Connecticut I won at the ANR auction.
Oldnewbie
Posts: 1,425 ✭✭
I'm very happy to get this. The variety is common but it's in really nice shape. It will be the finest "Painted Die Variety" Connecticut I own. (Or ever might own)
0
Comments
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
09/07/2006
Like VOC Numismatics on facebook
VERY
Let me paste in a post from Dennis Tarrant of Jade Rare Coin explaning the practice, as he does a great job.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JadeRareCoin
Veteran
Posts: 985
Joined: Mar 2004
Friday July 02, 2004 10:07 AM
Hi Eric,
As you already know, I am enamored with attribution ink on colonial coppers. There's not much documentation on the background of attribution ink, but some of the C4 (colonial coin club) members have information that they have shared with me. First of all, to answer your question, there was at least one person who was forging attribution ink on Connecticut coppers, Fugios and other colonials few years ago (what a jerk, huh?). Identifying the modern inked coins is not easy, but can be done. The primary difference is that the ink is too white. If you examine the attribution ink on your inked CT, you will see that the ink actually has a patina and is discolored. Look with even higher magnification, and you can see fine crackling sometimes on the ink.
In my own experience, I have positively identified at least 3 different styles of attribution ink on colonials. The one I sold you (your icon coin), is by far the best done. Whoever that collector was, he was very particular about the placement and quality of his inked attributions. The worst one was done with a much broader brush and sometimes it's even difficult to read the attributions. I was told by one colonial expert that there's information on the collectors who actually did the inking, probably obtained via researching of old auction catalogs.
In case you're wondering why someone would "paint" the attribution on a colonial copper, here's my understanding and opinion: Publications of works that identified different varieties of colonial coins were available to collectors in the late 1800's. For example, Maris released his work on NJ coppers in 1880. At that time, and even well into the 1960's, collecting colonial coins was comparable to collecting sea shells today. Colonial coins were readily available (remember that millions of these coppers were struck) and there was not a big demand by collectors. The supply/demand ratio was such that these "old coppers" were literally selling for $0.01 or $0.02 each. The really nice ones could be had for $1 or so. Now that collectors had variety references (i.e. Maris for NJ, Miller for Conn., Ryder for Vermont, etc.), they could affordably collect a particular series by obtaining the different varieties. This was coin collecting in its purest form. In the 1890's and early 1900's, coin holders were not ubiquitous. Even if one did have an envelope, it may not be worth wasting it on a cheap-o colonial coin. So, how else would one keep track of his different varieties? How about if you write the variety right on the coin! After all, these are not expensive coins......they are like sea shells.
I see more attribution ink on Connecticut coppers than any other issue. Probably for a few reasons. My theory is that CTs offer more varieties than any other colonial (nearly 400 different). Amazing, isn't it? Also, Miller's work on CTs was released in 1920. With The Great Depression some to come, collectors were probably looking for the most affordable way to enjoy their hobby, even through the hard times.
How rare or scarce are inked colonials? Well, I have sold less than 20 in my career. I have seen others, but they represent a small percentage of the coins on the market. Probably because some people collect inked coins and they have mostly been removed from the market. Also, we must assume that many of the coins have been "curated" to remove the ink. Does original attribution ink add value to the coin? As confirmed by CCU, only if you are interested in that sort of thing. To some, it's just damage. To others it's a link to the early days of The King of Hobbies; American coin collecting. I am in the second group.
I should make note that I am not the authority on attribution inked colonials. Most of the thoughts I expressed above are my thoughts and opinions, or is simply information that I am relaying from others. I am sure that there are others on this forum who know much more about inked coins (i.e. the names of the collectors, how many collectors, etc.). I know that some colonial experts lurk here, but do not post. Maybe now is your chance to make that first post (hi Ed).
I would think Pistareen (John K. from ANR) would have plenty of information for us on this subject. John, ya out there today? I am also sure that Mr. Bowers can enlighten us on the subject.
Dennis
PS - I absolutely love colonial coins (with or without ink )
Congrats on your purchase.
Jenna
ANR
Cameron Kiefer
Jenna
ANR
(PS- Humorously, when I do shoot a coin I have to stand on a box of old catalogues to do so- I'm only 5'2" and can't see through the viewfinder!)
Cameron Kiefer
Jenna
ANR
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.