1856 cent - an uncommonly choice piece

[Hoot]

I recently picked up an 1846 cent that I attribute as N-14b. This is an R.1 variety (quite common) that was, according to Grellman, a hoard coin of unknown circumstance. By the condition census, there are many Mint State (EAC) examples around, and many coins that the grading services call MS would grade AU55 or MS60 by EAC standards. The most uncommon pieces of this die marriage are those of die state "a" that has a faint line leading up from the chin into the field (a die scratch or impression) and a faint line below the lower end of the 8. Die state "b" does not have either of these traits and has a distinct weakness in the tip of Liberty's coronet, making the upper ends of the letters LIB weak. The interesting thing about the coin I picked up is that it shows intermediate characteristics of the die states, with the line faintly from the chin but no line under 8, which makes it slightly less common than the average "b" example; the tip of the coronet and LI is weak. I'm quite pleased with the coin, as it shows no evidence of circulation. The coin grades AU55 C (choice) in my book, making it the first cent I've obtained with choice surfaces. The coin would likely grade MS64 with a TPG. Bear in mind that this illustrates well the difference in EAC and market grading. The coin is strictly uncirculated, but not fully struck and it's brown. The strike would have to represent a full die state "a" with a sharp coronet and full leaves on the lower reverse in order to grade as an MS example by EAC methods. Some might be generous and give the coin an MS60 A or A+ grade, but I rather like sticking with the details and calling the surfaces choice. Always, always, there are differences of opinions with grading, and when an early copper is in the range of grade from 55-64, it can be tough to gain consensus. For your consideration.

 

Hoot

 

[Bruceswar]

WOW nice coin! I like it alot!!

[EZ_E]

Aaaaaaah.........the other 1856 cent!

 

I think the eye-appeal on this piece is threw the roof!

[leeg]

Aaaaaaah.........the other 1856 cent!

 

I think the eye-appeal on this piece is threw the roof!

 

 

Got that right!!!

[pendragon1998]

...through the roof and into orbit! That is everything I would want in a large cent.

[lkenefic]

wow... mucho eye appeal is quite the understatement!! My 1856 is a DieState b with the "LIB" in LIBERTY being quite weak and a weakly struck reverse. My example was cracked out of a PCI holder (EF45). All bets are off for grading this piece by a TPG. If you get someone who understands the series it could end up as a commercially graded MS62...if you get someone who thinks the weakness in strike is wear it could easily be in an AU50 holder. Personally, I'd keep it out of plastic... and fondle it

 

Cheers,

 

Leo

[lkenefic]

BTW....here's mine to share...not nearly as nice as Hoots though... now that I'm looking at the image, I'm thinking it's a die state "a"....

 

 

 

[Zoins]

Nice coin Hoot. Lots of detail!

[WoodenJefferson]

 

I always thought there was an uncanny similaity between Ms. Liberty of the time and the Roman Goddess Diana. Hoot, it looks like Ms. Liberty just came back from the hair dresser...an incredible copper.

 

DIANA

 

As the ancient Roman goddess of the moon, Diana's sanctuary could be found on the shore of Lake Nemi, Italy, in the midst of a grove. Shrines to the moon were usually found in forests and near water. A sacred flame, representing the power of the moon to fertilize, was kept burning there. In later times, when she merged with Artemis, she became a three-fold goddess: virgin (waxing moon), mother/nurturer/protector (full moon) and crone (waning moon). She protected women, children and animals and came to the aid of women and animals during birthing with healing herbs from the woods.

[SkyMan]

Nice looking coin, Hoot!

[MarkFeld]

With no disrespect aimed at the coin or Hoot, I think the coin looks quite nice, but frankly, don't understand all of the apparent excitement over it. That type is not particularly scarce, even in "gem" uncirculated RB or BN condition and that example doesn't really stand out over numerous others I have seen.

 

I feel somewhat badly having posted the above, but I believe in open and honest discussion and feedback and am perplexed by the previous replies.

[Zoins]

With no disrespect aimed at the coin or Hoot, I think the coin looks quite nice, but frankly, don't understand all of the apparent excitement over it. That type is not particularly scarce, even in "gem" uncirculated RB or BN condition and that example doesn't really stand out over numerous others I have seen.

 

I feel somewhat badly having posted the above, but I believe in open and honest discussion and feedback and am perplexed by the previous replies.

