Penny for your thoughts. . . 1 1

[cobymordet]

This 1819 penny is pretty worn, so I wanted to verify if it could be determined whether this coin could be a variety:

1819/8 LARGE DATE N-1 1C MS - NGC Attribution: N-1

https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/united-states/cents/coronet-head-cents-1816-1839/813236/

I'm thinking that this coin may be too worn to definitively determine. 

 

[Sandon]

    I think that this low-grade coin is the 1819, 9 over 8, N1, although the overdate feature isn't as clear as on most.  It is clearly a large date, which is either an N1 or N2, the latter now also being thought to be a 9 over 8 overdate that is weaker than the N1.  Your coin has the diagnostic features mentioned by Newcomb that are visible on this coin, for the obverse "left edge of curl [beneath bust] to right of 1", for the reverse "[t]enth [last] berry to left of center of right base of [first] A" in AMERICA, "E in ONE and T in CENT low." A comparison of the VarietyPlus photos for N1 and N2 with reference to these diagnostics also show a match with the N1, not the N2.

   The coin grades no better than Good and has some corrosion or environmental damage. It's probably worth no more than $25 or so.

[cobymordet]

Thanks for the verification Sandon.  I hoped that it would match up, but I wasn't sure about the degraded condition mucking things up. I ran a cursory search for Newcomb varieties online and only got books.  Is there a site that doesn't cost?  Or better yet, is there any NGC forum chatboard that provides a (more or less) comprehensive site listing for the varieties of specific coin denominations? 

[Sandon]

    I happen to have the 1985 Quarterman Publications, Inc. reprint of Newcomb's United States Copper Cents 1816-1857, which was originally published in 1944. While both NGC VarietyPlus and PCGS Coinfacts have photos of most Newcomb varieties, I know of no website that has a verbal attribution guide for middle date (1816-39) and late date (1839-57) large cents. (The late dates are often difficult to attribute because by that time due to the use of "hubs" or master dies only the dates were punched into the dies separately, and attribution usually involves minor differences in date positions and on other minor die differences that often can't be seen on worn coins.) In addition to the Newcomb book, the bibliography near the end of the Redbook, of which I assume you have a recent edition, references the more recent works by Noyes and Wright for the middle dates and by Grellman for the late dates, which I haven't reviewed but understand to be helpful. There are online attribution guides for some other series of early U.S. coins, but I don't know of a comprehensive list of them. 

  We have an old expression, "Buy the book before the coin!" While some research can be done online nowadays, a good numismatic library remains important and will be worth the expense if you want to get into numismatic research in a serious way.  Additionally, attempting to attribute early U.S. coins by die variety is usually an activity of more advanced collectors, and it is important to learn the basics first.  These topics may be helpful: