Is there anyway to tell if this an 1858 Canadian Cent

Smittys

In a set under the 1858, is there anyway to tell if really is?

bohica268

with a mintage of only 421,000 it's likey not a 58. Charlton doesn't list any diagnostics for the 1858, only for the 59 and yours is too worn to even guess which of the 4 it might be.

Numismatics

As my own understanding, the reverse of 1858 and 1859 is the same.

Too bad that the last digit is so worn.

Sylvestius

The wear on that is odd!

How did the last number vanish beyond recognition and yet the other three are still strong?8

*Does the last number gain most wear first? (Honest question as i don't know the series)

bohica268

<< <i>The wear on that is odd!

How did the last number vanish beyond recognition and yet the other three are still strong?8

*Does the last number gain most wear first? (Honest question as i don't know the series) >>



My 1965 edition of Charlton & Wiley's Standard Grading Guide To Canadian Decimal Coins identifies the wreath as likey to wear first. Based on the book's illustrations the word CENT is second.

Smittys: any chance of seeing the obverse? I've got a thing for Victoria - Regina D.G.

Smittys

obverse as requested

Sylvestius

<< <i>My 1965 edition of Charlton & Wiley's Standard Grading Guide To Canadian Decimal Coins identifies the wreath as likey to wear first. Based on the book's illustrations the word CENT is second.

Smittys: any chance of seeing the obverse? I've got a thing for Victoria - Regina D.G. >>




The CENT going early on comes as no surprised being in a place where it would be handled most often, if the coin has slightly convex fields (miniscully so as to be unnoticable) then it's not uncommon.

Smittys can you look at the last number under a magnifying glass or something and see if there's any evidence of the number being, how shall we say... worn off unnaturally?*

From gazing into my screen (quite a while) though it looks like a very faint trace outline of an 8. Buit didn't one of the '9' issue have a 9 where the tail came up to meet (or nearly meet) the loop?

*From experience with UK coinage there's alot of 'doctored' 1935 pennies out there with the last digit altered to a 3. Perhaps someone saw one of the 'closed' 9's and though, a bit of wear on that and it'll look like an 8! (Might explain why that last number is significantly worn in comparison to the other three).

Smittys

Can't tell under a magnifier just looks worn can't make out a good enough
to tell the digit

Spinynorman

I don't know if there is anyway to tell the date on it. I just wanted to say that there's no way that the missing digit is from wear. Either it was removed post mint or, more likely, struck so weakly that it never showed or was gone with just moderate wear. With the detail missing in one cent also, I'd guess it was struck from a filled die.

docday2003

to me it looks like the last digit has been removed. I have heard that there is a way to soak a coin in an acid solution to get an impression of the date underneath. I've never tried it, but heard about it in connection with "raising" the dates on worn buffalo nickels. Maybe the US forum has more info on how to actually do it.

bosox

Is there a vine break next to the leaf at 5 o'clock (the one closest to the missing digit)? If the vine is intact next to that leaf, it is a '58. If the vine is broken it could either a '58 or a '59.