1786 CT Copper

[MikeKing]

This is a 1786 Connecticut copper M.2.1.

It weighs 93.6 grains while the standard for CT coppers was set at a legal minimum of 144 grains.

The coin is believed to be a counterfeit copper.

 

[bsshog40]

I didn't even know it was a coin.

[Hoot]

Has the look of a counterfeit colonial. The major devices are not quite right, and the minor devices are too sharp for the degree of circulation that the coin supposedly shows. Also, the color is off, but that could just be good-old digital photography. I'd have to check my references on counterfeit colonials to see if yours is listed.

 

Hoot

[michael]

superb

 

the english counterfeiters did a better job planchet sndf strike wise than the original country mint in north america

 

rarer and for me more desirable and histroical than an original

 

 

i give this coin ten out of ten with an extra umph

 

[Zoins]

On the reverse with Lady Liberty, is that $ dollar signs on the shield?

[MikeKing]

for HOOT

 

 

 

zoins, that is not a dollar sign on her shield.

[MikeKing]

the shield on the CT coppers is usually poorly struck, so you don't really get a chance to look at the design.

Honestly, I don't know what the design is, I can only guess. If anyone knows, please let me know.

This is a cropped pic from a 9/2005 Heritage auction of a so called 'african head' variety, I believe an au50. What is especially notable on this one is that the shield struck up perfectly well. Of course, the globe or world that liberty is sitting on didn't strike out well at all.

 

 

edited to add: this may be the only time you'll ever see such a well struck shield

[James_OldeTowne]

I believe an additional reason this coin would be assumed counterfeit is the absurd appearance of the bust. It is - at best - childlike and cartoonish in artistic quality. As poor as production of the Connecticut coppers was, they did have an air of professional quality in their execution. "Coins" such as this one don't compare.

[MBA101]

Almost looks like an ancient Roman or Greek coin...Nice!

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

Has the look of a counterfeit colonial. The major devices are not quite right, and the minor devices are too sharp for the degree of circulation that the coin supposedly shows. Also, the color is off, but that could just be good-old digital photography..........

 

Hoot

 

This is a legitimate Connecticut design. Miller 2.1-A and the weight on these colonial pieces was often inconsistent. As a matter of fact two similiar M 2.1-A examples, one of 81.1 grains and one of 100.5 grains were recently auctioned in the 2006 C4 Convention Sale. I agree with Hoot that the piece appears to be suspect from the looks of the photo - and the drapery is especially well struck up, which is typically not the case. The central devices are usually softly struck with the letters and dentils much stronger in detail on better grade examples. Additionally, a planchet of such light weight would not strike up very well.

 

Was your point that this you believe this to be a Contemporary counterfeit of the era or a modern reproduction??? Contemporary counterfeits were widespread, of acceptable weight and size, and readily accepted in commerce. I may be incorrect, but, I don't believe that this particular copper was known to be counterfeited for that use.

[WoodenJefferson]

Click on 1786

Here's a whole index of Conn. Coppers

 

What's on the shield...good question?

 

Indian (India) symbols?

[Hoot]

This is a legitimate Connecticut design. Miller 2.1-A and the weight on these colonial pieces was often inconsistent.

 

...

 

Contemporary counterfeits were widespread, of acceptable weight and size, and readily accepted in commerce. I may be incorrect, but, I don't believe that this particular copper was known to be counterfeited for that use.

 

Here's what Miller has to say about the counterfeit Connecticut coppers of 1786:

 

"Owing to the scarcity of Coppers in the Colonial period from 1783 to the establishment of the United State Mint, the country was flooded with a quantity of counterfeit and lightweight British half-pence. Some of these were sent from abroad, but the close resemnblance of others to the Connecticut coins is fairly conclusive evidence that many of these half-pence were struck in that State. ... They were all made at the same epoch, some by fairly competent hands, others evidently by novices in die-sinking."

 

And you are absolutely right, 1798, that the coin is strikingly like the M-2.-1-A, which is fairly common and listed as an R3. So, what I'm left with is merely an impression. Given that Connecticut coppers and other colonial issues were struck on quite variable planchet stock, it would have been somewhat easy to counterfeit the coins. Also, with the common practice of producing underweight coppers during the period, there was, as you mentioned, extraordinary variability in the weight of genuine pieces. It makes the identification of genuine and counterfeit pieces an inexact art.

 

Miller comments:

 

"The coins of Connecticut vary greatly in weight. Specimens are found weighing not mre than 108 grains, while others range from 168 to 184 grains. In some cases, the lighter coins are probably counterfeits of the time, but many light weight, undoubtedly authentic, are from the same dies as the heavier ones. In fact the weight and character of the planchet seems to have been regarded of little importance.

