Attribute This

S-180. Tough variety

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

For you @Marshall it's LOVELY...

 

Is this worth 4x the next?




I honestly don't know. I'm an addict.

 

I know how you feel. You’ve seen my recent pickups and I can get a 1796,1800,1805 and the common 1807/6. I really want them all.

 

I represent the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to collect beyond my means.

 

I don’t know who got it, but someone beat me to this S-37 by seconds

 

I'm so sorry for your loss. I hoped to attribute it and find a reason it wasn't the S-37, but I can't. Even the flaw (die created, but not a break. More a bend of the field plane than a break of the die) from the chin to the rim is there, though heavier than on my comp. An R6+ is a great find.

 

Just to rub it in, these are the enhanced photos.


There is a similar flaw on the S-36 in the field, so the flaw may be related to the press or the reverse. But definitely not a reworked S-37 on the S-36. Too many differences.

Noyes shows one die state, Breen shows two with the French ANS coin being the sole example of the Perfect Obverse.

 

I was just looking through eBay offerings this morning and came across this:


I enhanced the dark image and just simply disagree with the attribution as S-16. While it would be easier if more of the perimeter detail were there, it looks good enough to see a S-13 to me. BER are close, three large border beads close and above the cap, and B(ER) is in a normal rotation unlike the CC rotation of S-16. Yet another S-16 attribution which just doesn't fit.

 

Agree @Marshall - looking at it as well.

BE matches S-13 as you state!

 

I contacted both the seller and PCGS with no response...

 

Left is Obverse 12 used on S-12 and S-13. Right is obverse 14 used on S-16. I highlighted the points I used to determine an S-13 attribution. Seeing is better than describing and both are even better.

 

It will be hard to digest for each. The question is how long before they at least remove it from the auction while they satisfy themselves that either they got it wrong or we did.

I always like the sellers who take down an offering until they investigate further.

I also like the way Heritage handled the Auction where it was uncertain whether a Fr2 was a S-12 or S-15. The offered it as S-12, but noted there was mixed opinion by key copper specialists.

 

Just a comment on the S-14 picture. I'm sure someone must have commented on the Libekty look of Liberty. Also, the letters and numbers almost look not mint-made. My eyesight is why I don't do attribution work.

 

I'm struggling with that again myself. I sold off my first collection about ten years ago for the same reason. But then I hooked up a digital microscope to my computer along with using my big screen for a monitor and I built a new collection.

The label of 14 is for the obverse number and was used on S-16. While this comp is very sharp, the K look pf the R I believe is from bifurcation or the incomplete filling of the die during the striking of a coin.

It is fairly common in the early days of the mint and often appears as appearing to be script rather than type with curved features where it should be straight. The absence of the top of the R is a bit of an extreme example of this. I actually find these less well struck coins more attractive than the fully struck ones.

 

Broke this one out again today and took another look at it. It's Style 2 Hair and clearly 17xx, so we know it's 1798 or 1799. The position of the last A in AMERICA in relation to the stem end and ribbon is more consistent with earlier Draped Bust cents and matches only one Style 2 Hair reverse, and that's S-168. Pretty confident in 1798 S-168, R-3.

 

I concur. Reverse E has a rather unique stem position.

 

I'm back on the confirmation trail of this "1800 NC-2" that I started about 4 years ago after a thread about a frustrating attribution of a 1809 Half Dollar.

It's time to revisit this old friend. It has tantalizingly good detail where visible through the PMD and corrosion.

This is the new image I extracted this morning showing the best detail of the best Attribution points, 1. the LIBERTY and top of the head and 2. The date area including curl 2 and the bust tip.

 

Maybe I can make this more definitive this time by going through each of the 19 known obverses and showing why they are excluded and with what confidence I have in the exclusion.




Confidence level - HIGH