Hey guys ! Santa just dropped off a little something special for yours truly, and I thought I would share. Please attribute this lovely bustie and give any opinions you like. Please forgive the photography; it's still in a flip, so there's some glare. It'll look better when I snap it au naturale. Also ignore the black on the rim at K2 obverse; it's not on the coin. Enjoy, copperheads !
Santa comes early, eh? I don't have the attribution knowledge you seek, but I do like your coin. Do you think the reverse prevented it from a 40?
Awwwww heck... I left the attribution and grade on the photo ! :crying: :desk: I've removed 'em from the web version. Hope that didn't spoil the game for too many folks. :whistle:
By the title, you'd think he'd given us a hard one to attribute but that's one of the easiest ones there are, especially in that condition. I likes! :eat: Ribbit
Santa is being real nice to you - and Christmas is still more than 100 days away. Lovely coin! Interestingly, the S-243 seems to share the same reverse as the S-241 (with a dropped S in 'States'.
There are several varieties that either use the same obverse or same reverse and some cross dates, like that one. I can't spit them out off the top of my head but I know of them. :goofer: Ribbit
Come on H.T, if anybody here is able to identify individual Sheldon varieties from memory, that is probably you. The reason why 900's coin seemed familiar is because I have an S-241, and that recut 'S' is so obvious, that it sticks in your mind. Here is the reverse of S-241. In this case it appears the reverse die was used in 1802, and continued to be used in 1803. Probably quite telling of conditions at the mint back then, that dies would be used until they literally broke apart?
I can sometimes spit out the variety off the top of my head but rarely. I don't have them memorized, plus, I spend more time with Connecticuts than DBC's now so I'm a little rusty with my BDC attributions. However, I've used Tom Deck's pics for so long now that I have a general idea of what's where and it doesn't usually take me long to attribute a DBC but CBC's are a totally different puddle to swim in. I have to look all of them up. I love old copper! :eat: Ribbit
Actually it was used in 1803 and then later used to strike 1802's. The reverse die comes perfect on the earliest 1803's and then with clashmarks by ERICA. The earliest 1802 S-241's have the ERICA weakened from polishing to remove the clashmarks , then the die cracks above OF AM. A cud develops above and to the right of the F. In the terminal state of the 1802 S-241 there are cuds above TATE and OF A.
I've seen peeps ask "what do varieties do for us" and that is a perfect example of what they do, which is prove striking times and in this case, it proves 1802's were struck during 1803 or 1803's were struck in 1802. :goofer: Interesting! :thumb: Ribbit
You betcha. There's another case of this in 1796 v 1797 DBCs. I'll check those numbers later when I get home. They were Nichols Hoard coins.
Quite right. That's one of most charming elements of early copper - understanding what those guys were going through. The coins are the "fossil record".
