1797 cent NEWP - let's see your'97s!

[Hoot]

I was delighted in the Long Beach Heritage auction to have snagged a couple of nice large cents. By far, the best of these for me was a 1797 S-138. (It's one of the "Reverse of 1797, with stems" Red Book varieties.) This is a very tough coin to find problem-free, and often comes with all sorts of planchet and strike problems.

 

When I first saw this piece, I was surprised to see it in an ANACS holder net graded XF45 corroded. I studied the photo carefully, lightening it and enlarging it variously to try to see the noted problem. No matter how I looked at the coin, I simply could not see evidence of corrosion or any other problem. In short, I bid strong on the coin but got it for a very low price, given the detail.

 

I've received the coin, have cracked it from its tomb, and have sat long with it, absolutely dazzled in amazement. I don't know how ANACS made such an incredible error, but the coin shows absolutely no corrosion or remnants thereof. Also, the coin is beautifully colored and indeed has XF details, even in EAC terms. I grade the coin XF40 details/net, A+. I believe that the coin is worthy of the condition census for the variety.

 

This coin has what is called "die swelling" on the reverse northeast quadrant. That is, that portion of the die did not temper correctly, as it was not annealed properly. Thus, with use, the die heated up and swelled during the run of striking. This led to a slow obliteration of the detail of that area where the metal was swelling. In many S-138 cents, the die swelling is so bad that one simply cannot read the lettering in the quadrant or see the details of the upper right wreath. This coin is of intermediate die swelling, as all the details are present, albeit weak in the area.

 

Could the ANACS grader have not been familiar with the variety and therefore mistook the die swelling for corrosion? I'll never know, but I'm quite lucky they made the mistake.

 

Add some 1797 varieties!

 

Enjoy, Hoot

 

[joel Beach-migration]

hoot what would a coin of this nature be worth if you dont mind my asking,sorry if i'm pesky this stuff is new to me but very exciting.also i joined the cu you told me about,How long does it usually take to get accepted.

 

Thanks Joel

[Hoot]

PM sent.

[WinstonWare]

Great snag Hoot ! Even if ANACS screwed-the-pooch on that one, the owner should have just cracked it and resubmitted it.

[Hoot]

Great snag Hoot ! Even if ANACS screwed-the-pooch on that one, the owner should have just cracked it and resubmitted it.

 

I thought the same thing. The only explanation I can think of is that the owner didn't know what they had and just sent their coins through ANACS believing blindly in their assessments. I'm sorry for the owner in that context, but the idea (at least) illustrates the point that you should know what you're collecting. Nonetheless, I doubt the owner lost anything on the coin, and it was likely part of a very old and sequestered collection, otherwise the coin would be known for its provenance already.

 

Hoot

[EZ_E]

That is a beautiful cent and would never fall out of favor with the owner as michael's earlier post posed.

[WoodenJefferson]

Hoot, there is only a handful of people alive that could correctly attribute these particular early cents...you happen to be one of them (Bill, you're in this lump of experts along with 1798centcollector)

 

Phenominal examples of early coins.

[lkenefic]

Hoot...nice pick! Do you think the ANACS grader mistook the dirt at the back of the hair and in the reverse devices for corrosion??? Depending upon how I adjust my monitor, it can look dark-green to black. I don't think I've seen a 1797 with that much detail...ever...Leo

[leeg]

Very, Very, "Sweet" Addition!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Hoot]

Hoot...nice pick! Do you think the ANACS grader mistook the dirt at the back of the hair and in the reverse devices for corrosion??? Depending upon how I adjust my monitor, it can look dark-green to black. I don't think I've seen a 1797 with that much detail...ever...Leo

 

I think what you're seeing are anomalies of the scanned image. In-hand, this coin has no visible discoloration, roughness, or porosity. Truly, a stunning coin that I feel quite lucky to have picked up.

 

Hoot

[IGWT]

Thanks for the education!

 

Edited to add: The coin looks glossy by comparison in the Heritage photo.

[rexcat]

Great going Hoot!

 

Love your story about finding your new gem, yeah I do mean gem, this is a coin would shine bright in any collection.

 

Once again superior knowledge of coins and a keen eye trumps the market place; bringing home a fine prize that others might not have noticed even if it jumped up and bit them in the face.

[gmarguli]

I compared your pictures to those of Heritage. What I notice (and this very well might not be accurate based on the coin in hand) is that there appears to be some micro porosity covering the coin which is most noticeable around the devices. Perhaps this is just dirt that could be lovingly brushed away?

 

Also, the Heritage picture makes the coin looks coated. I know that coated copper is OK according to many people, but I personally feel that most coated copper is done to hide problems. I have seen first hand how some of the most hideously abused copper coins can end up in top tier TPG slabs after a well done coating of %@#&^*$.

 

Having said that, I think that coin can likely get into a top tier TPG with some minor help and you're going to make a killing on it.

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

I gotta hand it to ya Hoot ... that's Hoot -errific !!

