1851 Large Cent...What Happened ???!!!
PocketArt
Posts: 1,335 ✭✭✭✭✭
I'm fairly certain some sort of PMD; yet, I've never seen this effect on large cents so curious to what may have caused this...perhaps tooling? It's unusual- high points of the coin are worn and don't display effect, but the fields have a wavy pattern. This is most prominent on the left field of obverse, and date. The reverse has hints of this effect as well. It puzzles me how this may have happened. Did the coin corrode long ago, was cleaned, then circulated? Are those metal flow lines from the strip when rolled, since corroded, and the artifacts of wavy lines from that process display this? Just tooling? IDK- tell me what you think. Is there a Newcomb "reptilian" for 1851.... 
0
Comments
My guess is that it was corroded, then someone exposed it to acid for quite a while.
1930's high school chemistry class?
bob
Nope. This is what excessive whizzing usually looks like on a coin. The waves are the clue.
Then it circulated. IMO, the only other possibility has been mentioned (I don't agree) and that would be "selective corrosion."
Is the weight and diameter correct?
I vote for a heavily corroded coin that was wire-brushed clean.
I think that is original 1851 chocolate coin without the tinfoil wrapping. It's a little dried up.
That thing is so messed up it's kind of cool.
Successful BST deals with mustangt and jesbroken. Now EVERYTHING is for sale.
Diameter is at around 27.5 mm, and weight is at 10.13 grams.
When was the practice of whizzing coins first employed? Was this method around during the mid-nineteenth century? If so, what sort of tool was favored by those earlier whizbanger's to alter surfaces? Thanks.
I agree with Walkerguy21D as this looks like it was corroded before submerged in something acidic.
Whizzing doesn't create raised wavy bumps making coins look like they have leprosy.
Whizzing became popular in the 1960's as in the 1860's when this circulated no one had an electric drill nor electricity.
Thanks @Broadstruck on when whizzing became popular- understand no electricity. Question per @Insider2 suggestion coin whizzed and then circulated. So curious on tool used- what, no steam powered dremel?
I would DISAGREE with Insider2, but don't have the heart as she already looks like she's practicing to run the 5K
Even if the coin was corroded then whizzed the drill and whizzing wheel would have done more surface damage than just creating mild waves.
Left way to long in a denture jar.:)
Buried for a long time in acidic soil then harshly cleaned?
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
Having seen this cent is reason enough to get cremated!
I believe it to be a corroded then cleaned coin... as to the original corroding substance, I cannot say - there are many that affect copper. Even the rims have signs of corrosion. Cheers, RickO
I think that it is a combination of corrosion and then harsh cleaning, which probably included the use of acid and wire brushes.
Not saying this is what happened, but it is possible that it was whizzed in the 1960's by somebody using it as a practice piece, and then carried as a pocket piece which could account for the subsequent wear.
First thing I thought it was found with a metal detector and then used as a pocket piece.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
When did the market for collecting circulated coins first seriously evolve? I would guess pre WW2 possibly 20's or 30's. Anyone with knowledge in this regards? Roger are you around?
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
This is turning out to be like how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie pop... Thankfully we can all agree it's majorly effed up!
Please leave me alone. Been divorced 5 times and there
is nothing left.
Question? Have any of you "experts" seen a whizzed coin dated in the 19th Century? That's 18- something.
I thought so.
Question? Since the practice of "whizzing" probably started in the 1960's. Do any of you believe this piece was altered in the 19th Century? So why even post a rebuttal to something not said and made up in your own
mind?
I think most of you must know what the usual whizzed coin looks like. It does not look like this Large cent.
It is apparent to me that most posting here don't have a clue about or have never heard the adjectives EXTREME, SEVERE, or EXCESSIVE applied to WHIZZED coins like this in an authentication or grading class! I've been very lucky to have examined coins as this many times. I have several excessively whizzed coins in my collection of counterfeit and altered coins - one nickel was actually given to me after I saw it made. As I posted above, the main characteristic to look for is the deeply waved surface.
Answer to the first question: Yes I have. The coins were DATED in the 19th Century. That does not mean that they were whizzed in the 19th Century.
AFAIK, modern whizzing was done to make a coin look uncirculated. The goal was (is!?) to not make the whizzing obvious.
As far as this coin is concerned, there is no danger of anyone thinking it was MS, so the whizzing that may have occurred (wire brush in my opinion) was probably done to remove corrosion. I don't think the coin would have circulated after the whizzing, since whizzing as a way to deceive is a more modern invention. Best guess would be it was a pocket piece and that is how it picked up the post-whizzing wear.
And on that note, with all this talk of whizzing, I now have to take one.....
@Insider2 asked: Have any of you "experts" seen a whizzed coin dated in the 19th Century? That's 18- something. I thought so.
