This got emailed over to me today. I am still waiting on info on weight, etc. My assumption is that it is not authentic but I am curious what the copper specialists here think. This is not in my wheelhouse at all. In fact, I had never heard of a Higley. Maybe this is up @Jack D. Young or @Marshall alley?
Man I don’t know it looks really good cI’m no expert on these but I think it’s got a chance it doesn’t appear to be cast or an electrotype and seems to have legitimate wear and damage though it’s nicer than most which are ground found And the strike weakness and rim inconsistencies look legit. If it’s fake it’s a really good one . But I’m not an expert on early copper though I like it. . I always wondered if there’s more of these in the ground in Connecticut waiting to be detected
Looks pretty good to me from the photos. That area of raised rim seems to be a common feature plus the design elements and patina look ok.
I must say the appearance is unlike any genuine Higley (in photos) that I have ever seen. It seems much too uniform. I have severe doubts about it.
I have had two of the top Colonial experts out there both tell me this one is NG. May be a Becker copy made to look weathered and more “authentic”. It would be interesting to see an edge view if possible.
Thanks for chiming in. I was very skeptical but couldn’t see anything wrong either but wanted to hear the opinions of those who know more than me as I was really curious about this one
I tried and received back two blurry photos with the coin being held with a pair of pliers! Geez Lets go with NG on this one!
