1828 large cent misplaced date?

darktone

I did a thread on this last year and I forgot about this coin until today. Anyone have any new opinions on this one? Anybody here up on these that would care to inspect it in person? Thanks Mike

wingedliberty

Clear MPD in the denticles! The flag of the -1- and the loop of the -8- can be clearly seen.
Not sure which variety it is though. Consult an EAC expert for more detailed info.
Nice find!


Brian.

darktone

Thanks Brian, I thought it looked like a date in the denticles also but the large cent guy's said there was no vatiety like this. I was going to send it to ANACS but I forgot about it because it was burried under some Morgans in 2X2's. mike

airplanenut

I'd love to inspect it in person...

I have no idea what I'm looking for, but hey, it's nice and old, so I'd like it

Jeremy

Devman

Darktone:

Your coin appears to match the obverse of the varieties N2, N3, N4, N5, and N12 judging by the date positioning alone. In the text by William C. Noyes, he does not mention a MPD on this obverse die, nor does there appear to be one on the 3 inch plates. Hope this helps.

Devman

darktone

Thanks Devman and welcome to the forum! Do any of those varieties show what appears to be a date in the denticles?

Thanks Jeremy, If you want to look at it in person send me a PM. mike

Devman

Thanks for the welcome, Darktone!
The varieties I listed all share the same obverse die that doesn't appear to have the MPD, and in the later die states no die cracking comes down into the date, so its not probable that it was caused by die cracking. It could be very light old damage that has had many years to tone over and blend with the rest of the color. It probably forced the metal up and out, making it appear to be an erroneous "8" punched into the denticles.

jadecoin

In our opinion, devman is correct: it is damage and not misplaced numerals. The clue is that the mark that appears to be the upper loop of an "8" does NOT match the logotype of the "8" in the date. It actually looks like (2) stray 8's, but I am guessing that there was some sort of impact damage in this area. Just as devman said, the marks have blended with the surrounding surfaces and the appearance is convincing at first glance. Just an opinion.....

darktone

Thanks guy's, that is what others said before but the metal is raised and I don't really see where that much metal could have been moved to create this. mike

Lakesammman

It looks authentic enough to at least not dismiss it outright. Getting it attributed is a good idea. If all that survived was the INNER portion of the top of either 8, it could look this way, the outer margins either effaced in the die making process or by wear, blending them into the fields. Let us know the answer. You could send to ANACS or to someone like Fivaz.

Devman

Darktone:

Since copper is a very soft metal, the metal could have been displaced very easily. Perhaps an object such as a small nail or punch was used after it was released from the mint to inflict that damage, and it would have moved the metal in the shape of the object that inflicted it. This coin uses Newcomb's obverse 2, which is used on Newcomb 2, N3, N4, N5, and N12, none of which displays the misplaced date on the Plates in Noyes. A very interesting coin; thanks for posting it on the message boards!

Devman

Conder101

I agree with the die identification seems to be, and if it is that die it should be a N-5 since that was the first use of the die. That die does have a misplaced digit on it but it is the BOTTOM curve of a 2 joining the 28 at the bottom. It would be helpful to have pictures of the entire coin to confirm the attribution. If it is NOT an N-5 then we may have to look closer at the possibility of a new obverse. If it is N-5 then we have to check and see if it is possibly a very early die state that shows something we haven't seen before.

darktone

Conder- I can't seem to get a picture to upload with AOL right now but as soon as I do I will post some pictures of the whole coin. thanks mike