1C - 1959 D with a Wheat Reverse when it should actually be a Memorial Reverse. @Fred Weinberg I am sure knows about this article. Him and I once had a face to face conversation about this Cent. He stated it was an complete fake. I want to share the following link that will take you to the Coin World article - https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-c...al-1959-d-cent-mule-heads-to-auction.all.html I believe Fred actually saw it some years ago when he was asked to authenticate it.
I think that if it were real it would have had considerable wear by the time it was found. Or, it would have been illegally manufactured at the mint and carried out by an employee. In either case it would not be a valid US coin.
I've examined it closely when it was submitted to PCGS years ago. It's a nice counterfeit. I see it's coming up for auction again in the Goldberg's June LB Sale - sold 'as is' with no guarantee of authenticity. By the way, the person who 'authenticated it for the Treasury decades ago worked in the BEP, and had no experience with the Mint, coins, or anything else not having to do with currency. He was wrong in his assessment, which has caused all the confusion about it.
Imho, I definitely agree it’s a fake. Even by looking at the pictures you can tell. It’s a misaligned die strike that shows no signs of any kind of doubling.
Send it to NCIS. They can tell you where the raw materials were mined, when they were mined and what operator mined them. Then they will tell you what plant processed them. Etc., etc.
Isn't this the famous Hofmann "coin" ? https://scvhistory.com/scvhistory/signal/coins/sg090206-coins.htm
Yes, that's it.... But it's important to know that the Treasury Dept. person who authenticated the coin was from the Currency Division, and had no knowledge of coins or numismatics. I saw the original report about 20 years ago, and was surprised to see the 'authenticator' at the Treasury Dept. had nothing to do with the Mint or coins.
I am sure there is a lot more to the story, not just this coin, but a lot of LDS historical letters, money, coins, etc. that remain suspect forgeries and fakes, that seem to be forgotten except by some of us oldies. Jim
If it were genuine, then the same reverse die would have struck 100,000 coins. If the wrong die was used (and I don't think they were) and then discovered, the coins would be destroyed. Could 1 slip through? Sure, but there would also be a paper trail about it and there is none. These stories are great though. In regards to this "spark erosion" technique, are 2 halves of coins joined together? I also enjoy the articles on the 1964-D Peace dollar, 1913 nickels, Henning nickels, the guy who counterfeited $1 dollar bills, etc. As for the coin in the OP, you can't authenticate a coin as genuine if you are not an expert in that area.
I have no idea what you mean.. Which Coin are you even looking at? Because the Cent in question is definitely not a Misaligned Die Strike
I'm glad both of you asked those two questions above. I didn't want to seem snarky or argumentative, but I also couldn't see what MAD or doubling had to do with the 59-D Cent.
By the way, that title: The Coin That Shouldn't Exist!" works for a Thread, but I'd like to expand it: "The Coin That Shouldn't Exist - Because It Doesn't"
It is a very good story and part of numismatic lore now. When they auction this coin, do they put the disclaimer that they take no financial responsibility in regards to authenticity? Or that, they know it is a one of a kind and will not guarantee that it is genuine? Because I figure the only time they want to auction this coin again is to make another commission and not because of a refund. Going back to the spark erosion. If 2 coins were involved in creating this Frankencoin, couldn't modern imaging technology unveil that? Do we know the precise weight of this coin?
Darn , my quantum duplicator device blew its tachyon overdrive module, so I can't make another right now...sorry. Jim
Imho, Well from the link provided. It looks like it has a rim at the top but no rim on the bottom. Leading me to believe it’s misaligned. I agree there would be more produced if it were true. As well as documented by the mint.
The last line in the Auction Catalog description is: THE PROPERTY IS NOT GUARANTEED TO BE AUTHENTIC, AND IS MARKETABLE AS IS, AND CANNOT BE RETURNED (in bold dark print)
If it isn't a coin the mint made, can the Chinese copy it and sell without any 'replica' imprint ( as if they are concerned with such)? I would like to have one for the auction house to sell, Jim