Guess the Attribution

Here is a coin which is almost dateless. See if you can guess the attribution.



Here is a second photo of the same coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

No Players?

 

Sorry, Marhsall, I'm not nearly smart enough to be able to do this from memory, and I'm too lazy to break out the books.

 

That's OK. I figured I'd keep it bumped until Tuesday.

 

Not many people like to work really hard on attributing large cents - me included. I did notice the die cut from A to ribbon and I also see the top of the 8 for the last number - 1798 S-184.

 

I suppose enjoying attribution puts me in a small group, but I understand it. To me, grading subtleties on MS coins is not enjoyable, but I try to do it because it's such a large part of the hobby. Thanks for playing even though you don't find it as enjoyable as I do.

 

My apologies - I think I worded it incorrectly above. Even though I do not collect by sheldon number I do like attributing the coins. The key is I need a date and some chance at seeing some of the diagnostics. And yes MS coins are easy. Dateless coins put me at a disadvantage and all I see is hundreds of varieties to go through. I don't always have the patience to do this. I honestly admit I am not good enough to recognize a date by diagnostics on the coin. But give me a date and a reasonable shot at it and I will give it a try. So don't get me wrong - I do like doing it, just not when I have to go through 100's of varieties. So if you post one with a date and I can see some diagnostics I will give it a try.

 

PS - Did I attribute it correctly? 1798 S-184?

 

I think you have it half right (Reverse). I will confirm the 1798 date.

 

Was that reverse used in 1797 also - or some other year? That's they part I don't know well enough to even start with.

 

Reverse EE of 1798 was used on S-182, S-183 and S-184. I am not aware of any other appearance.

 

Okay - that is what I narrowed it down to. Then the HWH narrowed it down to the 184 - of course I am not always positive about that placement, but it looks like it is under left side if the upright of R.

 

I think you are seeing it well, but I'll produce marked up images of the three obverses for an easier comparison. I'll probably wait till Tuesday afternoon to post it so anybody who else who wants to play, but won't have access to their reference material till Tuesday Morning, can take a shot.

 

I'm impatient.

Here's a guide to the Obverse Attribution of a 1798 EE Reverse where the date is too damaged or worn.



The S-182 has a smooth HWH (Highest Wave of Hair) centered just RIGHT of the Right upright of R shown by the Orange line. The JHF (Junction of Hair and Forehead) is RIGHT of the right side of the upright of T shown by the Red line. The PC (Point of Curl) is under the outer curve of B.

The S-183 has a peaked HWH under the left side of the upright of R. The JHF is centered at the right side of the upright of T. The bases of the I and B on both these are close with the B a little higher on the S-182 and about level on the S-183. PC under inner curve of B.

The S-184 has an in-between peaked and smooth HWH which is centered just LEFT of the left upright of R. The JHF is just left of the right side of T. The bases of I and B are both more distant and angled than on the prior two obverses. PC under inner curve of B.




And here are blowups of the subject coin.

 

Well it looks like it narrows it down to 183 and 184. Look at IB - if as close as it looks it might be the 183 instead of the 184. I am never really sure about marking them up like this when they get so worn down - kind of makes the spread. Now I am not as sure as I was before.

 

This is where a lower grade copper is a challenge. I find at least one thing to eliminate each of the three choices I see. However, two are far easier to eliminate than the third. I have chosen to consider it the third choice, but if a fourth obverse pairing appeared, I'd check it in a hurry. The differences are far too subtle and the coin far too worn to press for a discovery coin of a fourth pairing.

 

More closeups.

 

I think I will stick with 183.

 

I'm calling it that.

The shape and location of the HWH eliminates the S-182 and the separation and angle of the IB eliminates the S-184. That leaves the S-183; however, the HWH appears to be slightly less peaked and closer to the bottom of the R than the S-183, so that is why I leave open the possibility of a fourth pairing. A different die state could also explain the difference.

Thanks for playing.

By the way. This would be one of only about 40 known of this variety as an S-183 or unique if not.