Can you tell the year from the Reverse?

This date has sadly worn away. I have tried to identify the date from the reverse but have not been able to. Anyone have any ideas?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hard to tell though the 2 x 2. If anyone can I would put my money on @Marshall

 

And I think even he would have a devil of a time determining the date......

 

Probably a long shot but thought I would try!

Thanks,
Tom

 

Give him a chance though..........he's really good with early copper.

 

It is intriguing. The combination of the slightly falling berry at O(NE) with the junction of the ribbon and stem at the wreath (excluding the S-187), the fraction bar near the numerator, The leaf under the center to right center of D seems to exclude all but one very unlikely reverse.

But before going further, let me look again with fresh eyes to see if I've overlooked something more likely.

In the mean time I'll try to find a better example of the reverse I was unable to exclude to use as a comp.

 

Correction - I was looking at half cents. But I do still see a '5' and possible a '2' after.

Wrong ↓
Take anything I say with a grain of salt since I'm probably wrong, but I want to take a guess.

Has to be 1803-1808 right (2nd style reverse - larger lettering)? If that assumption is correct, I have a 16.7% chance of being right on the date.

I think this 1805 (large 5, stems - mainly since it does not look stemless and the proximity of the 5 to the bust). I can see the '5' directly at 6 o'clock on the obverse and I think I see a '2' that may be clashed from the reverse after it.

 

It sounds like you may be on to something!! I am looking forward to hearing what your opinion is!

Tom

 

My initial examination indicates either a very common 1798 S-187 or an extremely rare 1801 NC-5. The odds are the former. Unfortunately there is no better example of the NC-5 to use for better diagnostics. If the latter, it is the earliest die state of what would be the third known without the catestrophic die failure seen on the two know examples.

My initial exclusion of the S-187 may have been premature. It's just so unlikely to be an earlier than previously known 1801 NC-5 that I must be missing something.

Examine the coin closely to see if the berry stem at O(NE) has PMD leading to an erroneous attribution.

 

I will get some better photos for you.

 

Do these help?

 

The photos you just sent look less like a falling berry than this one from your prior post which I have included in this comparison. The coin left is the S-187, middle is from your earlier post and the right is the best 1801 NC-5.

 

The falling berry? Is that the portion on the 1801 where it appears to be missing part of the stem?

 

@Conder101 is well versed in these too, maybe he'll be able to assist.

 

@Marshall Here are a few high resolution scans that may help clear it up. Do these help you? Thanks for all of your help thus far by the way!

The first scan is at 1,200 DPI with adjustments to brightness and contrast to make it "pop".

The second scan is at 1,200 DPI - no adjustments.

The third scan is at 600 DPI - no adjustments.






To try to bring out the date I had some fun with the contrast and brightness of the scans:






Thanks, Tom

 

@Marshall The fraction bar seems to be more similar to the 1801? The high res scans seem to show a wider fraction bar, whereas the S-187 has a more narrow bar?

 

Not that it helps much, but this is the other 1801 NC-5. As you can see, it is only identifiable by the catastrophic die failure:



Many thanks to Heritage for making their Archive Available for research.

But I will take another look at other varieties since the new photos do not appear to have the falling Berry (at O(NE), The stem pointing toward the CENT rather than above it.)

The new photos look more like it might be parallel with the top of CENT like the S-195. I'll go back to see if there are other good candidate based on that. I'm actually surprised that the berry stem can look that different in the photos.

 

I was probably taking them from different angles? I'm not sure if that has anything to do with it. The scans are from direct head on

 

The obverse enhancement of the obverse appears to show a 17 as the first two digits of the date. The high res scans show what might be corrosion just below the "falling Berry" which might account for differences in appearance in different photos.