@CaptHenway reinforced the point he made above, that I wished to emphasize with my posted question: "Answer to the first question: Yes I have. The coins were DATED in the 19th Century. That does not mean that they were whizzed in the 19th Century."
Just to clear up a bit of confusion insider2, in your first post you stated:
@Insider2 said:
Your above statement implies that the coin was whizzed, and then put back into circulation. My response to your above statement was this:
It was an honest question, as I took from your statement that it was put back into circulation after it was whizzed. When large cents were circulating?
You ask this question:
Answer- refer to your first post.
Insider2, no problem, it's easy to misinterpret what someone writes, or, mean something different than what was wrote. We all do it, and you're quite knowledgeable so please don't take this as a dig. Just trying to clear the air.
Thanks
I have to admit that I was a bit confused as well. I trust @Insider2 's judgment but I took the comments to mean that the coin was whizzed - as in coin doctored in the mid to late 20th century - and then put back into circulation. I suppose someone could have tried to pass off a 100+ year old lizardy large cent as circulating coinage but I didn't see that as likely.
On the other hand, that coin might have gotten some serious environmental damage soon after issue and then someone in the 19th century whizzed it (19th century style) to get it spendable again.
I still think it was probably harshly cleaned/whizzed well into the 20th century.
@JBK said: "I still think it was probably harshly cleaned/whizzed well into the 20th century."
Sorry I caused some confusion. At least two of us here agree with you. The interesting thing is the coin shows no evidence of waves in spots - over the ear for example indicating it received more wear after the whizzing - pocket piece?
Yes, I agree. The missing whizzing (or whatever it is) seems to suggest it spent some time in someone's pocket
The wear is noted just on the high points of the coin. Obverse- stars, hair, tiara. Reverse- wreath, one cent, and also significant deterioration on "States of Ame." Both side's rim worn. I don't see any excessive wear beyond mention- the deterioration appears to be a significant amount of bunched wavy lines obscuring letters on reverse.
Not quite sold on pocket piece/whizzing, and leaning more towards environmental damage.
However, my thoughts are that if this was a whizzed coin back in the '60's or even closer to the present, that it wouldn't have an even chocolate brown patina to both sides- should be some hints of red unless recolored? If recolored- acetone should remove any application to the cent. Correct?
Maybe see what acetone does?
A pocket piece that was carried for a while and then set aside could recolor this way naturally.
No one said it had to be whizzed in the past 50 years. Maybe someone fished it out of a creek bed in the 1930s and took a wire brush or wire disk on a rotary machine to pretty it up and then carried it around for a few years as a pocket piece. Or any other scenario you can think of.... Maybe ocean salvage? Swallowed by a shark?
PMD no matter what,
@PocketArt said: "However, my thoughts are that if this was a whizzed coin back in the '60's or even closer to the present, that it wouldn't have an even chocolate brown patina to both sides- should be some hints of red unless recolored? If recolored- acetone should remove any application to the cent. Correct?"
Nope. I've seen a stripped to pink copper cent (not zinc) turned to chocolate brown that is "set" in less than a month. I've been told that clues to this are in the literature.
Okay, thanks for your insight. I did try acetone bath on piece just to check if it had an application of color added, and there was no change. So, if piece did recolor it did naturally as you suggest.
Right, I agree PMD. Wasn't sure if tooled, or, corroded, and then cleaned as indicated in original post. Whether cleaned with a wire brush, or, rotary machine vs. a whizzing IDK...my understanding of whizzing was the manipulation of the surface to artificially create a BU effect. When we go routes that include any use of a rotary tool to remove debris then you'd be correct. IDK on pocket piece- would think more heavily worn but anything is possible.
It's not tooled, so that rules out that- corroded/cleaned is consensus...thanks for feedback/knowledge- my question is answered.
Less than a month? That's pretty amazing turning to chocolate brown.
I'm trying to bring back a 1969-s PL Lincoln cent that I pulled out of mint set packaging. It had some cloudiness, and I applied MS70 to it...removed the cloudiness but turned pink salmon on me...just trying to bring that back to somewhat of an original color. It's hard to forgive myself on that one...
Thanks again all!
MS-70 does not change the color of a copper cent to the degree that an acid dip will. It should come back. Make sure you neutralize the MS-70 with hot soapy water then hot distilled water then acetone or as it tones back it may streak.
Thanks for advice- I've done the acetone treatment afterwards but hadn't the hot soapy water/distilled water. I was pretty disappointed with the outcome on the '69-s. Could have been some residue left on the coin that interacted with the MS70? Maybe I should wash the copper first too, acetone, apply MS70, and then do as you suggest.
Cheap Leather
The coin is 19th century cheap leather
Yes, I expect a wheel made of leather flaps would produce this effect also.
Well she wont win a beauty contest any way you say it.
Hoard the keys.