Options
Stump The Experts....Unusual Bust Quarter.....Error, Die Trial, Pattern, What???? (Info in first po
elwood
Posts: 2,414 ✭
You don't see something like this everyday. An 1821 Quarter in copper.
Only 4 known.
I think it's a counterfeit....die stansfer, electro or spark??
Weight is 6.4-6.5g
Dia. is almost identical to another 1821 I have....the copper coin is slightly larger but so close it's almost unnoticeable.
The fields are smooth with what looks like light die polish lines. Miss Liberty and other design elements appear slightly porous.
Mostly brown with some red luster around the rim.
There are some lumps in the fields, which don't appear to be die rust...I could be wrong??
There are several lint marks, at least 5. There are also several planchet voids.
If you look at 2:00 and 10:00 on the reverse there are area's where the denticles dissappear and then reappear.
I bought it as a counterfeit with the possibilty of it being a die trial. I don't think too many people have had a chance to view the coin and give an opinion. I do know that it is quite rare with only 4 examples being known. Pretty cool item.
If it is a counterfeit i'd sure like to know the era in which it was created.
Only 4 known.
I think it's a counterfeit....die stansfer, electro or spark??
Weight is 6.4-6.5g
Dia. is almost identical to another 1821 I have....the copper coin is slightly larger but so close it's almost unnoticeable.
The fields are smooth with what looks like light die polish lines. Miss Liberty and other design elements appear slightly porous.
Mostly brown with some red luster around the rim.
There are some lumps in the fields, which don't appear to be die rust...I could be wrong??
There are several lint marks, at least 5. There are also several planchet voids.
If you look at 2:00 and 10:00 on the reverse there are area's where the denticles dissappear and then reappear.
I bought it as a counterfeit with the possibilty of it being a die trial. I don't think too many people have had a chance to view the coin and give an opinion. I do know that it is quite rare with only 4 examples being known. Pretty cool item.
If it is a counterfeit i'd sure like to know the era in which it was created.
Please visit my website prehistoricamerica.com www.visitiowa.org/pinecreekcabins
0
Comments
A fantasy piece from the 1860s or a die trial strike in the 1820s??
<< <i>That is a nice evenly struck coin also....tell us more >>
I'll let more people guess and post some of what I know tomorrow.
wonderful and a killer coin thst makes a collection of early coins special
extra special
wild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>Elwood - Is there much die rust? >>
There do seem to be a number of "dimples" in the left obverse field. I don't know squat about 1821 quarters, but perhaps a specialist can tell us how common that is.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
But so far, Cladiator has attributed the coin correctly as a B-5.....does that narrow down the possibilities?
Highly unusual and extremely rare.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
Oh my goodness. That is phenomenal!
We own one of the 1834 quarters in copper, which is documented (ref. J-50 as a pattern). Some have called the 1834 copper quarters contemporary counterfiets, others call them patterns. I call it a die trial struck using a half cent planchet of that day. Much debate regarding this subject. My rebutal to the 1834 copper quarters being contemporary counterfiets is this: how could the coins match B-3 and B-5 exactly? The counter argument is that they were cast from a real 1834 quarter. The counter to that counter is that the 1834 copper quarters are die struck. The argument goes on and on, such as why aren't the known examples even slightly silvered, like a contemorary counterfeit bust half would be? .....and around and around we go.
Regarding your quarter, here's my theory, albeit an amateur theory:
1821 B-5 dies were used to strike proof examples for that year of quarters. I would venture to guess that a few pieces were struck in copper while setting and refining the press to strike the proofs, thereby qualifying them as die trial pieces. What's the diameter of the coin you posted? Large Cents of that time were 28-29 mm, and the quarters were 27 mm in diameter. What's the weight/thickness? An interesting note about the coin you posted: weak dentilation on the reverse and a relatively weak strike.
Before going any further with any theory, it would be best to gather as much information as possible. For example, get a specific gravity test on the coin, count the edge reeding, take all measurements, etc.
A fascinating coin. Thanks for posting it!
Our eBay auctions - TRUE auctions: start at $0.01, no reserve, 30 day unconditional return privilege & free shipping!
I am Looking to Buy California Tokens too.
Wait, that's a nice trial piece!
