Connecticut Cent - Can You Attribute It?

Howdy fellow coin peeps,

As many of you are aware, I collect Early American Coppers, to include Colonial Coppers. I acquired a recent Connecticut Cent that is interesting, in that it is off-center on the strike and the date is missing because of it but with most Connecticuts, that's common and they are still attributable.

I don't have it in hand yet but the auction pics were good enough to attribute it so the question is, if you accept the challenge, what's its attribution, which will also include what its date is? Did the seller guess its date correctly?

​

Here are some reference sites to help you attribute it:

http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/CT-Copper.intro.html

http://www.coinfacts.com/colonial_coins/connecticut_coppers/ConnecticutCoppers.htm

The key is to examine the coin first for all "interesting" attributes then to find that one in the references above. It isn't easy but I already know what it is so I know it's doable but it also helps to know a little about these to reduce the hunt. :whistle:

Ribbit

Ps: If I've already told you what it is, do not spoil this for others by posting the variety but if I haven't, feel free to post your answer here and I'll let you know if you got it right or not. :hammer:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

okay, where is the picture of the coin?
(silly boy, as is, I'd say:
R-9, non-existant.)

 

If you can't see the pic in the OP then here it is again.

Ribbit

Ps: I'll give you all a hint - It's a INDL error variety. :kewl:

 

and a really neat off center!

 

I'll give you all one more hint. The seller had this improperly listed as a "probable" 1787, when it happens to be in the plates on the Notre Dame website and they only have plates for 1785 & 1788 so that narrows it down considerably. :kewl:

Ribbit

 

1788 16.2-o ?

 

Look closer at the neckline of the drapery? Does it flow like the 16.2? You got the reverse correct though! Good job! :thumb:

Ribbit

Ps: CoinFacts does not list this combination. It's in Breen's Encyclopedia but not on CoinFacts.

 

I assume you mean obverse 17, I am aware of it but I didn't think the letter and fleuron shape, spacing and placement look right for 17. I thought it looks more like 16.2 but hard to tell for sure from the picture,wouldn't be the first time I was wrong! I am sure you will tell more when you get it in the copper. Nice coin, you gotta love Connecticuts. Hey leave some colonials for the rest of us!

 

Here are a few excerpts that may help:

​

On the 16.2 the neckline is looped evenly but on the 17 it does a sudden drop into a upward loop. Look at the neckline on mine to see how it flows. :kewl:

Ribbit

Ps: I will post much better pics when it arrives.

 

The more I look at it the more I think it could be a 16.2 but it is very difficult to tell with the seller's pics. I'll post much better ones when it arrives.

But you are right on with your attributing! :thumb: I know with better pics, you and I both will figure it out.

Ribbit

Ps: The A in AUCTORI appears to have a slight angle difference and the angle of mine looks more like the 16.2. Do you agree?

 

It would be much easier for me to attribute that coin if you send it to me for closer inspection. Nice Coin.

 

I got my first Nova Eborac this weekend so I'll be posting it later this week, along with a few more Connecticuts and another Virginia half-penny. I'm going to have to study up on the Virginia half-penny varieties so I can start organizing what I have plus if I have any doubles, sell them to fund something else.

Ribbit

 

Toad, I agree with you on the A. I have a Nova Eborac, but you are way ahead of me on Virginia's I have one lonely coin. Keep em coming!

 

BTW - I don't know if you know Jeff Rock or not but he also agrees so I think this one will be ready to be put in the album, once it arrives. :thumb: Of course, I'll take new pics and post them before it goes in the album.

Thanks for being a Devils Advocate on this for me. :bow: It always helps to have a second pair of eyes to catch what you didn't catch or thought your caught.

Ribbit

Ps: I've got quite a few coming in and I'll post them when they show up.

 

Sure, I know Jeff, I have a 1786 Connecticut 5.2-I on the way from him now. Wish I could add them to the collection like you do, I can only manage a few a year! Thanks for showing them.

 

Here's one that came in yesterday and it appears to be a 1787 ETLIR variety but Breen only says there are 5 varieties and doesn't cover it well. It's also damaged so that doesn't help either.








It came attributed as a 1787 33.31-gg.2 but Breen says there's no cinquefoil after AUCTORI: or ETLIR: and this appears to have something after AUTORI: so I do not believe it is a 33.31 but I cannot rule out a gg.2 reverse.

Feel free to tackle this one, if you dare.

Ribbit

Ps: I have a couple more to add to my other Connecticut thread and will after I get back from the grocery store. I got in a bunch of Baby Bello mushrooms so I've gotta go get some steak to make Philly Steak sandwiches with. Plus, I'm out of milk for my coffee and I'm starving. :eat:

 

Wow, now this is a tough one! All obverse 33's have a cinquefoil after Auctori:. The punctuation is the most important part of attributing Connecticuts, and most of the relevant diagnostics on yours are gone. The two ET LIR reverses are gg.1 and gg.2, gg.2 sometimes has a die crack from the shield, through the last cinquefoil. It looks like their may be a crack on yours there. Could be a 33.17-gg.2 or 33.31-gg.2 or something else entirely? The real good Connecticut guys could probably get it pretty quickly. I will have to dig to see if I can find a good pic of gg.2, particularly the die crack.

 

Finally found some decent pictures of a 33.31-gg.2, my best guess is that is what yours is. I think the gg.2 is right and the obverse seems to resemble 33.31.

 

Here's what Breen has to say:

​

And here are some better pics of the areas you need for attributing:













I think there's a cinquefoil after AUCTORI: but that "spot" may not be a cinquefoil. That's what's been throwing me for a loop. :goofer:

What ya think? :kewl:

Ribbit

 

Yes, yours would be Breen 829 with cinquefoil, the no cinquefoil after Auctori: is for Breen 831 and 832. Obverse 33.31 has the cinquefoil as do all the 33 obverses. 33.31-gg.2 is one of Breens 5 829 varieties. I think yours probably is attributed correctly as 33.31-gg.2, but hard to say for sure. Breen had kind of an odd way of classifying Connecticuts, I am going directly from Miller's work.