 

Seriously, a nice cent. The photo does give the appearance that there is some die rust scattered around the obverse lettering BERT in LIBERTY and the back of the hair and upper ribbon. Thought maybe that could have been mistaken for corrosion. But I know you would have noted that in your assessment of the surfaces.

 

I love the swelling and it looks to be a nice middle to late die state example - can't tell from the photo if thats a die crack from the rim to the lower curl. Great detail and surfaces and I know you are thrilled to snag that coin !!

 

Thanks WJ

[SkyMan]

That is a NICE looking coin.

[Hoot]

I compared your pictures to those of Heritage. What I notice (and this very well might not be accurate based on the coin in hand) is that there appears to be some micro porosity covering the coin which is most noticeable around the devices. Perhaps this is just dirt that could be lovingly brushed away?

 

This is correct. I will truly be loving.

 

Also, the Heritage picture makes the coin looks coated.

 

Absolutely true. The Heritage picture is typical of Heritage - it requires interpretation, which is onerous. In-hand, the coin has no such coated appearance.

 

Having said that, I think that coin can likely get into a top tier TPG with some minor help and you're going to make a killing on it.

 

 

Hoot

[michael]

sweet coin really sweet

 

i have never seen a stronger dare on a 1797 it is really amazing.........

 

also other things about the coin but i have no doubt that in hand sight seen you know all of these things already hoot and also you are more of an adsvanced collector on these early large cents than i am or will ever be

great find and a coin worth lots more

out of that anx holder

[MikeInFL]

What a gorgeous obverse!!!

 

That's an awful nice coin for a "corroded" one, and I agree that this one will likely make it into PCGS or NGC plastic.

 

Not having a '97, unfortunately I can't contribute to this thread.

 

Nice coin, Hoot, and thanks for sharing...Mike

[EZ_E]

 

Not having a '97, unfortunately I can't contribute to this thread.

 

Nice coin, Hoot, and thanks for sharing...Mike

 

Hey, Mike, if 1798CentCollector can provide input into this thread then anyone can!

 

Geez, it is a 1797 afterall!

[Wihlborg]

Mark,

 

WOW! Very, very nice.

 

Why didn’t you tell me about this coin when we spoke last week.

 

Congratulations on a great windfall!

 

John

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

Not having a '97, unfortunately I can't contribute to this thread.

 

Nice coin, Hoot, and thanks for sharing...Mike

Hey, Mike, if 1798CentCollector can provide input into this thread then anyone can!

 

My thoughts exactly.

[NoTwilight]

Mark,

Beautiful coin. Great story. Will you be curating this coin at all or leaving it totally as is?

 

Alas, I havn't a 97 to post..and the two 95's that I won in the same aucton haven't arrived yet although they shipped last week...

 

Congrats,

Jerry

[Hoot]

Mark,

Beautiful coin. Great story. Will you be curating this coin at all or leaving it totally as is?

 

Thanks Jerry! I will only be removing the excess gunk that Greg mentioned, then give it a light brushing. This is not a coin I need to tinker with.

 

Hoot

[Bruceswar]

Everytime I look at this coin I go WOW! That one is a smoking coin!!

[MikeKing]

very nice coin. the photo make it look like there is diffuse porosity but you say there is not, so I can't comment on that. I didn't look at the heritage photos.

 

I sent an anacs coin (graded normally) to ngc who rejected it as environmentally damaged. I could see what they meant, but I sent it to pcgs afterwards and they graded it the same as what anacs had graded it.

 

So who the hell knows how it will grade.

 

I'd send it to pcgs first.

 

edited to add: but I'm sure those famous brushes are coming out first.

 

[Hoot]

I sent an anacs coin (graded normally) to ngc who rejected it as environmentally damaged. I could see what they meant, but I sent it to pcgs afterwards and they graded it the same as what anacs had graded it.

 

So who the hell knows how it will grade.

 

I'd send it to pcgs first.

 

I put the coin under a scope last night (I have a Nikon SMZ800 planar dissecting scope for my work in biology), and at magnifications above 10x there does appear to be some mild porosity. Given the way it is dispersed around the coin, I would attribute it to the condition of the planchet and not to any former corrosion. Again, what appears to be porosity around the edges of the devices is not - it's just oily gunk that Greg mentioned. That waxy build-up was also thick on the surfaces, which may have given my scan a greater sense of a porous coin. That's now gone from around the devices and the surfaces. There was an oily little blob on the top of the bosoms of Liberty - that's also now gone.

 

The "microporosity" of the coin's surfaces simply does not bother me - besides, I can't see it without my scope (or a high powered loupe, I suppose). I typically do not look at coins this way. As for the grade, I might lower the surface attribution to A from A+, but with some reluctance - after all, it's my coin.

 

I will not be sending this coin in for grading, although I am quite sure it would make it into a PCGS or NGC slab. I want to keep the coin, as it's the nicest specimen of a 1797 cent I'll likely ever have, and I like my coppers raw, simply preferring to see them that way and take care of them properly.

 

Thanks for all the keen-eyed observations. They prompted me to look more carefully at the coin and to rid it of the gunky build-up, which can only gather killer moisture over time.

 

Hoot