Henri Charriere

Meanness, age, dishonesty, bad faith? At the outset, with the exception of age, I believe most members will agree that the descriptors used by the OP as applied to numismatics, is refreshingly different from the terms ordinarily used by U.S. collectors. While I agree with member Coinbuf's comments, I should like to emphasize the search for truth is never-ending. The OP has raised an interesting point which deserves amplification. As most of us know, with DNA, we can determine with some specificity what part of the world our ancestry came from. We can generally state whether a human skeleton is that of male or female, race, age - even how well-nourished. Just as the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) can determine the country of origin of a drug (and growing region) it can also determine purity and diluent used. Metals present their own properties. Gold from the Canada's Yukon differs from that of California; silver from the Comstock lode differs from that of Peru. (With the discovery of the shipwreck S.S. Central America, we were able to recover not only coinage but "Gold Rush" gold in its raw, unrefined form which, under analysis, reveals it's own unique signature.) While I can understand the "much ado about nothing" attitude of members regarding the sophisticated (and likely costly) spectral analysis of a mere penny, the problem with metals is complicated by constant cycling and recycling. Gold and silver ores are extracted, refined, melted, alloyed, re-melted, re-issued, minted, melted again into bars and re-minted or re-purposed for other uses such as jewelry and industry. I would imagine copper presents its own problems. For that reason I feel determining age with some degree of specificity, particularly as it relates to coinage and date of mintage, is beyond present technological capability. [My sincere apologies to MAULEMALL, members who dislike long commentary -- and the moderator tasked with monitoring my every keystroke]

This is true but would not such "restoration," which always leaves a cloudy residue, affect the marketability of the coin? I believe most collectors consider this a last resort measure employed solely to satisfy their curiosity.

But that was presented in a "proposition" presumably put before the voters. And what if it hadn't passed? We live in a strange world.

I have never seen this one. It's nice to know there are people thinking about me. Thanks, Cat!

[Aside: When I'd take my gone-thru coin rolls to the Korean green grocers, they'd simply throw them up on a digital scale in lieu of manually counting each coin out. I wonder if that rivet would have registered. Once when I brought them a freshly-printed and BEP-strapped stack of one dollar bills -- all consecutively numbered, mind you, from me, a long-time customer -- they counted each one out by hand. I don't know about you, but I don't think I would have done that.]

That appears to be the case. And unlike the hoopla surrounding the IMHO rather unobtrusive display of V.D.B. on the reverse side of the cent, the name J.C. CHAPLAIN, the designer of the rooster, appears in all its glory on the obverse side, albeit in legible though inconspicuous print -- and not a soul crowed about it.

Your opinion is valid and his dissertation is breathtakingly thorough. I need to be more like Just Bob: humble, ever courteous and well-grounded.

[Baby shark bite, species unknown. Must have been pretty hungry to mistake metal for food. Either that, or bad eyesight.] 😉

Now the question is, Does such doubling even occur in proof coins? I don't know if what you've got here is a proof or not but the three distinct hatchet blows to Lincoln's shoulder -- besides suggesting a run-in with legendary Tong leader, Mock Duck in Chinatown -- is an affront to the standard of excellence, nay, perfection expected of coins exceeding the "business strike" (nee "circulation") line. And what happened to the original Mint luster? Further, any claim that the above damaged coin is the only well-known specimen does nothing to diminish the fact that, inadequate photography, notwithstanding, the OP may very well have something worthy of further inquiry. The very least we can do is provisionally deny the relief sought, i.e., validation, without prejudice to renew. SO ORDERED. /S/ Q. ARRIUS

Devil's advocate here... Okay, you've got a genuine '43. Now that you've got it -- and 99.44% of all viewers here agree -- what are you going to do with it? The only thing you have not done, but can do: submit it for authentication.

True, but wouldn't they be expected to degrade over time? O rings... hmmm, now where have we all heard about them before?

[I am beginning to feel that with all this renewed interest, this is one cold case that is beginning to heat up...]

The latent print on one of my Roosters is clear enough to submit to the FBI for identification but I keep thinking if I did that they would tell me it belongs to an employee of a TPGS, and then how would that make me feel? My understanding is graders do not wear gloves -- not even paper ones.

I would not even know what the available remedy was for such a serious injury way back then. Matter of fact, I wouldn't know how to treat a massive wound caused by acid today.

Absolutely stunning! I love that hexagonal look.

Insider, undoubtedly, would beg to differ but, nevertheless, that is why we have medical examiners, coroners and pathologists conduct autopsies to determine a cause of death. And if the finding is inconclusive, so be it. Just another in a long list of unsolved mysteries and cold cases stretching back to western Anatolia in ancient times.

This is an example of an atrocious assault on an inanimate object. The high points bore the brunt of the abrasions and lacerations which only a accentuated what was already there: a high concentration of copper. If this were cleaned, the pits and bullet pings would not be black. Incidentally, what would be the point of cleaning a coin that appears to have survived the WWII bombings of Dresden? I challenge any expert lurking about this Forum to say otherwise!

Just had a talk with my better half who asked me what was so funny that had me laughing uproariously and she ordered me to apologize to you immediately. Kindlyspeaker, you've caught me in a good mood and made my night. Therefore, I apologize and, if amenable to the suggestion, made here publicly, that I am prepared to make up for your loss, one mangled "road kill" as one member put it, and offer you one of my many unremarkable 1972 Kennedy halves and/or an "Ike" one of 110 I had gotten from a local bank on New York City's upper East Side, all curiously bicentennial issues I theorize were squirreled away years ago by a speculator who finally gave up his "investment." If you tap on my user name, my profile will materialize (the 3 Warnings are difficult to overlook) and somewhere you will find an envelope tab with which, should you accept my offer, email me a name and address to which I can send you these items free of charge.

Welcome to the Forum K! You are being far too kind to Kindlyspeaker, a member who could not wait to jump into the arena less than twenty-four hours after joining. [Heads-up to Ratzie33: you've got some potentially serious competition!]

Cleaned? Using what? No offense to the OP, but the moment I laid eyes on that thing the first thought that popped into my head was that quote, often misquoted, attributed to Hermann Goering: "When I hear the word culture, I reach for my gun." (actually, ...unholster or unsnap the release on my gun." There really is not much more to say.

I believe red tape was used to seal vaults after their contents were verified by two or more employees, right? I believe it was also used during the tour of select Ft. Knox vaults by members of Congress and authorized officials.

Pardon me, gentleman, but I have re-read this entire thread three times and nowhere have I seen a definitive correlation between grading and acceptance to a Set Registry. And exactly how do Set Registries accommodate coins that are accompanied by Certificates of Authenticity?

[Pardon my intrusion, Nineoneo... Attention: VKurtB, do you really expect me to believe professional graders on those assembly lines would have been able to draw a bead on this with five- and seven power toy lenses in the face of the immutable evidence heretofore presented? Would this gentleman have been able to present his case to us with anything less than the magnificent photo displayed hereinabove? No further questions. To the OP, Nineoneo... the only way I can address your concerns is to put myself in your place. While being transparent is the best approach, the market for over-sized coinage is fickle, particularly where a proof is involved. It would not hurt to make preliminary inquiries with various dealers and auction houses bolstering your query with a copy of that crime scene-quality image.

And here is the smug face of the know-it-all, Q.A., who up until now thought there was nothing more he could learn about a common cent that's been around longer than any of us have been alive. Thanks for the enlightening post!

😉