I haven't seen many of these so I felt fine responding, especially when it is a nice coin and Hoot has taken the effort to post photos. Thanks to lkenefic for posting his as well. From my perspective, photo posting is very worthwhile

 

My eyes tend to gravitate towards MS RD with luster but not all coins are available this way so I didn't feel like asking at the time. Now the cat is out of the bag, does anyone have photos of MS RD/RB with luster examples to share?

 

BTW, I still like Hoot's coin, even if it may not stand out among its peers. Thanks for sharing

[Hoot]

Hey guys - Thanks for all the great comments, I appreciate them.

 

lkenefic - I very much like middle grade cents, and am slowly putting together a Dansco album with such coins. They are pleasing and worthy additions to any collection. They also won't break the bank.

 

WJ - The bust of Diana you posted is remarkable for its resemblance to Gobrecht's Liberty. Many of the designs on our coins have roots in ancient mythology. Thanks for the addition.

 

Mark - As you know, not every coin turns everyone's crank, but for those whose crank they turn, there's no reason to throw a pall on it. You're right, and as I indicated in my initial post, there are many MS examples of this coin around. So what? I don't have a RD or RB piece, I have a brown piece and it has a story to tell, albeit just a tiny corner in the numismatic world. Personally, I could care less about most RD and RB Mature Head cents, particularly the RB pieces since most (not all) are ugly to me. So, it would seem that "all the excitement" is over something simple and appealing to the people who responded. If you don't like it, so be it and go ahead and say so (e.g., "I don't like the coin and much prefer the many RD MS examples I've seen"), but questioning others' responses is a not constructive. Please also post a pic of one you prefer. I like your participation here and elsewhere.

 

Hoot

[MarkFeld]

Hoot, I liked the description and information that you provided about the coin, as well as the coin, itself. And, you didn't hype it, either. But, as I mentioned previously, I was admittedly perplexed by some of the replies. I posted what I did in part, because I was and am open to hearing about and understanding the reasons behind them.

 

By the way, I appreciate a nice looking BN example just as much as or more than a RB or RD one.

 

Here's an NGC MS64RB which I think has a nice look to it, from the images, at least - I'm guessing that it is a bit darker in person:

 

 

 

Edited to add: I disagree regarding whether questioning other responses can be constructive. In my opinion, if we merely agree or disagree about coins, etc. without stating our reasoning, (and/or asking questions of others) we don't have the opportunity to learn nearly as much.

[PerryHall]

I was expecting to see another flying eagle cent when I openeds this thread but I wasn't disappointed to see your nice large cent.

[MikeInFL]

With no disrespect aimed at the coin or Hoot, I think the coin looks quite nice, but frankly, don't understand all of the apparent excitement over it. That type is not particularly scarce, even in "gem" uncirculated RB or BN condition and that example doesn't really stand out over numerous others I have seen.

 

I feel somewhat badly having posted the above, but I believe in open and honest discussion and feedback and am perplexed by the previous replies.

 

I tend to agree with Mark given the information provided. From what I see in Hoot's photos, this is not a particularly outstanding '56....

 

However, I also understand that Hoot's scans can make any coin look lackluster (sorry buddy!), so if Hoot says it's choice I would tend to believe him.

 

That said, I think the point of Hoot's post was that this is Hoot's first choice coin ("choice" being used in EAC parlance), and he was not necessarily comparing this to the extant population of this date

 

Those that responded giving their approval are certainly entitled to their opinion, but I tend to lean towards Mark's opinion -- a nice but not remarkable coin from the photos...Mike

 

p.s. FWIW, here's my "italic 5" (N-14) 1856 -- ANACS graded it a 62 BN (please excuse the old image):

 

 

Since someone above asked, here are two (IMHO) "remarkable" RB coins from my collection -- find a '56 that looks like these (good luck!) and we'd be in business (although we'd also have to spend a signfiicant amount more than Hoot did):

 

 

[lkenefic]

Since someone above asked, here are two (IMHO) "remarkable" RB coins from my collection -- find a '56 that looks like these (good luck!) and we'd be in business (although we'd also have to spend a signfiicant amount more than Hoot did):

 

I think you may have just hit the proverbial nail on the head... really, any coin can be had for a price. I'm putting together a mid-grade set of these and it's been a bit more of a challenge to find problem-free examples than I anticipated. After I get the date set completed (I've got four left) I'll go back and upgrade. The 1856 should be an easy upgrade from the one I have. Mine has a weakly struck reverse as well as some carbon spots that aren't very appealing...but I only have $50 in this coin. I don't know that I'd want to upgrade to an MS coin at ten times the price.

 

..beauty is in the eye of the beholder...but I have to remember I'm on a budget!!!

