1828 Cohen-1 Classic Head Half-Cent

[Toad]

Howdy fellow coin peeps,

 

I recently acquired a nice 1828 Cohen-1 Classic Head Half-Cent and upon close examination I noticed HALF CENT has been recut/repunched and since I haven't been able to find this mentioned with this variety, does it place it in a sub catagory (1b) or is it common for this to occur and it doesn't affect it in any way?

 

Ribbit

 

 

 

 

 

[harvey8542]

I'm not sure but that is a neat little find (thumbs u

[Toad]

Here's a break-down of the doubling (best I can do):

 

H - very noticeable on top of the left leg and slightly on the right one.

A - very noticeable under the horizontal line

L - very noticeable on the right side of the vertical line and on the top of the lower horizontal line

F - very noticeable in the center horizontal half-line all around it and on the lower side of the top horizontal line

 

C - very noticeable on the entire inside curve

E - very noticeable all around the center horizontal line

N - very noticeable on both sides of the diagonal line

T - very noticeable on both sides of the vertical line

 

[Toad]

Ps: Does anyone know if this or any other year, of the Classic Head Half-Cent, was made of a copper-nickel alloy? The weight on mine is right on the money of what it's suppose to weigh but it looks more like the early copper-nickel Indianhead & Eagle Cents, than a pure copper cent like the books say it's suppose to be.

 

Ribbit

[Toad]

I found another one like mine (Heritage Auctions), cept'n it's in MS condition (NGS MS-62), and because of its condition you can see the doubling extremely well:

 

http://cgi.liveauctions.ebay.com/1715-1828-1-2-C-13-Stars-MS62-Brown-NGC_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ52618QQihZ007QQitemZ170220836063QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

 

I've also seen more without the re-cut HALF CENT, than I do with the doubling (50 to 1 as of now), so that tells me the ones with a re-cut HALF CENT are probably more scarce than those without it (latter part of the minting cycle).

 

I would think this would create a sub-catagory in the variety, since it is the same variety but something is different. Have the grading companies missed this? I know that it was missed by Breen & Cohen (a friend looked it up for me in his books) so is this just another one everyone has missed? I see sub-catagories for other coins, why wouldn't this qualify for a sub-catagory?

 

Can someone from NGC please explain what it takes to qualify for a sub-catagory?

 

Ribbit

 

Ps: I also have another Classic Head Half-Cent with a major difference than the known varieties for its date and its difference is different than this one but I would like to know more about what it takes to create a variety sub-catagory before posting it for analysis.

[Toad]

Here's one more pic of the doubling. It shows the doubling better than the other pics:

 

 

 

 

Ribbit

[RGT]

You seem to be talking to yourself here so I guess I can ramble a bit too.

 

If I remember correctly, all half cents were made of pure copper (or as pure as they were able to get). Some of the early half cents were struck on inferior planchets that had come across the atlantic in barrels stored in the bilge of the ship and used for ballast. It's very difficult to find certain dates, such as 1811, with nice surfaces. The sea water did not treat them kindly. But by 1828 the planchets were much better. So no, there's no nickel in your half cent.

 

I have an 1828 but I can't remember if it's a C-1 or a C-2. If I remember I will check tonight. I don't have any pictures of it but I've been meaning to remidy that situation so maybe I'll have time to do that too. I think that maybe what you are seeing is a die state issue. I don't think they would recut the letters in the die after it has been used. More likely the letters were doubled when the die was made and were later polished off so that the later die states don't show the doubling. If true, this would not be a sub category or a variety but simply an early die state.

 

I collected these for a while but sold all of my raw ones. I still have a handful of slabbed ones between 1804 and 1857.

 

[RGT]

I checked my 1828 and it is also a C-1. I took some photos while I had it out but I was in a hurry so they aren't great.

 

 

I also checked Breens Half Cent Encyclopedia for some information. Breens says the C-1 is a rarity 3 which surprised me. I also checked the die states and I believe mine is a state II. The C-1 used the reverse die 2 from 1826 which had some die marks that Breen called spines sticking out from the wreath. Die state II also has some clash marks showing on the reverse. The die was later polished and the clash marks go away and the spines are greatly reduced. This is die state III. Breen said that die state III is the usual state that is found and calls die states I and II rare. There is also a die state IV where the spines are entirely gone and a die crack is starting to form. On the obverse the second star is repunched. The repunching is polished off in die state III.

