1797 Counterfeit Large Cent for Study- Sheldon 136

burfle23

I own two examples as imaged; one severely scratched, the other surface “challenged”. Appearances of the two seem pretty different, but looking beyond the surfaces common “circulation” marks show between the two, as well as minor differences when compared to a known example, such as hair and ear detail and berry shape/ size.

The Coin Week research article can be found at: https://coinweek.com/recent-articles-video/struck-counterfeit-coin-week-1797-s-136-large-cent-1-page-attribution-guide/

Best, Jack

BillJones

Both look like counterfeits to me. The face of the scratched one looks mushy in the wrong way. It's hard to describe, but it's not the mushy from circulation look. It’s a mushy from strike look, which should not be unless it’s something to do with the way the original dies were made.

I also get back to the color. These coins have to look of typical Chinese toning. It’s an unnatural looking red-brown that you don’t using see on cleaned and recovering copper. Of course, the berry you pointed out does not look good either. Dies don’t wear like that with use.

These things are really scary and disgusting. They are just the sort of garbage that will easily take in beginning collectors or those who are on a budget.

Insider2

@burfle23

The work you guys are doing is invaluable. It is scary to learn that the group of a dozen deceptive coppers has been on the market for over a decade! IMO, without the EAC sleuths, many of these coins may still be going into TPGS slabs.

With the luxury of imaging submissions, it will be easier to detect these things. IMO, there are very few folks who could look at a single coin (without comparison coins or images) and determine with 100% certainty the coin was a counterfeit. Comments about color (IMHO due to the existence of the copper color spectrum + changes due to corrosion) are just that and don't indicate or help detect anything.

ricko

I would recommend very serious study of these coins before getting into high price specimens... Cheers, RickO

burfle23

I received a third example from a friend after the EAC Convention in Michigan!

Walkerguy21D

It's amazing how different the reverses look on all three (areas of weakness, dentil strength, etc)....there is no way I would be able to link them to the same counterfeit.
The reverse of the third specimen does look shallow overall, and a little hoaky.
Still, I could see these things passing around at a typical Sunday bourse with no problem.

As others have said - thanks again for you effort and for posting!

DaveWcoins

Excellent work in uncovering very deceptive counterfeits.

MikeInFL

My eye was immediately drawn to the odd hair detail above the ear. Upon closer examination the circulation marks in common also give the coins' origin away.

Thanks for taking the time to write this up and share with us -- I find your posts on these topics wonderfully (and disturbingly) interesting.

burfle23

@MikeInFL said:

Thanks for taking the time to write this up and share with us -- I find your posts on these topics wonderfully (and disturbingly) interesting.

Thanks MikeInFl; I sometimes feel like the grim reaper on this topic, but feel it is important to try and get the word out about these threats to the hobby. As many have said, knowledge is so important and the research has made me a more experienced collector of early American coppers by default!