[1798CentCollector-migratio]

Hoot,

 

Thanks for another informative and instructional post.

 

I recently picked up an 1846 cent that I attribute as N-14b. This is an R.1 variety (quite common) that was, according to Grellman, a hoard coin of unknown circumstance. By the condition census, there are many Mint State (EAC) examples around, and many coins that the grading services call MS would grade AU55 or MS60 by EAC standards. The most uncommon pieces of this die marriage are those of die state "a" that has a faint line leading up from the chin into the field (a die scratch or impression) and a faint line below the lower end of the 8. Die state "b" does not have either of these traits and has a distinct weakness in the tip of Liberty's coronet, making the upper ends of the letters LIB weak. The interesting thing about the coin I picked up is that it shows intermediate characteristics of the die states, with the line faintly from the chin but no line under 8, which makes it slightly less common than the average "b" example; the tip of the coronet and LI is weak......................

 

This is the meat of Hoot's post IMO. The real value in many of these postings lies in the author's enthusiasm and and ability to inform and educate us a bit more, passing along a spark of interest that may send some us scurrying back to the reference books, auction catalogs, and our own coins for a closer look. A wonderful post that should generate further interest in the late date "states" for copper fans.

 

I like the coin BTW. Not a draped bust of 1798... but it'll do in a pinch when a little copper fix is needed. -

 

Mike, as usual you make me envious with that first rate photography !

[Hoot]

All matters in context... The point I think I made in the first post was that this was a choice example of what I regard as an AU EAC grade, and I made no direct comparison with the population at large; choice AU examples are not common. I provided reasons for this. It perplexes me that that appears lost on several people. If that's not educational, then I'm truly sorry.

 

Mike - I would regard your '56 as an AU coin by EAC standards for the reasons I stated in my first post; it's only MS by market standards, just like my coin. Nice '53 and '54. And you're right about my scans lacking luster, but we must all realize that scans and photos provide very little information about a coin compared with an in-hand analysis. So, my point was never to wow you or anyone else with my picture, and I make no apologies.

 

That this variety and year are readily available is utterly beside the point, but again, I made that clear in my first post.

 

As for "I disagree regarding whether questioning other responses can be constructive." This is all in the manner in which things are stated. Saying that you "don't understand all of the apparent excitement" reads as a sideways put-down, and it's not a question. I do not think that put downs are necessary or that they contribute to a discussion. Nice looking example that you posted, Mark. Such a coin is nothing I personally would be interested in, but a wealthy, high-end MS RD large cent collector could well be, and it would be a very worthy piece.

 

Hoot

[MikeInFL]

All matters in context... The point I think I made in the first post was that this was a choice example of what I regard as an AU EAC grade, and I made no direct comparison with the population at large; choice AU examples are not common. I provided reasons for this. It perplexes me that that appears lost on several people. If that's not educational, then I'm truly sorry.

 

Mike - I would regard your '56 as an AU coin by EAC standards for the reasons I stated in my first post; it's only MS by market standards, just like my coin. Nice '53 and '54. And you're right about my scans lacking luster, but we must all realize that scans and photos provide very little information about a coin compared with an in-hand analysis. So, my point was never to wow you or anyone else with my picture, and I make no apologies.

 

That this variety and year are readily available is utterly beside the point, but again, I made that clear in my first post.

 

As for "I disagree regarding whether questioning other responses can be constructive." This is all in the manner in which things are stated. Saying that you "don't understand all of the apparent excitement" reads as a sideways put-down, and it's not a question. I do not think that put downs are necessary or that they contribute to a discussion. Nice looking example that you posted, Mark. Such a coin is nothing I personally would be interested in, but a wealthy, high-end MS RD large cent collector could well be, and it would be a very worthy piece.

 

Hoot

 

Hoot,

 

I concur, my '56 is an EAC AU coin. Actually, it was one of the first large cents I bought when I got back into them. I bought it becuase it "looked nice" and was fairly priced. I'm happy with the coin, but will probably upgrade it once I can find a nice RB or BN example with more luster.

 

That said, and FWIW, I didn't read Mark's comments as a "sideways put-down", but rather an honest question that frankly occured to me when I was reading the responses.

 

Regardless, your point about TRUE CHOICE AU late date large cents is not lost on me, as a collector of these coins myself. IMHO, finding a choice AU example of these late dates is actually MUCH HARDER than finding an MS example, and choosing the '56 as an example is the perfect choice.

