I have a 1804 Large cent with barely readable, but readable date, but have personally attributed it as a genuine S-266 from the positions of the numeral 0 in the date corresponds with the letter o in OF on the reverse, (the only variety of any date that does this) NGC did not slab it and said illegible date on the sticker. they should have been able to do what I did as far as attributation shouldn't they? is there a slabbing company out there that could attribute this asn slab it? If so, how can I get this done?
Why do you need to slab it? There are several experienced copper collectors that would know what they are looking at even if the coin was raw.
Better pictures and both side properly oriented please. That is not correct. All 1804's have that orientation but it can be found on other years and varieties as well. Frankly from the initial picture I suspect an 1801.
the Noyes book on US large cents 1793-1814 it states "The O of the date is almost directly opposite O of OF on the reverse, and since occurs on no other variety of the early cents, an almost infallible test for genuineness of the coin is easilly at hand (for this reason, perhaps, there are relatively few altered dates of the 1804, and such as there are can be recognized merely by turning the coin over)
no sir, I have been a coin collector, and member of EAC, ANA, and specialized in early cents but also including colonial cents. the NOYES books are the best anywhere on large cents, and I use them to help attribute cents all the time. I usually try to disprove a coin rather than prove it to be what I suspect it might be.
As an EACer that loves the early dates, I'd love to see the coin more closely to see what NGC had issues with. The corrosion does make it tough, but I've seen worse. Additionally, I've heard it said that most of these TPGers don't spend much time with coin that comes across their desk, so it wouldn't surprise me if they just looked it over and, because it's a coin regularly faked (especially in die state A), just gave up when they couldn't confirm the last digit. Like I said, though, and additional pictures would clear things up.
I'm no expert on Early Copper, but I would not trust a reference which calls a relationship between obverse and reverse elements of a coin an "authoritative" pickup. Die rotation can - and does - happen to any issue at any time.
And I have seen fake 1804 cents ( in TPG slabs) that were altered 1803's that had the 0 and O in OF lined up. It does occur in other varieties. Notice Noyes says it is almost infallible. Noyes is VERY good and the alignment check is a good test, but it is a test of exclusion. If the coin fails the test it is no good, if it passes the test it may still not be good and needs to be checked further. (i'm not saying your coin ISN'T and 1804, I'm just saying so far I'm not convinced. I'm also a member of EAC and specialize in the early dates. Been doing draped busts since 1982. Have 184 of the 187 numbered varieties and four of the NC's.
I'm not sure why I haven't seen this before. Perhaps Harvey. Anyway, I have to vote NO on 1804 due to the position of the HWH (highest wave of hair) is right of the upright of R. On the S-266, it is directly underneath the upright. Now the poor image and condition might be causing an illusion, but I'd consider that a longshot.
