Congratulations on finding a coin with your favorite design. I would not get the habit of buying these raw from sellers you don’t know on the Internet. Usually a coin like this that is not certified is raw for a reason, and it’s usually not a reason that is in your best interests. I am a big fan of the Draped Bust design. Back when I was a young collector in the early 1960s, I thought that design was the coolest thing going. I dreamed of owning a Draped Bust coin, but they were mostly above my ability to pay. This item that appeared in the back of the Judd pattern book really grabbed my attention. Now that I have owned a fairly large number of examples of the real thing, I now realize that this piece looks rather foolish. "Genuineness doubted" indeed. Here is genuine example in high grade. You can see that the relief is very different. My first Draped Bust coin was an 1806 half cent (C-1) in AG-3 cleaned. I bought that one when I was 16 or so. My first "real" Draped Bust coin was a 1799 Bust Dollar, probably in VF-30. It had been dipped but not cleaned or polished. I bought that one circa 1968. I always wanted examples of the smaller Draped Bust coins, but they were beyond my ability to pay. The dime I saw was at the Gimbels Department coin counter. The price was $240, but it may as well have been $500,000 so far as I was concerned. As an adult I have been able to collect these coins in some detail.
The trouble with the modern Draped Bust coin that was part of First Lady's series (for Thomas Jefferson who was a widower) was that they left off a lot of hair detail. The also did it with the gold Mercury Dime. It didn't even have split bands!
I will agree that this is good advice for most. But personally, I do this all the time. Quite successfully, I might add. In this case, however, I contacted a few friends to gather their thoughts before pulling the trigger. That info, combined with a return policy and eBay/PayPal buyer protection, made me confident in the purchase.
A couple of points. There are collectors and dealers out there who don't like the Draped Bust design. More of them don't like the Heraldic Eagle design. They complain about the replacement of the Small Eagle design (1795 to 1798) and call the large eagle, "bovine excrement." If you look at Scott’s die work starting at the beginning of 1805 and especially in 1806 and ’07, you will see a distinct deterioration. The relief got much lower and the dies did not impart as much fine detail on the coins. The obverse of this 1806 half dollar is an example. If you look at Scott’s later design, the Matron Head Large Cents and the Capped Bust $2.50 and $5.00 gold pieces for example, the coins are down right ugly, at least in my opinion. Note the reverse of this 1916 large cent was still John Reich's design. Scot was clearly past his prime years before he died in office, but his body remained strong as his talents diminished.
I agree that the Matron Head is the least attractive large cent obverse design. Please tell me what evidence there is that Reich designed ANY obverse and what evidence there is that Reich did NOT design the Matron Head cent? I have looked in vain for years. For that matter, what is the evidence that Reich designed the continuous wreath reverse? Maybe he did. Maybe not. The fact that Breen or anyone else says so is NOT evidence.
The Red Book lists the designer as Scot or Reich. John Wright says Scot designed the Matron Head in The Cent Book on page 1.
I have the greatest respect for my good friend, John Wright, but secondary sources like books are not evidence.
Great coin! I too love the draped bust design. But if it's a 'Repunched Date' you crave, you can do a lot better for fewer bucks. See the 1846 N-4 large cent below.
Curiosity Question please. Back in 1803, how do they know that this coin is a one dollar coin, since the denomination is not stated? Was it just common knowledge?