 

Here are some close ups of mine showing the doubling, the spines and the star. You can see some of the die clash to the left of "HALF CENT".

 

 

 

 

I don't have the Manley die state book. Does anyone here have the book who can check some of this for me? Thanks.

[RGT]

Does no one have any more info on this coin? I don't know if Toad plans to return (given that he was mostly talking to himself) but I would like to know.

[Toad]

Does no one have any more info on this coin? I don't know if Toad plans to return (given that he was mostly talking to himself) but I would like to know.

 

It did appear I was talking to myself but what I was doing was adding more info as I came up with it, plus, asking more questions as they popped into my head.

 

My coin also has the spikes and I had wondered about them but didn't know if I should bring them up since I wasn't getting much of anywhere with what I did bring up. Mine also appears to have the repunched 2nd star, which I didn't catch till you bought it up and I also didn't catch the die clash, which also appears to be on mine but very faint. All of these are visible in the photos I posted.

 

I also learned a lot about die states. I didn't realize that is what they were called.

 

Ribbit

 

Ps: I'll post my 1825 Classic head Half-Cent next. It's really interesting. I like to find the 'weird" ones.

 

Pps: Thanks RGT!

 

Ppps: I also noticed the line beneath HALF CENT on yours is like mine and "pointy" on the right end. Does Breen say anything about that?

[Toad]

Here's one for you RGT:

 

1825 Classic Head Half-Cent with a full line beneath CENT:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've yet to find another like it but you seem to have the book that should discuss it, if it's known.

 

Ribbit

 

Ps: I will post better pics once it arrives. Just bought it last night on Ebay so it will be in first of next week.

[RGT]

I have a Bowers and Ruddy book that includes a reprint of the Gilbert book. I also have both the Cohen "Little Half Sisters" and Breen's half cent encyclopedia. All these book list only two varieties for 1825 and they both used the same reverse die. Yours is the C-2 judging from the obverse. I suspect that the corrosion is causing an optical illusion in the image making the line look longer than it is.

 

Here is a picture of the 1825 that I used to own. It is also a C-2. It is a decent VF but my pictures were taken with my old camera so aren't that great.

[Toad]

I suspect that the corrosion is causing an optical illusion in the image making the line look longer than it is.

 

I agree on the Variety but if you look at the ends of the "imaginary" line extensions, you will see it is very defined and "flat" ending (square), just like the short lines are. However, when it arrives, I will be removing the corrosion and then I will take new pics and I will post them. Then, we will know whether it's an illusion or ? But due to the visual fact that both ends of the line end approximately the same distance from the wreath and they are both square cornered, I do not believe it's an illusion caused by the corrosion (can that occur twice naturally?). I thought of that before I bought it and already dispelled it, but it is still a slight possibility but a poor probability.

 

I can't wait for it to arrive!

 

Ribbit

 

Ps: Notice how the the left end of the line on yours looks weak? That's a good sign that they may have repunched the line sometime after yours was minted and they may have inadvertently made it longer and from that, mine was born.

 

Pps: Did you not find anything on Die States for this year that might have talked about the line being repunched and even possibly the repunching of the C in CENT, since it is also weak in yours and strong in mine?

[Conder101]

I haven't had a chance to review Breen yet and I don't have a copy of Manley but I suspect what you have is a later die state where the die is beginning to crumble around the lettering.

[Toad]

The 1825 came in and after removing the corrosion, the line below CENT was corrosion. Mother nature fooled me.

 

I also just got Breen's Half-Cent Encyclopedia in today so now I'm armed and ready to build my half-cent colection.

 

Ribbit

[MikeInFL]

That book is a wealth of information, and I think Breen's finest work. Congrats....Mike

 

p.s. In addition to the details of each date, I think you'll find the section entitled "How the Early Cents Were Made" by Craig Sholley to be particularly interesting.