With the emergence of fairly high quality counterfeits of Large Cents, do you think any new discovery of a Cent with both a new obverse and a new reverse could ever be accepted as a legitimate variety rather than a counterfeit?
Yes. I think experts would know the coins. It might take a while for validation, but I believe it is possible.
I agree with Mark. I think they would be able to identify a legitimate new variety given enough time to study its characteristics. In addition to that, if a large number of examples surfaced over time (as counterfeits would) as opposed to just a few, it would certainly raise a red flag. The appearance of a very small number of specimens would lend credence to it being a legitimate new variety. Larger quantities would scream counterfeit loud and clear. An interesting question Marshall. Thanks for posting it. Bruce
Interesting question.... I think the odds of a new pair of dies in early large cents being discovered is extremely remote. These coins have been collected with vigor by a lot of sharp eyes for over a hundred years now, and almost 50 years since Penny Whimsey and the founding of the EAC a few years later. However, neither do I believe that counterfeits will necessarily rule out the discovery should one occur. So yes, I think a new discovery could happen despite counterfeiting, but doubt two new dies ever will be discovered.
Maybe, but only after long and careful scrutiny, ensuring it is at least nearly unique, etc. For my part, I just assume anything even remotely questionable is counterfeit and don't touch it (with deeper knowledge and/or pockets, I might be more open). "I don't know" means "treat it as fake" to me.
Interesting question. Thanks, Marshall ! I agree with much of what has been said. Leadfoot's point is well made... no aspect of US coinage has received as much study and scrutiny as Large Cents. There have been a lot of Strong Eyes and a lot of Good Science brought to bear on these - especially the Early Dates. The most likely place to find a new die marriage in Large Cents ? Late Dates. The vast majority of specimens fly around the room without an attribution attempt. It's possible there is a new die marriage out there somewhere.
There's another reason why Marshall's original post is so important. Counterfeiters don't pay much attention to die marriages. Typically, they make several obverse transfer dies for several dates, but they foolishly think they need make only one die for the reverse - since it doesn't have a date, they think they need not bother making more than one. That single reverse die is paired with obverse dies in a marriage which never actually happened at the US Mint, thus creating a counterfeit fantasy piece which never actually existed. We've seen this in early US silver coins. I've not personally seen it in early US copper. For this reason (and others mentioned above), a proposed new die marriage would receive a great deal of scrutiny from the best of the best. That's always been true, but more so now than ever.
I don't see it as a danger in the early or middle dates. I can't remember the last time a piece turned up with both a new obv and reverse. Late dates is a possibility. I don't think a new half cent die has been discovered since I started collecting. Actually they tend to make one hub and grind the date off. Then they make several dateless obv dies and put in what ever date they want. You can find a lot of fake half cents and middle date large cents made like that on ebay. You probably don't see the EARLY copper because the die are too individualistic and the series are too well studied. A fake of that type would be spotted instantly. While the silver is well studied their aren't as many specialist collectors to spot them and raise the alarm.
OK! I guess it's time to show you why I asked the question. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260821664489 This is either a fake or a new variety with new dies on both the obverse and reverse. The obverse is closest to 94s in the low 30s, but none match. The reverse actually is closest to S-48 and reverse MM, but is neither. My interest is peeked , but I don't have the funds to take a flyer. I don't know if bidders see the same thing or are fooled by it being labeled a head of 93 which it is certainly NOT! Most counterfeits would not have so many elements of a reverse which are seen on various varieties, but not on any individual variety. Comments?
Lousy small pictures. I would say it is a complete fake the whole thing just looks wrong. Head relief is low like the Gardner heads but the style is like the earlier Scott heads. It is a mish-mash of styles and features.
