1/4 Eagle Mystery Coin (ID Help): Error, Forgery, "Test Strike," or...?

I don't know much about this, so please excuse me for saying anything particularly ignorant. I collect ancient coins almost exclusively, but I have a couple boxes and bags of American and World coins that I bought 20-25 years ago. One in particular is puzzling to me:

​

(full size below)​

It appears to be an 1843-D Liberty Quarter Eagle strike, except the flan is not gold (it does have some gold-toned patches around the periphery). It's ~18mm and weighs ~2.15 grams. The flan appears to be tin, zinc, or some alloy (perhaps it was gold-plated at one time to pass off as a $2.50 coin?). I purchased it from a bargain bin at a show, where it was described as some kind of unknown mystery coin. The first coin dealer I brought it to told me it was an error, and that the coin was struck on a silver dime flan in error (the diameter is about right, but it seems to be about 1/4-1/5 gram too light to be a silver dime flan from the time).

Later I showed it to a dealer specializing in tokens and exonumia, who told me it was a "test strike": Before minting coins for official circulation, he told me, it was typical to test strike them on tin or other base metal flans.

Does anyone have any idea what this is? I find it a nice conversation piece (no one's given a confident ID) and want to know more about it, but I also wonder if could be of any value (I doubt I'd sell it unless it was outrageously valuable, but I'm curious).

Thanks for any help!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Is this a Pattern Coin? Someone just mentioned this to me and that they are, in fact, collectible. This one is rather worn and beat up, so if that's what is, would it still be worth anything (i.e., should I take care with it, rather than leave in my box of mixed old American coins)?

 

Most likely a contemporary counterfeit.

 

I would put it in some type of holder to protect it.
Can't hurt.

 

Thanks all for the detailed responses!

Note -- aside from my coin, GDJMSP, your off-metal strikes are quite a remarkable addition to your regular collection of gold ducats! That's very cool (especially to have found two)!​

GDJMSP, I've been getting feedback from others arguing strongly against it being an off-metal/pattern strike (undocumented variety in the pattern catalogs, which your coin(s) address; and the poor strike and wear, which your second coin shows, but seems unusual for a mid-19th century US coin). I'm trying to weigh that against evidence for it being a contemporary counterfeit (especially the traces of gold plating).

Most responses I've heard argue for counterfeit with plating. I'm not familiar with counterfeits other than fake ancients, but it seems remarkably well made. I would assume it's struck, which would indicate stolen dies, I think, since I don't see any evidence of casting.

I kind of like a combination scenario, however improbable: It's an off-metal "pattern" strike that some stole sometime in the 19th century and electroplated with gold to create a counterfeit... I suppose that would be a lot of effort for a thief to go through to make a quarter eagle.

Perhaps I will start search for examples of $2.50 Liberty forgeries and see if I can find any others (they wouldn't have made just one).

I paid a rather trivial amount for it, and I'm willing to pay NGC another service to give me an opinion. I wonder, though, if they determine it's a counterfeit (and thus illegal for a private individual to possess), do they keep it? Are they likely to have this same debate and just send it back as unidentifiable? I suppose I'll check the FAQ before sending it in!

 

Examples seem to abound:

An 1847 Liberty Eagle, similar in appearance, more gold, sold at stacks bower's:
http://stacksbowers.com/Auctions/AuctionLot.aspx?LotID=435710

 

Yes, you are right, Stacks Bowers is a US auction house, which alleviates my concern. I found a number of other Liberty eagle denominations in their past auction listings (searching "contemporary counterfeit eagle"). The closest to mine would be this one (and 1843 1/2 Eagle), which actually has all of the gold-plating gone: http://stacksbowers.com/Auctions/AuctionLot.aspx?LotID=435700

 

Why would being struck imply stolen dies? Countr feters have been creating their own dies for striking fakes for centuries. Yes a lot of fakes are cast, but they tend to be rather crude. Better counterfeiters, and those trying for a larger volume of fakes create dies and strike them.

Considering that only Philadelphia made patterns and the coin in question has a C mintmark I think we can disregard that idea.

 

Thanks.

Right, so I've learned. I didn't realize counterfeiters were capable of striking coins at that time, but I've come to understand it was common enough. (My past experience with forgeries has been in researching fake ancients, which are more often cast, rather than struck in high volume productions, since no two are identical and they are immediately recognizable as fake.)

Yes, I agree that the pattern theory (suggested to me by a professional coin dealer long ago) is bunk. Clearly I'm not especially familiar with these, but I think you meant D not C for the mintmark, right (unless I'm missing something)?

 

Your not I am, i's a D.