I have this 1937 D with characteristics of more modern copper coated zinc. The reverse looks to have the original mint copper look that is peeling off. I am sure this is some kind of foreign material. But, you can actually see demarcations where the thickness is different. And, the obverse has the natural look of an 83 year old penny.
I believe your cent was coated with shellac or lacquer long ago. More likely shellac. That wasn't an unheard of way to protect your coin in previous generations. The mint state surfaces are protected where the coating remains and toning brown where the coating has flaked away.
Heck, who knows. Same reason folks hit them with hammers or try to cut them with Dykes. Who knows?..... But I will offer this. I am a prolific woodworker. When I make a high end piece for someone, I always drill a recess in a hidden area, glue in a cent dated the same year I created the piece and coat it with lacquer. I most imagine a hundred years from now somebody will have one of those cents I sprayed one side of and wonder the very same thing!
So, if I had one of your woodworking pieces with a 1958 Wheatie in it, would it be considered a counterfeit?
Because the obverse shows no signs of said "coating" and has colored as expected, I'd say the coin was in an album for some time. That protected the coin from toning and left a "coating" of what ever the album had in that hole. JMHO
I thought the same thing. I have had coins in albums that looked much different on the rev. And Randy @Randy Abercrombie has a good point. Some older albums were treated different. The real old Whitman have the adhesive in contact with the coins and leave parallel black marks on the coin. I thought this coins was interesting.
