1795 plain edge, no pole half cent struck over a 1795 cent, PCGS MS66RB
rays
Posts: 2,420 ✭✭✭✭✭
Lot 3038 in the McGuigan sale, is just amazing on so many levels:
20
rays
Posts: 2,420 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
That's extremely cool. Thanks for sharing such a treasure.
Whoa!
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Too cool.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
That's seriously cool!
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
WOW... I wonder how they were able to tell it was struck over a 1795 Large Cent?
."It's a dangerous business... going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to" -JRR Tolkien_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Outstanding BST transactions as a seller, buyer and trader with: ----- mustanggt, Kliao, claudewill87, MWallace, paesan, mpbuck82, moursund, basetsb, lordmarcovan, JWP, Coin hunter 4, COINS MAKE CENTS, PerryHall, Aspie_Rocco, Braddick, DBSTrader2, SanctionII, Histman, The_Dinosaur_Man, jesbroken, CentSearcher ------ANA Member #3214817
Awesome!
Collector
75 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 45 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
Saw that coin at FUN and wondered if I could possibly afford it. Then I looked it up…..NOT!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Wow!
even more than that, they know the exact sheldon number.
in looking at the max trueviews, the auction listing with different images, the holder, the 76b sheldon from my database of the husak coin, i gotta say something isn't making sense here.
not only do i see no undertype, there is no mention of the o/c strike from what appears to be a large cent.
help, anyone?
I looked at that display at FUN as well.
I had no idea that many half cent errors even existed.
** WOW... I wonder how they were able to tell it was struck over a 1795 Large Cent?**
It almost looks like the half cent was struck first, then it was partially stuck between the dies of the large cent and struck again.
I would have to look again, but I wouldn't think a 1/2 cent would take up that much of a planchet on a Large Cent.
From the lot description: “All that remains from the large cent are the tops of the letters AME, but from that, attribution as 1795 S-76b was possible, courtesy of a patient numismatist.”
Link to description: https://coins.ha.com/itm/half-cents/1795-plain-edge-no-pole-b-5b-c-5b-low-r4-struck-over-a-1795-s-76b-cent-ms66-red-and-brown-pcgs-our-eac-grade-ms66/a/1348-3038.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
well, i'll post the links if someone is up for untangling what this thing is.
cert - - - ha link - - - tv image
just for fun, edited to add: the various people that offered attributions over the decades/centuries
Ross 3-B;
Gilbert-6;
Empire-18;
Cohen-5b;
Breen-5b;
Bowers Whitman-6b;
Eckberg 1a-C.
Me too.
.
.
ya, that part i understand but the only way this half cent is struck OVER a large cent, is if it was a small planchet of a large cent that was struck o/c and tbh, i'm not sure that even makes sense.
c'mon here, tell me i'm not the only one baffled, seriously! i'm not losing sleep over it but i am totally in OZ on this one.
I see what you mean, it seems to be a large cent struck over a half cent.
if any half cent experts care to chime in as to why the lettering/numerals of the half cent have bifurcation like it is broadstruck, that'd be grand. (i know there is early type that has bifurcation w/o being broadstruck, ironically)
however it is untangled, that is some serious 18th century midnight shenanigans!
the only reservation i have about which was struck first is that the edge of the o/c part looks like what i'd expect if the half cent was struck second as it has some metal curling up, whereas if the large cent came second, i figure that part would just be thin and kinda smooth?
i'm sure there are some label space constraints but it is odd it isn't listed as an error either.
Look at the rim through the Large cent section on the True View and you can see a bit of upturned metal on both sides. As the linked auction description says, the first strike was from cent dies off-center on a cent planchet. They then took the mis-strike and punched a half cent size blank out of that, partly overlapping the cent strike. They then ran this blank through the upsetting machine, raising up a bit of an upset rim through the cent strike area. They then struck this coin.
The area struck by the cent dies was made thinner than the unstruck area of the cent planchet. When the half cent was struck on the thicker cent areas, the strike did not penetrate down to the struck cent area.
Weight 6.74 grams. Way too heavy for a plain edge half cent, but about right for one that is (mostly, except for in the area struck by the large cent dies) of large cent thickness.
TD
TD, thank you for your excellent analysis. I was having trouble conceptualizing how this could have occurred.
i let your post digest for a bit and that makes sense. i did look over the description area a couple times before posting but didn't see any explanation.
i have heard about cutting down and reusing flans so that makes sense and explains the curled metal at the o/c sections.
thanks for taking the time!
this along with some of the other early errors are pretty amazing on their own, let alone the condition they are in!
after the short stint i have in numismatics, it seems there is no end to the amount of amazing material out there despite the chaos of time and history!
TD is correct, and his analysis was eloquently explained.
yes, I was trying to figure it out, when I saw your post.
Obviously a typo.
BHNC #203
That is a truly unique error coin. Thanks @CaptHenway for the explanation. Cheers, RickO
It's very interesting how many people were confused about the coin but how few of them bothered to actually READ the excellent HA description.
Turns out it isn't just kids that only look at the pictures.
the description is VERY poorly placed considering its importance. i skimmed it a couple times, for my part, and did not see it. that information is placed under "Surfaces."
how sweet is that
Neat-O... Thanks for posting!
.
do you think someone has the ability to add it to either the large cent or half cent registry since technically it is both and both are listed on the label and cert page?
Only the half cent registry.
35087 on Coinfacts is listed as follows:
1795 1/2C C-5b Pl Edge No Pole, RB (Regular Strike)
Series: Liberty Cap Right Half Cents 1794-1797