Opinion needed

And I think it's great that you can afford the time. That's a huge benefit to being a dealer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I just realized I put the wrong photo of the coin. OOPS.

Here is the right photo.

I thought it looked different. See what happens when you have too many of the same dates.

 

If you look close, you can see the doubling on the 1 in this photo.

 

You sure make it tough...

After spending a whole 7 minutes scrutinizing, I still think it is N7.

 

Sorry. I have too many coins laying here on my desk.

 

ND, if your desk is anything like mine, "too many coins" would be a severe understatement. And, when you saying "laying here on my desk" I assume what you meant to say was "laying around on every available flat surface in my office" ;-)

 

Okay, have you been peeking? There is a nice clear spot on the floor leading from the front door all the way to the nice neat piles. I know that there is a desk under this, because I put it here in this spot. It is the bathroom that bugs the employees. Boxes of coins everywhere. With our last couple of acquisitions, it is really getting tough to get anything done.
I won't even mention what I bought today, that is going to the office in the morning

 

No need to apologize, I have not seen the top of my desk in years.

I just wish it was covered in coins instead of just paperwork.

 

Well I have received an email from cdcda. He had not made the attribution yet. For all you well wishers that have been sending me emails, the results of this coin and its status will be announced as soon as an opinion is formed.

 

The suspense is killing me.

 

Well I just got an updated email, and while no firm opinion has been made yet, an interesting thought has come up.
The 1846 Cent had three different size dates that were used. Small, medium, and large. This coin certainly has the small date as the 6 is closed. His thinking is maybe the date was repunched using a different size date.
While I can find no supporting documentation of such a repunching having taken place, it does leave a little room for thought.
As many of you can tell, this has been a very interesting piece for me. Now for cdcda also. It is these fascinating things that makes numismatics the greatest little hobby in the world.

 

As ND said, I believe this may be a small date repunched over a large date variety. For an easy side by side comparison of the date varieties, check out a copy of the Redbook and the review the photos again.

The location of all the digits (and the style of the digits) is unmistakingly the small date variety. If you look at the "doubling" on the 1 and 8, the location matches where you would expect the digits to be on a large date variety.

Still working...

 

We have contacted Bob Grellman, co-author of "Attribution Guide for United States Large Cents" in an effort to obtain his expert opinion about this coin. Hopefully his comments will help shed some light on the piece.

 

According to Bob Grellman, the coin is not a Newcomb 4 which precludes it from being the doubled die or fixed doubled die referred to by Breen. The question now at hand becomes, what is it? My personal opinion remains that it is a repunched date and I have asked Mr. Grellman to provide his opinion.

 

Mr. Grellman, in his closing email regarding this coin, has stated that he believes the 1846 Large Cent is a Newcomb 1 with a repunched date. Although personally I was unwilling to state the die variety with certainty, I do not doubt his diagnosis in this regard.

So, at least in my opinion, the coin is no longer a mystery! We now have expert (from the man who wrote THE book on identifying Large Cent die varieties) confirmation of the fact that this is a repunched date.

 

I recognize Mr. Grellmans expertise in attributing the US large cents from 1840 to 1847. I also know that having the coin in hand has a huge advantage over trying to attribute from photos.

BUT, my copy of Newcomb states "..left base of 1 over space between denticles." for the N1, as one of the attributes.

I don't see that with this coin (admittedly from the photo), which looks more like "...left base of 1 over center of denticle." to me, which is one attribute of N7. But that's part of the joy of collecting, and I am sure I am wrong. The good news is, this will help me hone my attribution skills.

 

I haven't had the opportunity to do any more research on this coin in the past few days, but this coin will go to Baltimore on July 9th to be authenticated by Anacs.
I have not seen the photos that cdcda sent to Mr. Grellman so I don't know if the detail was better than the ones I posted here. Mr. Grellman is certainly one of the top experts in this area. I can't seem to match up the Newcomb 1 either, but maybe that is because I was hoping for more

I will certainly add the update of the Anacs opinion in July.
For now, I accept the conclusion.

 

Looking forward to what ANACS has to say.

 

Mr. Grellman was more certain about it not being an N4 and it being a repunched date than he was about it being an N1. I think seing the coin in person would be required to say for certain.

 

Well I certainly accept a repunched date. Now it is just a matter of matching it to an existing set of dies. At least this points me in a direction