Ireland: copper halfpenny of George III, 1782, double-struck error

lordmarcovan · October 12, 2014 7:35AM

Ireland: copper halfpenny of George III, 1782, double-struck error

Ex-Lost Dutchman Rare Coins, Indianapolis, IN (via "indycoindealer" eBay ID), 10/12/14.

With the exception of an aff-center 1820s British shilling I had in the mid-1990s, and the usual off-center modern Lincoln cents and some clipped Jefferson nickels I found in rolls, this is my first error coin. I have a thing for Irish harps on coins and for 1782 Hibernia halfpennies in particular, as I dug one while detecting an old plantation site near here.

This coin is a little bit porous, but I can live with that. And the price was less than many of the double-struck Statehood quarters I've seen. I think this one is infinitely more interesting.

Larger obverse image
Larger reverse image

When posted here, this coin was part of my "Eclectic Box of 20" collection. (Pending certification)

LochNESS · October 12, 2014 4:22PM

<< <i>... When posted here, this coin was part of my "Eclectic Box of 20" collection. (Pending certification) >>

Does this mean it's now been certified? Or is it still pending certification?

Is it no longer part of your eclectic 20?

lordmarcovan · October 13, 2014 3:36AM

It's a newp from yesterday. So I will have to get it certified before including it in the slabbed Box of 20 set. I fully realize it will probably not straight-grade due to the porosity, which a TPG will call " environmental damage". I expect it will get a "G details" grade. But in this particular case, I don't mind any of that. It really is not the sort of coin that needs slabbing. I just intend to do that for my own reasons.

PS- this will be replacing the Seleucid bronze (the least expensive coin in my set, which is on eBay.). And I also sold that Claudius as, so I have two holes to fill. I had big plans for one of those slots but am now just window-shopping and waiting for the eBay proceeds before I make the final decision on what to add.

NiceCurrency · October 13, 2014 4:23AM

Steve27 · October 13, 2014 4:41AM

Nice coin! Amazing amount of wear on a coin which everyone would have noticed the error.

LochNESS · October 13, 2014 5:10AM

Steve, excellent point. I wonder why nobody took better care of it for so long?!?

Lord M, sorry your big plans didn't pan out. I know the feeling. I recently bid on four huge coins (in July... CNG auction... including the finest-known Mombasa Rupee and Hejaz ryal). Unfortunately none of mine panned out either. What did you have your eye on?

JCMhouston · October 13, 2014 6:17AM

Very neat piece.

lordmarcovan · October 13, 2014 9:12AM

<< <i>Steve, excellent point. I wonder why nobody took better care of it for so long?!? >>

I think the idea of a misstruck coin being considered a worthy keepsake or collectible is a fairly modern concept. But perhaps not entirely. I have seen some early off-center errors that were carefully holed through the unstruck portion to be worn as jewelry.

Picture it in an 18th century working man's pocket, though. No doubt he'd have noticed the error, and maybe he commented on it- to the tavern keeper, as he slid it across the bar for his tankard of ale. He had his priorities, and so do we 21st century collectors.

<< <i>Lord M, sorry your big plans didn't pan out. I know the feeling. I recently bid on four huge coins (in July... CNG auction... including the finest-known Mombasa Rupee and Hejaz ryal). Unfortunately none of mine panned out either. What did you have your eye on? >>

CNG does non-ancients and non-medieval coins, too? Interesting.

I had my eye on a very nice thaler. My opinion of the coin remains the same- I love it. But I showed it to Zohar and he said that while it is indeed a nice coin, it is a common type and the price was rather steep. Another piece of the same type, date, and grade went for barely half the price in a Heritage auction. The Heritage coin was in an NGC holder with decent grey toning, while the one I liked is in a PCGS Secure holder with TrueView image and nice colorful toning. The PCGS coin I was considering is worth a premium to me for the toning, the plastic, and the overall eye appeal, But is it worth TWICE as much? Probably not. I'd be "buried" in it.

Were I the kind of dedicated collector who buys a coin and holds it for life, the purchase might have made sense. But since I am not, and coins tend to cycle through my hands on a one- to ten-year basis, I need to consider my costs a bit more. So I am considering other options. (Still have that thaler in my head, though.)

lordmarcovan · October 13, 2014 3:56PM

Another question, which savoyspecial brought up: do you suppose the coin above is of regal issue, or a contemporary counterfeit? The 1782 (non-error) Irish halfpenny I found here while detecting was a counterfeit, as I suspect many of the ones circulating in America were.

