1803 Large Cent Opinion Sought

I've been going through my Large Cent collection and photographing them and I'm verifying them as I go along. The photos sometimes make details visible I haven't seen before, but sometimes I see things that aren't actually there. For this reason, I ask for some assistance.

This is one of my three cents labeled S-245.



And this is a closeup at the top of the hair.



Now these are examples of Obverse 2 and 3 with similar closeups from the Holmes Auction site.

Obverse 2




Obverse 3




The Reverse of my S-245:



Reverse C



Now I'm comfortable with the reverse designation as Reverse C, but it sure looks like Obverse 2 to me.

I need help or I may either go off on a tangent or miss an important find.

Thanks in advance.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

nice coin,just wondering how many do you have? i only have 2 LOL,you sure have some collection

 

I'd say in the neighborhood of 100-150 Early dates and about 50 Middle and late dates.

 

I'm not eac expert, but it looks like obv 2 to me.

 

WOW nice maybe one day ill have that many:hail:

 

The more i look at it, it's really different than either. Maybe an initial trial piece in the middle of retooling Obverse 2 before the hairline was finished to get to Obverse 3.

 

Not an expert either but I think obverse 3.

 

Obverse 2

 

S.
2.
3.

 

As I said, IMO obverse 2.

 

I would agree with Obv. 2 also.

The difference between obv. 2 and 3 seems to be length and position of that little lock on top of the hair. You example seems to be closer to obv. 2.

 

It certainly looks like the 2 under E, but it looks different than either under the R. This coins two strands under R are strong and diverge with the top abruptly ending while the 2 practically disappears and the 3 has a weaker top strand parallel through the bottom of the dip.

Maybe someone with a Breen guide can tell me if it's part of a die state.

 

Condor?

 

IMO, it's a 3 with the top lock weak. Look at the position of T versus the hair. Also look at the relative positoins of B and E (BE T -vs- B E T).

If Conder doesn't confirm this, I will dig up Noyes and do so later this evening.

 

I picked 3 because of the spacing between B-E, plus the horn out of the forehead(faint, but present), plus the area around the base of the throat - all part of the S-245 unicorn variety. Of course just my opinion.

 

I have reviewed Noyes and Breen (and Heritage archives) and after further review it still appears to me to be Obverse 3. Which is, by the way, a later state of Obverse 2.

The differences being the finished hair, retouched face, and a "hornlike" protrusion from Liberty's forehead, (and I would suggest a reworked E), the so-called "Unicorn" variety.

I see the finished hair and a trace of the Unicorn's horn in the OP's coin. I also see the Obverse 3 spacing of E.

Therefore it still looks like a 3 to me, and I think a combination of wear, corrosion, burnishing and recoloring, along with a healthy imagination , have led to the suggestions this is a new die pairing.

Respectfully...Mike

 

I've been studying the Heritage archives and reading Sheldon and I think this is what happened:

During late 1802 and early 1803, little attention was being paid to either the die pairings or the date. This is evidenced by several sequential oddities. First, S-243 of 1803 Reverse A (L of 1802) reverse die markers indicate this was actually struck before S-241 of 1802.

S-242 Obverse 14 of 1802 die markers indicate it was also struck before the S-241.

Now I believe that rather than Obverse 2 of 1803 being retooled, it was actually used continually, first with Reverse C (M of 1802) for die states I and II of S-245 whereupon is was temporarily replaced with Reverse B and produced S-244. After this, the Reverse C was used again in it's terminal die state to produce the S-245 Die state III.

This would leave a sequence of:

1 L (A of 1802) S-243
14 M (C of 1803) S-242
14 L S-241
2/3 M (C of 1803) S-245 Die states I and II
2/3 B S-244
2/3 M Die State III

I will edit this later with marked up pictures as evidence.

 

Marshall, Please do post your pics!

I wonder, is there an authoritative emission sequence for the 1803 already published?

 

I'm sure someone has done it, but I don't have the proper literature.Both Noyes and Bland are good candidates to have done this already. Sheldon got a lot of things right and even suggests many of these possibilities, but he kept the sequence in date order for ease of use.

 

deleted