In another thread @Marshall was kind enough to offer his expertise at attributing some low grade coppers. I thought it would be a good thread for others to contribute challenges and the more skilled members to try their hand at maybe discovering something exciting. So, I have 3 dogs that will test the limits of your skill, patience and generosity. Only #2 was purchased intentionally, #1&3 came in a cigar box of random coins I bought. Thank you for your time and effort. Anybody please feel free to help or post other early coppers. #1 #2 #3
First one is S-56. Separate leaves under D diagnostic. Second is the Fallen 4 S-63. Fallen 4 is diagnostic. The third is also an S-56 in the later die state where the obverse crack from the hair to rim under the cap is visible.
Great thread! I buy any and all low grade early coppers that I come across (that are reasonably priced).
I always wanted to acquire a pre-1800 coin but I wanted to save up and not buy a cull! Still saving!!
Wow! I thought there would be a little head scratching with such poor examples. You, sir, are very good. I had #3 as S-56 but wasn't confident. Thank you and I hope others make use of the thread.
Now I'll flip the table on you and ask your opinions on the correct attribution of this coin I just picked up for $75 after jumping from $30 for the last two days in the last 30 second. I was confident enough to max bid at $105. The seller and I disagree on attribution, but I present both attributions without biasing you with which is which. What do you think? The left is the S-113, the middle is the subject coin and the right is the S-94. Now if you really want to spend the time, you can attribute it against all 96 draped bust varieties. But these are the two we came up with. This presents a more typical difficulty with more subtle diagnostics because the easy ones are obscured..
I will say S-94. Concavo convex planchet would be one (I believe many 94's are on such planchets if I remember correctly), plus a few other very minor details based on what is left of the lettering and their relative positioning vs the devices.
Interesting challenge. I think it matches the one on the right (S-94) based on the placement of the N and T in "Cent" relative to each other. Then again, I could be seeing things....
#1: 1795 with pole #2: 1794 #3: ? That's the best I can do. Now I'm going to read what the experts say and gain some knowledge from them.
I agree with this assessment based on the 2 options. Even with my decent reference library, I'm not qualified to start with all 96 varieties and narrow it down.
I came up with the S-94 as well. The first Key is the loops are the Reverse of 1797 style. All three meet this criteria, but is kept in mind in eliminating many of the possibilities from the 96 variants. Eduard also noted the concavo-convex blanks common on the S-94 and the subject appears on such a blank, convex on the reverse and concave on the obverse. The E and T are low and lean right. The O and N of one are close. Finally, the berry left of C(E) is just below the top of the C. Location of other identifiable markers is consistent. However; what appears to be a berry away from the left stem adjacent to the left ribbon loop (like on the S-113) is probably post mint damage of some type. This is certainly more likely than a new variety with so many similarities to the reverse K of the S-94.
I had to look very closely at the Reverse I (NC-1) which is very similar. The berry left of C is slightly lower on that and the outer berry under A(M) is absent. While not clear, I think I see evidence of that berry. An 8-I combination would have been intriguing, but I believe this is 8-K.
OK! I'm satisfied with the reverse K identification. But what do you think about this obverse possibility? You should be able to enlarge the picture by just clicking on it. I used two different brightness settings because the photo is brighter on the top than the bottom and both are needed for detail. I think I see the cracks at the bust, but I may be pushing it. But the other diagnostics seem to match up at the hair and date. But it's hard to tell with coins this worn. By the way, this is not the obverse 8 expected. I just couldn't get myself satisfied with the higher 6 and slightly different positions of 1 and 7 for an 8.
Or perhaps we were both half right. This is another S-113 from the Heritage archive and a crop of the date area on my new coin.
While I'm at it, here is my other S-94 I picked up a while ago which was mislabeled as a Reverse of 94. Perhaps they MEANT reverse of S-94. LOL!
