Cool mason penny someone in my metal detecting forum found

I have a similar one but rhe reverse has an area with damage from the pressing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Counterstamped or hand carved? I will wager it is the latter....Mike

 

p.s. do you have a pic of the reverse?

 

i can try to find it toight

 

here is my mason cent. seems to have more detail than the one that started thread

 

http://forums.kinzlicoils.com/topic/7170748/1/#new

 

Thanks for the pics sweet wheatz!

It's too bad the reverse is so mangled by this alteration.

 

Definitely punched not carved. Thanks for posting the reverse pics.

 

no problem

 

Man..and all this time I thought a mason was someone who works with stones, bricks, and cement.
Just kidding ,,Im intrigued by the organization

 

Here is one I picked up in pocket change a while back. Really puched hard from the bulge on the obverse.

 

Cool! Thanks for posting this sonlarson!

I like the diversity of punches, distortion and such on these counter-stamped Mason-cents. It's interesting to note that in general, the counter-stamp seems to be placed on the lower obverse side at the 6 o'clock position as a preferred location and that each of these dates has a similar yet different style die(?) used to stamp the Masonic symbol.

+++

So far we have seen the following Lincoln Masonic Cents pictured on this particular thread, (there are others floating around on other threads):

• 1937
• 1953
• 1955-D

...and one oddity that deviates from the Lincoln-planchet, in the form of a worn
"Modern Masonic "Penny" or token based on a Roman coin Issued by the Royal Arch Masons, St. Louis, Missouri"

 

I want a mason penny!!! My dealer sells Ohio (like a pic of the state) and Kennedy counter-stamped pennies, but no mason pennies.

 

I completely agree, this coin is carved, not stamped

 

Carved? How so, can you explain?
Did you see the image of the reverse side of the coin above?
These all appear counter-stamped.

 

CamaroDMD:
Sure, 'damage' as defined reduces the value of a thing, whether that damage is intentional or accidental. However, this coin is still regarded as a cent and still holds a cents value and you would pay at least one cent for this coin as you stated it's value to you in your reply. That's sort of how this hobby works, you pay for a coin what it's worth to you and based on what you can and agree to pay based on a subjective value assessed to a coin. You personally don't need to pay a counter-stamped coin because you can find one, keep it, coin-collect it and therefore you will never be out a cent for it. A lot of people agree with you, so you might be able to find one for free too!

It's value has not been diminished as a monetary device by the counter-stamp, which is not classifiable so narrowly as damaged and worthless as you subjectively grade your own collection of coins, so don't be so dismissive because someone else may appreciate it, even if it only holds 1¢ or intrinsic value for them. I doubt most collect these to make money on the counter-stamp feature.

Rather these coins are altered, post-mint, and there is a diverse style to these punches which you overlook, their use and the intentions of those who stamped or punched them. Just like this hobby, coin designs, categories of collecting and values change, it evolves and it diversifies. What came before is not reduced, it is historic and foundational to the hobby. The entire system of grading has greatly evolved in the past twenty years or so since it started becoming a necessary and agreeable form of assessing/valuing fine coins. Grading has evolved greatly to include all sorts of areas of coin collecting that didn't exist before, terms and distinctions now exist that were not known just two decades ago and to address special numismatic variations that are new to the hobby.

So where have these counter-stamp devices gone? Who created them? Why? Are they still in use? Are counter-stamps still being made to stamp new coins? Where can you get one? Why did they start this mission? Why did they stop? For how long were they stamped and how many were stamped? IF answers arise to these sort of queries, if numbers are limited and/or the story compelling, shared in the community, then these items will be something other than what you consider them to be in your current callous and ignorant manner. I don't care what you think of their value. I don't expect anything from them. But I do expect some respect to various areas of interest within collecting, despite its deviance from your form of collecting. I do not hope these coins to take greater value or pollute the hobby, but they have a place outside of unintended or malicious damage to a coin design.

This is still a coin, an intentionally counter-stamped coin, not a 'damaged' coin. People can and do still spend with it as well as coin-collect it for love and curiosity alone, not it's unrealised and non-valued numismatic value sense. The value remains at 1¢, yet depending on demand and what a collector may wish/choose to pay, it could possess a greater value, none of which will be diminished by limitations you'd wish upon it.

 

The coin on the second page is not the coin in the op. th coin in the OP has a flattened area that was carved out leaving the Masonic symbol.

Look at the position of the symbol on the two coins, not to mention the different dates.

As to the talk of value, the original coin would be no different than a hobo nickel in my opinion. It would be colletable, I would say far more than the host coin.

 

VIPER: I know the two are different coins... there was no mix up. Not sure how you arrived at that. Anyway, each coin even has different counter-stamps besides their dates. The 1937 at the top of page one doesn't show the reverse. So how can you tell from the flattened area that this is 'carved'? The 1955-D on page 2 also has a flattened area and it does show the reverse. It is counter-stamped. Others have concurred.

You haven't explained how the symbol was carved at all. I've worked with copper and practiced engraving. Copper is soft enough to hammer and shape with tools, gouge with burins and burnish with oils and steel tools, but I fail to see any evidence of this piece being 'carved', on an already hardened coin. If you can show me any serious evidence to the contrary then please do tell. I am very interested to know. IF indeed this was carved, the amount of time and effort to do this at this scale would take significant skill, man-hours and effort. There would be very few like it and if lost and found in circulation, very much WORTH collecting. Correct, the value is subjective. But given other factors as I speculated in my queries to Camaro and this supposed hand-shaping (carving) of the metal on a miniature scale, well worth a premium.

 

To me anyway, on coin #1 I can see how far down the area surrounding the symbol has been carved down flat. Coin #2 isn't really carved away it is just distorted on abes shoulder with just a bit of detail still showing.
If you look at hobo carvings such as Billzach's you can see what can be done in the hands of a skilled craftsman.

 

I would like to see a numismatic grading system that doesn't consider these coins damaged (and ungradable)...sure, the grading systems have evolved but not to that extent. In this hobby, the coin is damaged. Now, that doesn't mean it isn't collectible or interesting...but from a tradition numismatic view this coin is damaged period. I think you just like to argue. I never said this coin wasn't interesting or noncollectable. I just said it had post mint damage and as a result didn't have numismatic value. This is not a variation or a variety, it's an alteration.