So, what does it weigh?
.
But seriously, folks, it sure looks good to me.
Tom D.
Bring on the popcorn and beverages!
I am stumped on this one!
Thanks everyone for responding so far.....I'll try to give you some better details shortly. (if my wife quits bugging me)
<< <i>Interesting. What sort of strike pressure would leave the stars not fully brought up on a copper planchet? Seems much more likely that a die was created from a non fully struck silver coin ... >>
Valid point. I also raised the issue of weak strike. That could possibly refute my idea of die trial, but I would argue that it could be that the die trial was not fully struck. Remember, by definition a die trial is a piece that was used to test a die set-up. Maybe the strike was not strong enough as they were testing something like perpendicularity or concentricity, etc. 1821 B-5 quarters seem to only be found well struck. I agree with TDN that a copper example would be well struck, considering that it is a soft metal. I do not agree, however, that the technology was available in the mid-1800's to create a die from a struck coin....unless it would be crudely obvious.
Another interesting observation: note that there is a bit of "field" beyond the dentilation which is highly unusual (i.e. never observed) for a large size bust quarter. My mind wants to convince me that it was struck on a large cent planchet since they are about the same size. The problem is that the large cents were about 1-2 mm larger in diameter than the quarters, so one would assume that the blanks were also slightly larger. If so, a large cent planchet would never fit in the open collar of the 1821 quarter die. Could it have been slightly modified to fit the open collar? That's why the weight/diameter are so crutial here. Another possibility is that they mint could have used a cent collar for the die trial, but that would be illogical.
Another possibility (shootin' off the hip theory) is that someone obtained the dies for 1821 B-5 and, within a few years after 1821, struck some copper specimens with the intent on silver plating them to pass as counterfeits. A weak theory in the sense that it would be unlikely for anyone to obtain the exact dies of a specific marriage and......that anyone would have access to a press capable of accepting the dies and striking examples. If you understand contemporary counterfiet bust halves, then you will understand my point.
I still think that this is a copper die trial, possibly struck using a large cent blank that may or may not have been modified to fit the press.
Gotta love a good numismatic mystery!
Our eBay auctions - TRUE auctions: start at $0.01, no reserve, 30 day unconditional return privilege & free shipping!
Weight is 6.4-6.5g
Dia. is almost identical to another 1821 I have....the copper coin is slightly larger but so close it's almost unnoticeable.
The fields are smooth with what looks like light die polish lines. Miss Liberty and other design elements appear slightly porous.
Mostly brown with some red luster around the rim.
There are some lumps in the fields, which don't appear to be die rust...I could be wrong??
There are several lint marks, at least 5. There are also several planchet voids.
If you look at 2:00 and 10:00 on the reverse there are area's where the denticles dissappear and then reappear.
I bought it as a counterfeit with the possibilty of it being a die trial. I don't think too many people have had a chance to view the coin and give an opinion. I do know that it is quite rare with only 4 examples being known. Pretty cool item.
If it is a counterfeit i'd sure like to know the era in which it was created.
Well, the weight tells me that it is NOT struck from a large cent planchet of that era. Based on that weight, I would guess that it is the same thickness as a silver 1821 quarter. One disturbing thing is that star 1 is sharp, yet star 3 is weak (even missing a point). That just doesn't happen. That fact, along with the fact that you can see planchet voids, could suggest a cast contemporary counterfeit. That's why I would suggest a specific gravity test AND additional non-destructive metallurgical tests (specifically exact composition).
Let me tell you why I don't think that it is a counterfeit:
1) What's the point? It's copper. Who were the contemporary counterfeiters trying to fool? I would guess that the 3 other 1821 copper examples are not silvered either? Same with the known 1834 counterfeit quarters listed as J-50 in the pattern book. Your coin is high grade. If it were silvered to pass in commerce, it would show most of the silvering. At the very least you would see silvering in the protected areas (i.e. the stars, date, within the eagle, etc.).
2) It's too nicely done. I don't know of a known counterfeit from that era that exactly matches a known die variety for that year. I don't think that die transfer technology was even possible. Remember that they did not have electricity in that day and age, let alone precision transfer technology. One counter-argument could be that an actual coin was simply "pressed" into plaster, thereby making a mold from which other coins could be "poured". I would say that you would have a resulting "coin" with barely half of the original detail.
