Charlott Gold

Marshall, I am really glad both your coins are genuine, and that you can now sell them for maximum profit, and get the early coppers you want. What are you planning on getting, I am really interested.... a chain cent? a '94 head of '93? a 1799?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It looks like the offers aren't acceptable at this point, but I was hoping to get a 1799 since that's my EAC membership Number. It only seems right.

 

I got these from the bank so I could photograph them with my latest setup. These are my first shots at a slabbed coins so it is what it is.

Quarter Eagles

1843-C Large Date (straight 4)



1854-C

 

Marshall,
I'm new to the forum and just read your initial post. I'm an active collector and buyer of original, problem-free Charlotte coins and from my initial view of your coins, I thought they both looked genuine, albeit, with problems. The '43-C looked cleaned, with the '54-C looking both cleaned and with some light damage. I'm not aware of any doubling of the date on the '54-C, nor of a die break on the reverse. There is a die scratch, that resembles a die break to some degree, from the denomination's fraction bar to the lower rim, but it isn't a break. This is a diagnostic that shows on all '54-C QEs. I'm not aware of obverse clash marks on the reverse either, although all show roughness in the reverse fields that could be mistaken as similar marks. All of these are mint-made (die scratch, surface roughness), and thus, do not negatively affect the coin. All do show a diagnostic depression behind the eagle's head, and it appears yours shows faint evidence of this mark. I'll post a pic of the '43-C large and small dates from my collection. The large date is by far the more available variety.

1843-C $2 1/2 Large Date



1843-C $2 1/2 Small Date


regards,

Charlottedude

 

I apologize for the poor quality of the original photos which I think mislead your diagnostics analysis. I am now going to present some closeups which are better, though still a far cry from perfected, of the areas you so graciously pointed out for the diagnostics. Thank you again for your assistance.

1843-C Large Date









1854-C

 

That's because only the last one is the 54-C. The others are of the 43-C to capture re-cut numerals in the fraction.

Once again, I hope to continue improving so the images more accurately depict the coin rather than mislead people about it. I still have a LOOOOONG way to go.

 

I have all three of Doug Winter's books on Charlotte coinage and while he notes light strike die doubling to the date & some of the stars, it must be very light in nature. I've yet to observe this or the reverse clashmarks he mentions, on any example I've examined in hand, which now numbers anywhere from 14-15 over the last 20 years. Looking at his 3rd edition book on page 100, there is a good close up pic of the date. Other than what appears to be some minor recutting of the lower serif and base of the 1, there is no doubling. Either way, I doubt you'd be able to see it in the OPs photograph to make an assertion. Again, they frequently exhibit roughness on the reverse, a characteristic that I've seen on all examples I've examined. The roughness and associated voids on the reverse planchet could have easily obscured any clashmarks that may have been on the die at the time... I'm not aware of them from my personal observations.

Charlottedude

 

The thin mark running from the fraction bar to the reverse rim is a die scratch, not a die break. There is a difference. The die did not break/begin to fail. The scratch would've been made sometime during the die preparation process and is a diagnostic for every known example to include both early and late strikes. Same indications of die recutting I mentioned above are noticeable on the "1" in the OP's close up pic. I don't see any indication of other doubling to the date in the OP's close up pic. The date looks exactly like all the other examples I've seen, with the exception of wear/handling differences.

 

Just to clarify, I'm talking about the 1854-C QE in my two posts immediately above at 6:15 & 6:25. I can see the recut date and mintmark on the '43-C QE easily. This is a diagnostic which is also on my '43-C LG Date QE, posted on the previous page.

 

I'm seeing two different recuts on the 1854-C, one to the west and one to the southeast. I also see a prior punch of the Liberty Hub just south of the final position. But I don't know always know whether it's a recut, repunch, mechanical doubling, clash or undertype or now a break or scratch on the die or polishing lines. All I know is I see something. I'm learning about the multitude of ways SOMETHING can show up from the mint as well as after the mint.

In any event, the early statements that most 1854-C coins are in VF and below and cleaned doesn't match up with what I've been seeing in the Heritage Auction Archives. They're almost all AU+ on that site.

 

Most ungraded '54-Cs you'll come across are in the VF or lower range. Many of the AU coins you see in the Heritage archives are dupes. The same few AU coins that have been recirculated in the auction churn. Many of those coins are brightened or dipped-out AU-50 or even EF-45 coins that are now in AU-55/58 holders, and have been offered in multiple auctions, or show up in various dealer inventories and seem to stay. This has been a troubling trend over the past 10+ years with much of the branch mint gold that exists today.

 

I noticed that out of the 21 lots for MS 1854-C, I could only identify 7 different coins with a few that were unidentifiable do to poor or no photos. I only saw one re-slab.

Anyway, let's hope that the poor cousins of scarce coins in lower grades or with problems or both gain some appreciation. I mean, it's far easier to get a 1916-D Mercury Dime than the 1854-C Quarter Eagle but it's got the Market's imagination.

 

Why don't you weigh and measure the coins first. That Numistmatics 101. With that info and the diagnostics that do or don't check out you should be able to decide for yourself whether you should send them in to NGC. Dont forget to use a magnet.
It takes a lot of homework, and a lot of CoinTalk input to feel comfortable about what you are planning to do. You'll gain knowledge of the history of the Charlott Mint and your coins. That is priceless.
I never knew what Dahlonega was or meant until recently. I had a great history lesson researching a $3 Gold 1854-D coin. Good luck to you on whatever you decide.----------------- zeke

 

OOps! I apologize. I didn't see pages three and four. Anyone have a hole I can slither into.:goofer::hammer:

 

Don't feel bad. All input and suggestions are nice to have. Thanks for your comment.