1843 Seated Dollar

2windy2fish

t
ed
All, please excuse my photography skills! Can anyone help with identifiers for proof Seated dollars? This coin looks so much nicer in hand, no cleaning lines and unbelievable toning…My question is…any chance this is a proof? Only one image to compare to on PCGS and nothing definitive there. Also, i do not believe it has been polished and the luster in fields is spectacular.

MFeld

The coin doesn’t look like a Proof and it appears to be cleaned (edited: or polished) and artificially toned. One tell, in particular, regarding the cleaning, is the area surrounding the first three stars on the lower left side of the obverse.

Inspired70

I agree with @MFeld. Doesn't appear to be a proof. Also looks cleaned and AT'd. Nicely struck.

ElmerFusterpuck

That 1843 dollar has been majorly boinked with. A shame, since it looks very well struck.

291fifth

Polished.

amwldcoin

Agree with the above.

lkenefic

@amwldcoin said:
Agree with the above.

What he said...

DelawareDoons

Agree with biz strike, cleaned, AT'ed. These early dollars can fool people easily RE proof vs non-proof unless you've handled the proofs.

Flatwoods

I'm in the polished, AT camp.
Sorry.

Broadstruck

Yep, in the cleaned AT camp too.

Edited to add... I do however like your username!

kaz

I checked the seated dollar attribution guide, and this is pretty clearly not a proof. please see this link: seateddollarvarieties.com/1843-OCP1.shtml

jmlanzaf

Ditto

Coinscratch

Whatever the case it's pretty sweet looking.
Secondly, it's never too windy to fish

numisma

For some reason, I just had a hankerin' for blueberry pie.

2windy2fish

Thank you Kaz!
That is what I was truly after but was unable to find, of course had it been a proof!
Appreciate your help!

logger7

AT as well as AS, must have been exceptionally shiny on the first go around by whoever fooled with it; then he decided to try to AT it.

thefinn

It also doesn’t have proof rims.

cnncoins

It is definitely AT, but look at the reverse final "A" in AMERICA. All proofs from 1840-1850 were struck from the same reverse die. The final A in AMERICA shows the middle crossbar extending to the the outside on the right side. If this coin has that
it is probably a proof. You can see this on Proof Seated Dollars of this era on CoinFacts. Check it out and compare to
your 1843.

Coinscratch

Based on that diagnostic this coin is legit.
Here is the 1843 proof from CoinFacts compared to the OP’s coin.

Coinscratch

@MFeld said:
The coin doesn’t look like a Proof and it appears to be cleaned (edited: or polished) and artificially toned. One tell, in particular, regarding the cleaning, is the area surrounding the first three stars on the lower left side of the obverse.

I wouldn’t be too quick with the AT either. Other proof coins from this era also exhibit non toned areas around the devices. Perhaps the coin was kept in a cellophane that simply could not touch the surfaces next to the higher points. If this was this case then that could explain why this is happening on the entire coin.

Coinscratch

And then my final non professional point would be, yes it does have a nice strike.

airplanenut

@Coinscratch said:

@MFeld said:
The coin doesn’t look like a Proof and it appears to be cleaned (edited: or polished) and artificially toned. One tell, in particular, regarding the cleaning, is the area surrounding the first three stars on the lower left side of the obverse.

I wouldn’t be too quick with the AT either. Other proof coins from this era also exhibit non toned areas around the devices. Perhaps the coin was kept in a cellophane that simply could not touch the surfaces next to the higher points. If this was this case then that could explain why this is happening on the entire coin.

Those halos are textbook for cleaned or polished coins. Cellophane wouldn’t likely cause toning the way paper or cardboard would. Many toning sources also impart toning by being near and not directly touching the coin. Think about 1950s mint set toning where coins can be fully toned but the paper causing the toning can touch anything more than the highest points, if any part of the coin. Even if the toning were “natural” it was enabled by the coin being polished, so it’s not as though the coin has truly original toning that ignores the other surface issues.

yosclimber

Using the link that @kaz posted, the date position on your coin is too far right to be a proof.
It is in the correct position of the only known business strike obverse die for 1843.
http://www.seateddollarvarieties.com/1843.shtml

Walkerfan

Someone really fooled with this one.

ricko

That coin is AT and cleaned.... Those points alone make it a hard pass for me. Cheers, RickO

Coinscratch

So would this be the work of a coin doctor? Trying to turn a 500 coin into a 50,000 coin.
What a shame

MFeld

@Coinscratch said:
So would this be the work of a coin doctor? Trying to turn a 500 coin into a 50,000 coin.
What a shame

I don't see anything to indicate that someone was trying to make the coin look like a Proof.

Coinscratch

@MFeld said:

@Coinscratch said:
So would this be the work of a coin doctor? Trying to turn a 500 coin into a 50,000 coin.
What a shame

I don't see anything to indicate that someone was trying to make the coin look like a Proof.

Okay, I see.