BTW, if anybody is interested in this sort of thing, here is a 1719 George I British farthing with multiple strikes. (I have no connection to the seller.)

I had that one in my watchlist for a few months. It plainly has nicer surfaces than my Irish halfpenny, but I chose the coin above since it had a Best Offer option, I liked the Irish aspect to it, and the shift between strikes is more dramatic than on the Brit farthing. But that one is a neat coin, too, and it looks as though either the price has been reduced or the exchange rate between the US and Aussie dollar must have changed, because it's a little bit cheaper than I recall it being. (Not quite as cheap as I got the Irish piece for, but pretty close.)

LochNESS · October 13, 2014 5:52PM

CNG handled the online bidding for the Lissner collection. I don't know how often they do that for non-ancients / non-grecoromans, but yes they did. If I could go back in time ... I might bury myself

As for the authenticity of your newp, well I didn't want to speculate because I'm not an expert on this century or errors .. but the only coins I've ever seen which were THAT porous were replicas at museum gift shops. I can think of one particular keepsake that I picked up at the spanish fort in St. Augustine, FL. Porous just like yours and even has the exact same greyish toning. Doesn't mean anything though.

lordmarcovan · October 13, 2014 11:39PM

<< <i>As for the authenticity of your newp, well I didn't want to speculate because I'm not an expert on this century or errors .. but the only coins I've ever seen which were THAT porous were replicas at museum gift shops. I can think of one particular keepsake that I picked up at the spanish fort in St. Augustine, FL. Porous just like yours and even has the exact same greyish toning. Doesn't mean anything though. >>

I've seen the Saint Augie tourist fakes. We had them at the Fort Frederica gift shop here, too. (Hilariously, you could buy a genuine low grade George II halfpenny for a fraction of what the museum charged for a replica of one!)

But no, I'm certain this is not one of those. The question is whether it is a contemporary 18th century counterfeit or a regal issue struck by the British government.

Savoyspecial mentioned a Mike Ringo collection of British and Irish coppers, many of them off-center and many with this look?

It's a common enough look on 18th century coppers, as any metal detectorist like yours truly can attest. (And many of those museum replicas were no doubt cast from dug coins, so there you go.)

Oh- and if you haven't seen many coins THIS porous, then you haven't seen much 200-year-old copper. This one isn't so bad. Trust me. Go have a peek at some of the Vermont coppers Ambro51 posts over on the Liteside sometime.

LochNESS · October 14, 2014 4:33AM

I have a 1771 Danish skilling with no pores, but it's true I haven't seen much 200-yr-old copper. Certainly not much that was dug. I suspected what you said about the replicas being cast from porous coins. Why else would they make them that way? Must be the case.

lordmarcovan · October 20, 2014 2:23AM

Browser freeze caused double post.

lordmarcovan · October 20, 2014 2:39AM

This coin arrived today and as I had hoped, the surfaces appear nicer than they do in the photos. The color is not so dark and is more of the natural medium brown one might hope for on old copper.

In fact, I am of the opinion that the microporosity may be within acceptable levels for an 18th century copper, and I would guess this piece has some chance to straight-grade at a TPG without getting a "details" grade or "Gennie" holder. Time will tell, after I submit it.

Even if I'm wrong in that and it doesn't straight-grade, I still like it.

LochNESS · October 20, 2014 3:05AM

Congrats on your newp, buddy! A very cool error indeed. Sounds like fresh photos are required

lordmarcovan · October 20, 2014 3:07AM

It'll get the TrueView treatment when it goes to our hosts.

brg5658 · October 20, 2014 3:09AM

Do TPGs straight grade or even encapsulate contemporary counterfeits?

Just wondering...in case your piece is indeed non-regal. My first thoughts are that it is not regal, but I'm not expert in the area.

lordmarcovan · October 20, 2014 3:28AM

Good question, and you aren't the first to ask it.

I brought it up across the street, and the much-esteemed Conder101 was of the opinion that this one is regal issue.

Years ago I had ANACS reject one that wasn't. How this would go at PCGS or NGC these days if it were a contemporary counterfeit, I don't know.

LochNESS · October 20, 2014 3:51AM

Time will tell. Meanwhile ...

Ireland: copper halfpenny of George III, 1782, double-struck error

Comments