INDIAN HEAD CENTS SHALLOW OR BOLD “N” in "ONE" VARIETIES These have been nagging me for quite a while (I've got a wife for that.) From the Red Book (reformatted): "Cents dated 1869 and earlier have a shallow N in ONE. Those dated 1870, 1871, or 1872 have either shallow N or bold N. Those dated 1873 to 1876 all have the bold N. Circulation strikes of 1877 have the shallow N, while Proofs have the bold N." Any of you IHC buffs collect these varieties? Does NGC or PCGS slab them with that attribute noted on the slab? Is there a catalog value difference between the two varieties?
Looks like they only attribute the 'shallow N' for the 1870, 1871, and 1872s according to the population report on the PCGS website.
That makes sense. But I guess my real question is, "Is it really worth collecting by this attribute?"
Well John that depends on what IHC varities one collects. I know they are listed in several books on the series. Russell Doughty list them in his book as well web site. I dont have a Snow's book on IHC. https://www.indianvarieties.com/ http://www.indiancentvarieties.com/index.html Davids site for IHC
Yes, I collect IHCs and for my 1870-72 dates, I am collecting both bold and shallow Ns. It is challenging to find nice (or even some) examples of some of these. Of course, if you are willing to throw money at the effort, it is no challenge at all. From my experience, the TPGs seldom, almost never, label the coin as bold or shallow N.
The answer of course is it's up to you! I think it makes it more interesting. I've been collecting the reverse transition varieties of Barber dimes 1899-1905 for example, even thought none of the TPGs recognize them. But it depends on your goal. If "worth it" means profiting from it, your market is limited to collectors who know about it and care about it.
If you mean Greysheet, Redbook, etc. then the answer is no. But if you mean the real market, then the answer is yes. Most collectors of higher-quality sets have been including the bold and shallow N varieties for some years and you can see it in the pricing of the dealers in higher-end material. It is still possible to cherry-pick the scarcer of the two varieties for any of the three years via auctions, etc. for both slabbed and raw coins.
If I'm willing to pay for variety attribution, will NGC and/or PCGS identify and include the Shallow and Bold "N" attribution on their slabs. I'll have to check eBay to see if any slabs have that.
This appears to be the case. I'll have to ask the TPGs about attribution. If they ONLY use the "rev of 69" label then you won't know if unlabeled slabs are automatically "Bold" or the coins have just not been examined for "shallow" vs. "bold". I've got a full Red Book set of IHC's in MS except for the shallow/bold varieties. This does not count the error varieties except for the 1894 Doubled Date.
I was seated at Larry Briggs' table today at FUN and the fellow beside me was poring through a box of raw IHCs, looking for 1870-72 Shallow and Bold N cents for his collection. He even had a small, 3-ring binder that he had filled with his own sheets with the PUPS for his various searches. He showed me the page for the Bold N/Shallow N. I told him my pnemonic for remembering which is which based on the shape of the middle stroke of the Es in ONE CENT: Bugle = Bold. This is based on the fact that the middle stroke of the E on the bold Ns looks decidedly like the horn of a bugle while the Shallow N's E is much less bugle-shaped. This is easier to detect than the Ns, in my experience. Annotated pictures of both types below.
Thank you, I've run across this mentioned a few times and could never quite figure out what to look for (I don't collect IHC). This thread made me look at a bunch of images and I also noticed that the upper left serif of the N in ONE is a lot longer on the "shallow N." The bugle shape is much easier to see.
Yes, the serifs on the Ns are different and there are other differences on the Ns, but they are harder to see on circulated coins than the middle serif of the Es. Plus, for me at least, It's hard to distinguish the N differences without them side by side.
I resurrected this thread because I recently purchased a coin that adds some additional information of the 1870-73 Shallow N/Bold N topic. For those three years you can collect either the Shallow N (Type 1) or the Bold N (Type 3) reverse coins. I previously posted in this thread how to tell the two apart by using the shape of the middle serif of the Es in ONE CENT. Now, for the year 1870 only, the mint tried to turn Shallow N reverses into Bold N reverses by using the newer punches on the old hubs, thus creating the intermediate variety, the Type 2 Shallow N/Bold N. They repunched the two Ns but only one of the Es, the one in CENT. The result was not only a third reverse type for year 1870 but also many repunched die varieties. I have shown below in close up photos where the mint repunched the Ns and one of the Es but did not repunch the E in ONE. This is recognized by both Bowers and Snow in their respective books on the Indian Head Cents. So, going back to @kanga 's original question: Yes, many IHC collectors collect both Bold N and Shallow N varieties for the years 1870-73 but also the intermediate variety Type 2 for year 1870.