3) If it were not a contemporary counterfeit (made in the early to mid 1800's), then that would suggest that it is a modern counterfeit. Especially if one would suggest an EDM counterfeit (electrical discharge machining). Again.....what's the advantage? Certainly not financial as a very high-end 1821 would have been destroyed.
4) You state that you see "some red luster" at the rims. That would suggest a coin that is die struck. To achieve this, one would need to manufacture dies from a solid material capable of surviving heavy forces from a press (many tons of pressure). The mint used hardened steel for their dies. To manufacture a die required a lot of work (remember what was available to the mint workers of that time). Would counterfeiters make actual hardened steel dies by transfering from a coin to steel? Unlikely. Back in the early to mid 1800's, you didn't just call the metal supplier and have them FedEx die steel to you. It was more rare than gold itself. I believe that whatever your item is, it came from the actual 1821 B-5 dies.
5) Since the 1700's and perhaps even earlier, die trials (e.g. die splashers, etc.) are known in various metals. Those trials often have porous surfaces. That could account for the voids and porosity you see on your example.
One additional bit of information that you could provide here is the reeding count. That's a very important factor in the evaluation of your piece. If counterfeit dies were made from a high grade 1821 B-5, then that would explain the obv/rev dies. But.......but.....the reeding would much more than likely be added after the fact and not be very close. That's based on my personal experience with many different types of counterfeits. If your coin is a plain edge, that would further the argument for die trial as opposed to counterfeit. Reeding (and edge lettering) was there for a reason: counterfeit prevention. The slightly larger diameter of your coin could suggest that it was struck in a cent collar. I say it is slightly larger (1 mm or less) based on the gap between the dentils and the edge of the coin.
Our eBay auctions - TRUE auctions: start at $0.01, no reserve, 30 day unconditional return privilege & free shipping!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
If there is a silver wash, I would say it is a counterfeit.
<< <i>possibly struck on a half cent planchett? >>
Not for a large size bust quarter. However, the small size bust quarters are almost the exact diameter and thickness as a half cent planchet of the time. That's my theory for the 1834 J-50 copper quarters; struck on a half cent planchet at the Mint.
My 1866 Philly Mint Set
The coin looks absolutely authentic to me, except for color.
Is it possible that in in the pre-stages of minting coins that trial metals were used during set-up of the machine in order to test the dies ? And if so, wouldn't this be very feasible ? Remember with the minting facilities, these were guys like you and me. If the boss says, "hey, I don't want to mint 216,851 of these and have the overdates or NOTHING on these coins as we've had in past years, so....let's Clean it up boys.... And put this copper planchet in to test it", wouldn't we do it ? And what of the test pieces ?
Now, go look at all the overdates and varieties from past years and latter years, and ask yourself a simple question :
Who was in charge that year and how were minting standards different that there were NO OVERDATES or little variance, anyway ? I'll bet the guy in charge was a meticulous blacksmither or someone in the know and wanted to ensure QUALITY, so I surmise that they used copper to test the machine.
Your call, boys !
This was a fun thread. Any updates elwood?
Glad to be aboard. I finally decided to join and put in a response concerning this 1821 B-5 Quarter. This particular example was purchased outright along with its identical second mate from Bill Anton out of New Jersey. I was so intrigued by the 1806/5 copper he sold me I couldn't wait to get these two in hand. I will try to download the two seperate pictures. The pedigree on these two pieces are as follows:
Lou Werner, ex. Sergent of Arms of the ANA
Bill Anton
Rory Rea
Steve Elwood.
Bill states in a hand written letter to me dated 9-2-03 that he has owned these two examples for over 40 years. "Both coins were sitting on metal trays for who knows how long before I bought them. Coins struck from same pair of dies, dies may have not been used for a period of time, which is not out of the ordinary. I call these die trials struck some years later from dated coins."
I am not sure how long Lou owned these coins as I also have a business card with my notes written on the back (info. given to me via phone by Bill) stating Lou owned for 50-60 years, Bill Anton approx. 25 years. It's possible the letter stands corrected. Bill also stated in the letter early on that another serious collector was intereseted and if I chose to return one of the two 21 B-5's it would not be a problem.
