Stumped: Counterstamped 1802 Large cent 1 1

[One onehundredth]

Hello:

I'm new to the world of collecting counterstapmed coins and I recently acquired the pictured 1802 large cent with an eagle, olive Branch, and an oval with "US" inside.  In short, I'm stumped.   

I've searched Rich Harzog's extensive online resource: Complete List of Merchant Countermarked, Counterstamped Coins: A-C (richhartzog.com), which appears to be a transcription of Gregory G. Brunk's publication of merchant counterstamps, but doesn't include government stamps, which I believe this to be.  Any thoughts on this?  The style looks to be civil war era, but have a hunch this combination of symbols may well pre-date the civil war. 

Also, I'd be curious to get some opinions about the coin's obverse surfaces (outside of the counterstamp): damaged?  I ask because are some areas of roughness on the obverse, but there's no porosity/unevenness/color change apparent, so I'm inclined to attribute the roughness to the planchet quality (vs. environmental damage) .  Any and all feedback / opinions would be greatly appreciated. 

Thank you kindly

---

---

[RWB]

Possible test of a button or belt emblem stamp ?

Edited July 11, 2023 by RWB

[Sandon]

    I frequently see counterstamped coins offered at Stacks Bowers and other auctions with many referred to as "Brunk--unlisted".  Some coins were counterstamped to advertise a business or product to those who subsequently received the coin in circulation, and the merchants who counterstamped them can often be identified through archival research of contemporary public records, newspapers, and periodicals. Other coins were counterstamped as a convenient way to test a punch that was intended for other purposes, and these are usually much more difficult or impossible to identify. This is one of the latter category. I don't know why the U.S. government would have counterstamped a coin that it had already minted and issued and doubt that the stamp is of government origin. 

   The surfaces of the obverse of the coin that are unaffected by the stamp are rather nice for an early large cent, but the coin is worn down to Good or so grade, and only collectors of counterstamps would have much interest in it, unless it were of a rare (R5 or higher) die variety.  I would need to see a photo of the reverse to attempt an attribution.

[One onehundredth]

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.  Here’s an image of the reverse.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

I saw this one for sale, too.  I also thought it was interesting.

[VKurtB]

According to NGC usage, a counterSTAMP is done by a governing monetary authority. A counterSTRIKE is done by miscellaneous folks damaging a coin. You’re welcome. Ya’ picks up some junk when you attend a course taught by NGC bigwigs. 

[zadok]

On 7/11/2023 at 5:54 PM, VKurtB said:

According to NGC usage, a counterSTAMP is done by a governing monetary authority. A counterSTRIKE is done by miscellaneous folks damaging a coin. You’re welcome. Ya’ picks up some junk when you attend a course taught by NGC bigwigs. 

...yes but, the operative words r "ngc usage"...it was a determination they made but not universally accepted...but everything has to start somewhere....

[One onehundredth]

🤣 Yes, and thank you for the differential..   Topics can become rather academic (or pedantic, semantic, etc..) the doctoral level of numismatics.  I’m sure “Countermarks” are another topic of a 4 day seminar….  

[RWB]

On 7/11/2023 at 6:27 PM, One onehundredth said:

 I’m sure “Countermarks” are another topic of a 4 day seminar…

Only 4 days? There are collectors whose entire social life revolved around these things....  

[Sandon]

       Although some of the diagnostics are flattened by the stamp or wear, the host coin appears to be an example of the S-231 (stemless wreath, single fraction bar) die variety, a common (R1) variety that is nevertheless popular as a "Redbook" variety. The area where the stems would be is weak, so this coin would likely be mostly of interest to collectors of counterstamps (or "countermarks" if you prefer, a term I've never encountered before).

 

[One onehundredth]

There appears to be a faint remnant of a cud along the inside rim between the “O” and “A” on the reverse.  Possible s-241?   Still an R1, but neat!

 

thank again !

[Sandon]

   The host coin is definitely not an S-241, whose reverse features the bottom part of an "S" punched beneath the second "S" in "States" and a doubled fraction bar, neither of which is present on the host coin. There are a number of differences in the positioning of the letters and numbers on both sides, such as that on the obverse of the S-241 the "E" in "LIBERTY" nearly touches the hair, while on the S-231 the "E" is higher and farther to the left, with the highest curl point on the hair situated between the "B" and "E" as on the host coin instead of beneath the left side of the "B" as on the S-241.

   I happen to own an 1802 S-241 graded VF 20 by NGC, whose photos you may compare with yours of the host coin:

 

[powermad5000]

I just bought a double bar and S for a modest $300. When I saw it, I became interested in the variety. As I already own an 1802 Large Cent, but with an extremely scratched obverse and verdigris, I was looking to sell the one I have and acquire a better specimen when I came across the S-241. I got the damaged cent for only $40, yet it graded XF details.

The OP's cent has some porosity and it is important to note that the quality of the planchets in this time period were not the greatest. Smooth specimens are not easy to come by and many have environmental damage.

As to the counterstrike, as it may, it could be impossible to determine its origin, especially if it was done by an individual and they only did it to one coin.

Edited July 12, 2023 by powermad5000