Could this be real--1792 Birch Cent--Pictures included

mrshmooze

Don't know what to do, but may have found a 1792 Birch Cent...It has smooth edges, (2 known). Is this even possible?
See pics and please let me know your thoughts and what I should/could do next to authenticate and etc.

Thanks

1792 Birch Cent

STONE

Modern Repro

lasvegasteddy

yeah what stone says

welcome to forums and quite the 1st post too

mrshmooze

Thanks

DorkGirl

braddick

Looks genuine but with heavy engraving.

stealer

I don't collect this series but it doesn't look real to me.

mrshmooze

Reason I asked in particular because it was found with a metal detector on or around a civil war confederate campsite (according to person I acquired it from). Figured that might give it an outside chance of being the real deal. Granted, its in awfully good shape to have been in the ground so figured I would ask the experts on this forum.

BillJones

A Birch Cent and a Confederate Civil War campsite don't seem to go together. I agree with the others. It is a modern copy.

LanceNewmanOCC

STONE

<< <i>Reason I asked in particular because it was found with a metal detector on or around a civil war confederate campsite (according to person I acquired it from). Figured that might give it an outside chance of being the real deal. Granted, its in awfully good shape to have been in the ground so figured I would ask the experts on this forum. >>


The story is almost certainly cr@p to drum up a sale...if it was the real deal, it would be BIG $$$

Tell me what you think of mine:

Twinturbo

Several problems

One - no corrosion or porosity on the planchet
Two - the story sounds unreal and like utter dodo
Three- the strike placement is well centered and almost too perfect.
And the big giveaway??? Notice the nail hole, they used to have square nails not circular/ Pentagon??? Lol

Twinturbo

P.S. get your money back ASAP

Shamika

The hole is a nice touch. Very period.

mrshmooze

Great points...again I figured the same, but wandering if real was really bugging me. Anyway, I have added a few more pics since I am no camera person nor do I have experience photographing coins. Anyway, from my understanding the coin was the 3rd of the Birch's pictured in the Red Book (as there were 3 different types) from my limited understanding.

mrshmooze

I agree I thought the story was BS because I metal detect some (what got me interested in old coins) and everything I have ever dug up has much more wear and tear from being in the ground...

What interested me most was the G.W. P. t inscribed on it. Of course coin facts has no image available, but for those with a redbook at home (I have the 2011 one in front of me) on page 85, the third coin pictured under 1792 Birch Cent is what this looked like to me. It's the unique Birch coin with G.W.P.t.

The picture posted of the 1792 Birch is a different coin (version of the coin) altogether. Again, this is from my understanding and research.

braddick

No one here knows (for sure) what they're talking about- including me, of course.
Get it authenticated.

There are 'tells' that appear totally genuine.

Nysoto

The hair detail and ear engraving is fake and unlike any of the originals. The date is raised and not artificially worn to the degree of the rest of the lettering.

mrshmooze

Can't tell if that is a an actual picture of the coin or a representation of the coin...but have back side by side to mine

The famous G*W.Pt. (George Washington President) Birch cent. It is also listed as Baker P-37.

An article by Carl W.A. Carlson in the March 1992 edition of the Numismatist describes this as being the original Birch die. It was later modified to produce the more common Birch cent J3-J5/P4-P6.

Only a single example, struck in white metal is known. Its pedigree is ex-Sotheby 3/1888, G. Bascomb (H. Chapman 1/15), Garrett-JHU, Bowers and Ruddy 3/81 (Garrett IV), William T. Anton.


Side by Side Comparison

mrshmooze

I see what you mean with the hair; the nose on mine is also damaged so makes harder to compare

ambro51

.......so, submit it for authentication and grading. There's the easy answer you're looking for. Personally, I say altered copy.

coachbedford

Came upon this thread late... but if you have not sent this in to be authenticated, please do so! Odds are HUGELY against this being authentic, but man, if this is an artificially aged and artificially damaged modern replica birch cent--China made or not-- that is the most convincing artificial aging and damage I think I have ever seen. The bust and hairline of the obverse resembles some pics of birch cent Chinese fakes I have seen, but the reverse looks incredibly convincing as a piece that has been around a while. In other words, if a modern copy can be "aged" that convincingly, that is truly scary. An 1800s fake? Maybe-- that would explain the convincing "age."

I won't even touch as to whether or not I believe it was amongst other Civil War era artifacts-- I prefer to focus on the coin itself.

I would LOVE to know what a professional authenticator says about this piece.