exact same weakness of details. Breen wasn't known to stop spouting facts when he ran out of facts, and the evidence (especially when compared to other issues suffering the same rim-rim near-cud) tends to indicate he's wrong here. Indeed, the absence of denticulation on some of these is likely the result of the cracked reverse die as well. I have a couple other things frying right now; let me get them out of the way and I'll post photographic evidence of my thinking so we can talk it through.

 

On a tangentially related note, why is the 1825 half cent not valued more than some of its higher mintage counterparts? With a mintage of only 63,000 it is a fairly rare coin.

 

Because no one collects half cents. It's the same reason the 1909-S VDB cent and 1916-D Merc demand high prices despite the fact that they are common coins.

I can pick up certain French colonial coins with survival rates in the single digits for under $200. If ten exist but nine people want an example, there's always going to be one available and it won't command huge premiums.

 

It has the technical details of VF, for sure. It would get docked for centering, and for the mark on the reverse. I'd say a strong net-F or a weak net-VF.

 

I guess that is the most straightforward explanation. I have an 1825 and was sort of shocked when I saw the low mintage, but price guides don't place any extra value on that year.

 

This interesting discussion (which I am quoting from another forum) discusses this very point with regard to S-277:

''...The S-277 obverse and reverse dies are unique to the variety. The obverse die does have 13 stars punched in . The term 12 star variety is simply a term used to describe the apparent differences in the fully struck examples and the weakly struck examples sans the first star. Breen says that the first star is evident or not as a result of strike quality and not wear. Breen also states that the lowest star may be evident or not in any die state- early middle or late. So if the star is not evident in an earlier die state but in a later this would seem to support his claim of strike quality. Noyes states that the reverse die sinking (in the area of the arc crack) causes the weakness in the stars on the obverse. According to Breen the reverse die sinking begins in state II (early to middle) and the arc cracks starts in state IV or the middle die state and expanding as the die state progresses to the later state. If this is the case then the later the die state and progression of the wear of the die, the less and less you would see the star - in other words you would find early die state examples with perfect reverses or nearly so with the star and later die states with more obvious die sinking and cracks with less or no star showing. Longacre's example is a late die state. It would be interesting to find and early die state example with a perfect reverse or nearly so where the first star is not evident. This would support Breen's statement. If Breen is correct then the star issue is neither a die state or die stage effect. If you take Noyes' statement associating the star quality with the sinking of the die and the progression of the die state, then the star is would be associated with the middle - later die states, still not classified as a die state and not a stage. It would be interestig to hear other opinions on this''


...'' FWIW, I agree with the above assertion, and after reviewing all the examples I could find, I believe that there is some striking variability among these coins (as is quite common on these classic head large cents), the star in general seems to vary along with the die crack and sinking on the reverse. In other words, I agree with Noyes rather than Breen on this one''.

end of quote.

So it appears that Noyes is of a differing opinion that Breen regarding the weakness
on the obverse of S-277. Notes opines that the weakness progresses as die state progresses, as SuperDave states.

Here is another S-277 I have. This one (possible ground find) clearly shows the 'missing star', it also shows a perfect reverse. This example then supports the line of thought that die state is related to obverse weakness.
I have not been able to locate pictures of an example with advanced reverse breaks and a perfect obverse with clearly visible 1st star.

 

Almost all (if not all) S-277's are struck slightly off-center.
Also, this does not diminish the value of early cents in general.

 

@GDJMSP would likely disagree with this. Well, on grade, maybe not value.

 

OK, guys, I welcome any further opinions on the grade of this coin.

 

I cannot venture an opinion of how it SHOULD grade, but I suspect the market grade given by PCGS/NGC slabbers would be VF details/Environmental damage simply because they do that with almost all copper coins with any hint of corrosion (which is almost all copper). that also keeps then from having to make a decision between 20/25. It might do a little better with the others.

But I'd love it anyway.

 

Solid VF-25. I really like it. It has character.

 

Man, this was a far more interesting variety than I ever thought.

Near-terminal die state, what seems like a nearly-full obverse rim, but the reverse has almost completely mushroomed (the denticles are almost on the side!):





Early die state, almost full denticles, early crack and still weak on the star and TAT:





Very early, no crack, yet TA is still weak:





This is just all kinds of fascinating.

 

Thank you, guys, and you Dave for taking the time to post the pictures.

I agree, one could talk about early copper die states for days on end.

Regarding S-277, I am inclined to think the weakness on obverse (and reverse) was probably caused by a combination of poor die alignment and die state.

Thank you all for your comments regarding grade/condition. This is quite an appealing Classic Head cent with above average surfaces as collectors of this series know.