In late 2003 I took these pieces to Long Beach CA. to get opinions. And opinions did I get! One dealer tossed it back and said its a counterfiet, its worth about 20 dollars. Many other dealers offered to purchase for quite a bit more but I would not sell. Everybody loved these things. I showed Mary Sauvain and she said (if I remember correctly) it looked like the 21's are Die Transfers. She also offered to purchase all three on the spot but again.....................I couldn't. So there you have it, a little bit of history before it went to Mr. Elwood.
I agree on the weight that is listed. The reed count is 136. Don't think any bust quarter has this particular count. I think the 1821 B-5 normal quarter has 118 reeds but will have to recheck. If you look at the pictures of both examples they have similar diagnostics, depressions, voids, missing dentils, pitting inside D1, mushy defective T ..........all in the same area although the color seems to be slightly different.
I would like to know more about this like the specific gravity and the metal content. Maybe you can do some more research Steve.
I really enjoyed all the attention this coin has brought along with all the good information by everyone, Thanks.
Rory
Enjoyed numismatic conversations with Eric P. Newman, Dave Akers, Jules Reiver, David Davis, Russ Logan, John McCloskey, Kirk Gorman, W. David Perkins...
Rory! Welcome to the forums! Glad to see you posting. We could sure use someone as knowledgeable as you around here.
PS - I am Dennis (ex-Jade)
Enjoyed numismatic conversations with Eric P. Newman, Dave Akers, Jules Reiver, David Davis, Russ Logan, John McCloskey, Kirk Gorman, W. David Perkins...
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>This was a fun thread. Any updates elwood? >>
It's still part of my collection an no I haven't done anything with the coin except enjoy it.
Welcome Rory
Thanks for sharing the info with the forum.
Not too many quarter collectors (do I need to define collector?
steve
Thank you very much guys, I appreciate the good welcome. Rich, You are way too kind!
Thanks also for putting up a great shot of your high grade 25 B-3 with a nice UNITED break! I love these dates, they tell a complete story from the beginning to the end (Cud). I remember putting together my set a while ago...........I had some great fun. Say, how did you insert or attach the pictures into the message board? And once it is inserted can you review the picture size before you send?
Btw, the pedigree on Elwoods example was listed above in my first comment. The other example I pictured along-side it resides in another quarter specialists collection.
Enjoyed numismatic conversations with Eric P. Newman, Dave Akers, Jules Reiver, David Davis, Russ Logan, John McCloskey, Kirk Gorman, W. David Perkins...
I am wondering whether, upon very close examination, there is any evidence of this being an overstrike on another coin? Also wondering how these die states compare to known examples in silver ... are there any regular issue silver pieces known in later die states? What could account for the weight? How could there be a higher reed count than on any known 1821 quarters without this being a counterfeit? Are we sure about the reed count differing from the proofs?
Best,
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
You need to shrink the pictures to a size of 50 kb otherwise they will be too big for the server.
Rory, start with the "for newbies" part of the post, select the file, attach it, then go to the top of the instructions and follow from there.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
I'm surprised I missed it one its initial pass around.
Why, when, where and by whom they were made remains a mystery.
Both of the 1821 examples have hand applied reeded edges to hide the seam where the two halves of the cast mould came together. You can plainly see that they are cast copies as many of the dentils do not extend out to the edges of the "coin". The 1806 example has a smooth edge but also shows the same dentil issues. All of these pieces show grainy surfaces, but they are very well done.
Any illusion that these are struck patterns or mint produced, needs to be discarded, they are simply counterfeits.
If anyone else has more information I would be interested in hearing it.
QN
Go to Early United States Coins - to order the New "Early United States Half Dollar Vol. 1 / 1794-1807" book or the 1st new Bust Quarter book!
As Quarternut related, they are cast pieces (not even electro's) and were probably struck in the mid to late 19th century.
They have not been offered at auction, because they were too easily detected as being copies, hence, they remained in collector's hands. I believe Rory mentioned his came from the Richard Picker collection out of New York.
TD
That is a awesome article. I wonder where the early 1806/5 and the 1821 are now?