1800/79 Large Cent with "U S" countermark

rgpete

I got a response about my Large Cent from the Springfield Armory Museum in reference to the "U S" countermark, their opinion was there are consistencies with the fonts used by the US Government for marking items. I know this is not a coin issue but for military. The coin is very worn and it could have been used by an Armorer or US inspector' testing their gangpunch. Would this coin be worth certifying?

rgpete

Springfield Armory Fonts

IkesT

@rgpete said:

Springfield Armory Fonts

The coin wasn't marked with the same punch as the item above. The "S" is clearly different.

IkesT

JBK

Springfield Armory was a government arsenal but private makers of various things made under government contract might have had their own "US" punches.

lkenefic

I think most collectors of Early Copper will view this as damaged. The collectors that gravitate towards counterstamped coins typically want one linked to either a movement (political or otherwise) or a specific merchant that would counterstamp coins as a marketing tool. Here are a couple of mine. Vote The Land Free was linked to the Free Soil Party and the election of 1848. I can't recall the vendor information for the WWL counterstamp, but it's in Rulau's book as Brunk L-26.

lkenefic

@rgpete ... and Welcome to the Forum!!

jonathanb

Brunk says:

"U S" has ben noted on many coins. Some stamps of this sort were meant to mark US government property. Others were to be used with the initials of government inspectors on guns, swords, etc. (Rulau 2001), and so "U S" often is found with various unidentified initials. Listed below are some examples. Many more exist.

rgpete

@IkesT said:

@rgpete said:

Springfield Armory Fonts

The coin wasn't marked with the same punch as the item above. The "S" is clearly different.

I know there can be various differences in the fonts being hand made in the 1800's its the roman font with block serifs type

rgpete

@lkenefic said:
@rgpete ... and Welcome to the Forum!!

Thank You

IkesT

@rgpete said:

@IkesT said:

@rgpete said:

Springfield Armory Fonts

The coin wasn't marked with the same punch as the item above. The "S" is clearly different.

I know there can be various differences in the fonts being hand made in the 1800's its the roman font with block serifs type

The point is, they're not the same. It could have been a private individual making "US" counterstamps on coins for fun.

Hard to see anyone attributing the coin counterstamp to anything in particular unless there is an exact match.

rgpete

@JBK said:
Springfield Armory was a government arsenal but private makers of various things made under government contract might have had their own "US" punches.

Yes it could be a Surcharge countermark for muskets from France or Germany used by the US

rgpete

@jonathanb said:
Brunk says:

"U S" has ben noted on many coins. Some stamps of this sort were meant to mark US government property. Others were to be used with the initials of government inspectors on guns, swords, etc. (Rulau 2001), and so "U S" often is found with various unidentified initials. Listed below are some examples. Many more exist.

The US Government had a standard size for their gangpunch this does fit within standards on size and gaps currently in the process of getting that verified

TomB

Howdy and welcome.

Someone will find it interesting and someone will buy it, but I imagine the pool of potential buyers to be quite small since it appears to be an anonymous punch. The reason you received an observation about the differences in the Springfield Armory punch is because you brought up consistencies in fonts that they mentioned, but then illustrated a font that was clearly different. That's all.

Anyway, I think it's cool, but don't think it would be worth attempting to get certified, and if it is indeed rather anonymous it might only get certified as "damaged genuine".

rgpete

@jonathanb said:
Brunk says:

"U S" has ben noted on many coins. Some stamps of this sort were meant to mark US government property. Others were to be used with the initials of government inspectors on guns, swords, etc. (Rulau 2001), and so "U S" often is found with various unidentified initials. Listed below are some examples. Many more exist.

Are there images to compare

Morgan White

These are common. Unless you can prove, without a doubt, that the punch matches a known military stamp (and you will never be able to), then you're wasting your time.

JBK

Guns (and other things) were marked US for many years. I'd expect there to be many variations.

I have a couple vintage US and anchor punches (US Navy) that are in different sizes.

Early 19th into mid 19th century muskets/rifles would generally have US and an eagle. If your cent also had the eagle it would have bolstered the gunmaker angle.

Walkerguy21D

Not worth certifying, and probably not worth a whole lot….But, still a neat old piece of history.

rgpete

I don't think it is a waste of time as I said it comes down to an expert in military markings expert not coins, nothing ventured nothing gain

rgpete

@JBK said:
Guns (and other things) were marked US for many years. I'd expect there to be many variations.

I have a couple vintage US and anchor punches (US Navy) that are in different sizes.

Early 19th into mid 19th century muskets/rifles would generally have US and an eagle. If your cent also had the eagle it would have bolstered the gunmaker angle.

There can be different punches for musket lock plates which can include the eagle and us and they can be separate also it can be a breech barrel stamp, etc

rgpete

@TomB said:
Howdy and welcome.

Someone will find it interesting and someone will buy it, but I imagine the pool of potential buyers to be quite small since it appears to be an anonymous punch. The reason you received an observation about the differences in the Springfield Armory punch is because you brought up consistencies in fonts that they mentioned, but then illustrated a font that was clearly different. That's all.

Anyway, I think it's cool, but don't think it would be worth attempting to get certified, and if it is indeed rather anonymous it might only get certified as "damaged genuine".

Yes different but still a Roman Font with a block serif these punches were hand made by different makers it would be hard to get the same style in 1800's to today's modern standards the illustrated font was just an example for the style of font

rgpete

@JBK said:
Guns (and other things) were marked US for many years. I'd expect there to be many variations.

I have a couple vintage US and anchor punches (US Navy) that are in different sizes.

Early 19th into mid 19th century muskets/rifles would generally have US and an eagle. If your cent also had the eagle it would have bolstered the gunmaker angle.

Also the "US" would be centered on the throat area to test the punch for clarity of the punch and depth

Givaudan

Pete, you are on to something.
Please keep us updated on your advanced and continued research.

Morgan White

@rgpete said:

@JBK said:
Guns (and other things) were marked US for many years. I'd expect there to be many variations.

I have a couple vintage US and anchor punches (US Navy) that are in different sizes.

Early 19th into mid 19th century muskets/rifles would generally have US and an eagle. If your cent also had the eagle it would have bolstered the gunmaker angle.

Also the "US" would be centered on the throat area to test the punch for clarity of the punch and depth

Makes zero sense they would test for "clarity and depth" on 100% copper and then use the punch on military steel.