Just to avoid any confusion, this paragraph should have read: The other primary diagnostic was shared with me by Conder many years ago and is the intersection of the stem, inner vine and ribbon almost at the same point where the S-194 and other overdates have the stem intersecting below the intersection of the ribbon and the inner vine.
I've made it to the S-209? called S-215 on the SEGS slab. I really don't like any attribution at this point. You'd think at least getting the right date would be easy, but it's not. One possibility is that the date shows signs of a double strike. Where I'd expect to see the first 0, it looks more like another pointed 1 to me with a shadow of an 8 to it's right. But a date is not always needed for attribution. The clash marks between the ribbon and the curls appear sharp and should be helpful, but they just add confusion. They do not match either the S-209 or the S-215, particularly the clash coming down from the bend in the ribbon. It's another head scratcher, but the injured right side of the pointed 1 (like the S-215) and the sharp point should help. But so far, nothing is satisfactory. My biggest reason for not going with S-215 which has the injured 1, pointed and correctly positioned is the 8 appears closer on S-215 than on the subject as well as missing a very prominent die crack in the left field above the lower curls.
https://coins.ha.com/itm/large-cent...-/a/1259-4396.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515 This S-209 Die State III looks like a good match. I may have gotten it right after all. If the speculation about a possible double strike is correct, it could explain why clash angles are off.
Mission Accomplished. I have now photographed every Sheldon Cent in my collection. 1793 - 1 1794 - 15 1795 - 7 1796 Caps - 9 1796 Draped Busts - 36 (4 NCs) 1797 - 27 (2NCs) 1798 - 31 1799 - 0 1800 - 42 (1NC) 1801 - 16 1802 - 22 (1NC, 1 Unknown) 1803 - 27 (3NCs) 1804 - 0 1805 - 0 1806 - 0 1807 - 1 total - 234
Still a lot of coins only slightly more available than non-collectible because of your ability to properly identify them by variety.
I pretty much limited myself to R4+ (~100 known) and higher.Those that aren't are mistakes or have something special. Here is one: A common S-216 EXCEPT it looks like the Terminal Die State or possibly a New Terminal Die State. This is another: It appears to have reground/lapped Obverse of S-216 which was originally called Obverse 4 which is Obverse 8. It was heavily lapped and given the different number. Breen speculated a S-216 might exist before the lapping was done, but this coin indicates the opposite occurred. The S-221 after the obverse was lapped. So it is common as a variety and so far unique in this die state. It is possible this indicates an interrupted die marriage like the S-76 and the S-265 where the pairing was interrupted by the use of a new die or dies before the pairing is restored with more advanced die deterioration. The latest S-221s show a break, then CUD over TA which is obscured by wear, but not enough to hide the final die states. This coin appears to be a middle state of the reverse of S-221.
Hope I'm not hyjacking but wondered if I could get one of you large cent experts to attribute this for me. I found it around the house larger Letters? Anything special thanks in advance.
I feel a little out of sorts today. I broke down and SOLD several of my coins today at the Houston Money Show.
The impact of selling some of my Large Cents along with eyesight problems has taken the fun out of attribution for the time being. I'm not dead, just absent for a while.