 

I like how Miller says, "...are probably counterfeits..." equivocating the entire morass.

 

I would argue that the more common pieces are likely an admixture of well-made counterfeits and genuine pieces, but I'd be curious if anyone knows better.

 

Hoot

[MikeKing]

I got this from the most recent STACKS/ANR auction.

From what I read here 1786 CT Copper it looks like this is considered a forgery contemporary at that time.

Can you tell me why you find this piece suspect? suspect of what?

thanks

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

Mike, a clarification. I was remarking that the photo made the coin appear to be "suspect". not that the coin was a fantasy or modern counterfeit. The variety is a longtime listed variety and a very distinct one, whether it was a contemporary counterfeit circulated during the era or a genuine piece. However, I was not aware that this variety was considered a distinctly counterfeited issue.

[MikeKing]

Thanks for your response. I would be interested also in what you find suspect in the photos of the coin. I did send it off to be graded so it would be interesting to see if the tpg thinks it is corroded or altered surface, and the fact is that I'm not sure.

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

Nothing suspect - the photo just tends to give the appearance or illusion of such. The photo tends to reflect an unnatural glossy appearance which I would say is probably not an acccurate reflection of the actual coin in hand. The coin appears to have the typical planchet imperfections or striations that always seem to accompany the majority of these early pieces. There also appears to be some granularity in the planchet - can't make out any offensive corrosion at all in the photo. I don't believe the surfaces have been altered. This is just the nature of the beast. A nice piece with a nice detail in the devices around the edges and in the hair.

[MikeKing]

I have to say that it is somewhat glossy, and I wondered if it was just brushed to be like that or if it was shellaced (sp?).

[Hoot]

Mike - I hope you'll update us on this piece as you have the chance. Also, if you could weigh the coin, that'd be interesting.

 

Hoot

[MikeKing]

93.6 grains

[Conder101]

I am by no means an expert on colonials, but this is clearly a contemporary counterfeit. It just doesn't have the look of a modern fake, and the first thing that jumped out at me were the large triangular denticals which is a characteristic of products from Machins Mills, and Machins DID strike counterfeit CT coppers. Machins also struck the counferfeits well under the legal standard because they were making their profit on the difference in the value of the copper compared to the face value. The legal weight 144 grain coins would have had a copper value of just a little under a half penny. At 93.6 grains this piece had just over a farthings worth of copper. Machins would have made almost twice the profit per coin that the legal coiners did.

 

After writing that I took a look in Breen and it is listed as a counterfeit, but issued by James Atlee of the Rahway Mills mint in NJ and not the Machin Mills mint. The large crude denticals are still distinctly different than the smaller regularly spaced denticals seen on the official issues.

[MikeKing]

just for those interested, the coin graded at PCGS a VF35.

[Hoot]

Mike - I'm quite pleased for you. I'd be very interested for you to send the coin to a colonial coins expert (e.g. John Kraljevich, aka. Pistareen) to hear what he might have to say about the coin. I'm very curious about the significant light weight of the coin and the overall look. It'd be quite fascinating to hear what a true expert has to say about the piece. John puts his email in his signature line on the CU boards, so I'll put it here: johnk@anrcoins.com

 

Hoot

[MikeKing]

thanks Hoot. I'll email him, maybe he'll come over to this board.

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

Mike, You mentioned earlier in this post that this coin came out of a Stacks/ANR auction. It's likely JK was the cataloger on this - you may want to to pont him back to the auction and lot number.

[MikeKing]

I'm sure he won't mind my copying his answer. (I tried to get him to post here)...

 

Hi Michael --

 

That variety is thought to have been struck at what I like to call an "extra-legal" mint -- i.e. outside of the law. Before the Constitution, counterfeiting state coppers would not have been illegal, particularly if accomplished outside the state. Counterfeiting paper money and specie was illegal, but producing counterfeit coppers was more of a nuisance activity in the Confederation. Their preponderance helped lead to the Coppers Panic of 1789, which centered on NY, the hotbed of the counterfeiters.

 

To my mind, ALL the most interesting Connecticut varieties are the counterfeits -- the 1787 Small Head (struck at Machin's Mills), the Muttonhead (produced with a topless Britannia on the reverse), etc. Yours is a great coin!

 

Enjoy it -- perhaps this will inspire you to collect other similar pieces?

 

John K.

[Hoot]

Excellent information. An entire variety that is counterfeit! Explains, somewhat, the extraordinary variation in weight and condition of the copper.

 

Hoot

[MikeKing]

In a second email he agrees with James Atlee as the engraver and believes it could have been minted in either NJ or NY.

[Hoot]

Excellent follow-ups on your initial post. Thanks Mike! (And my thanks to JK.)

 

Hoot