 

Have fun, and as always, thanks for sharing your collection and the fact-filled post...Mike

[MarkFeld]

All matters in context... The point I think I made in the first post was that this was a choice example of what I regard as an AU EAC grade, and I made no direct comparison with the population at large; choice AU examples are not common. I provided reasons for this. It perplexes me that that appears lost on several people. If that's not educational, then I'm truly sorry.

 

Mike - I would regard your '56 as an AU coin by EAC standards for the reasons I stated in my first post; it's only MS by market standards, just like my coin. Nice '53 and '54. And you're right about my scans lacking luster, but we must all realize that scans and photos provide very little information about a coin compared with an in-hand analysis. So, my point was never to wow you or anyone else with my picture, and I make no apologies.

 

That this variety and year are readily available is utterly beside the point, but again, I made that clear in my first post.

 

As for "I disagree regarding whether questioning other responses can be constructive." This is all in the manner in which things are stated. Saying that you "don't understand all of the apparent excitement" reads as a sideways put-down, and it's not a question. I do not think that put downs are necessary or that they contribute to a discussion. Nice looking example that you posted, Mark. Such a coin is nothing I personally would be interested in, but a wealthy, high-end MS RD large cent collector could well be, and it would be a very worthy piece.

 

Hoot

Hoot, sorry you took my post as "a sideways put-down", as it was not intended as such. I had stated that "I think the coin looks quite nice...", and meant it. What followed those words of mine did not pertain to your (in context, non-hyped) comments about the coin, but rather, to those of other posters. If the coin graded MS66, I would still have had the same reaction to the comments I read, which in my view were somewhat hyperbolic. If anyone had a problem with my post, I would have expected it to be the posters whose comments I took issue with, and they obviously are still free to chime in.

 

By the way, a collector need not be wealthy to acquire a coin like the one I posted - it brought $368 when it sold in auction a few years ago, and I doubt that the price would be dramatically different today.

[zrlevin]

I don't know about everyone else, but I think that that is a damn nice coin. Nice, clean surfaces and an excellent looking patina.

[leeg]

I love finding coins like the one Hoot posted for my 7070. They are not all that readily available, without problems. It's a perfect fit for my 7070 due to it's above average eye appeal.

[zrlevin]

Mine too, but Mike already took care of that spot for me.

[WoodenJefferson]

Hmmm...I said, "Hoot, it looks like Ms. Liberty just came back from the hair dresser...an incredible copper."

 

I still think it is an incredible copper even after seeing the other coins posted in the thread. I like the patina of Hoot's posted cent, almost chocolate, which accentuates the lighter features of the strike. There is a softness about the coin along with the stark contrast of strike details, it just does it for me.

 

 

I did not take Marks comment as an objection one way or the other...it just shows the vast difference in taste for the same series of coins.

 

~Woody~

[Hoot]

Hoot, sorry you took my post as "a sideways put-down", as it was not intended as such. I had stated that "I think the coin looks quite nice...", and meant it.

 

Thanks Mark. I realize that the written word can be read and misread with all kinds of inflection. I suppose I should err on the side of "no harm intended" rather than allowing myself to be trapped by my interpretations.

 

By the way, a collector need not be wealthy to acquire a coin like the one I posted - it brought $368 when it sold in auction a few years ago, and I doubt that the price would be dramatically different today.

 

That's surprising, and goes to show what time and demand can do to change matters. The landscape for late date large cents (and others) has changed, I believe, since the Rasmussen and Reiver sales. These coins now bring much stronger money than they once did. I have a client who likes late date cents in MS64-65 grades, but only likes to spend around $500 max per coin. I have a dickens of a time snagging 1839-57 cents at that price, with any color variation. I'd pay $400 for the coin you posted any day of the week if you have it to offer.

 

Thanks to all for your comments and clarifications.

 

Hoot

[MikeKing]

I didn't read this thread until now because I've been tied up in some personal matters, otherwise I would have responded sooner.

 

First of all, the coin that Hoot posted is one of the nicest 1856 pieces I have ever seen in any grade up to and including MS66.

 

I say this as having been a 1/2 cent collector in the past, and discovered what is truly unique and developed a desire that having been a serious collector of these pieces brought me.

 

I also want to say that very, very, very rarely is there a full red anything that, in my un-humble opinion has any noteworthiness in terms of eye appeal and that over 90% of the so called red pennies and 1/2 cents are rather revolting, to me at least.

 

Similarly, red brown is very often a joke, though, there are many beautiful red brown examples of these species that superced eye appeal for either brown and most certainly the 'red' examples.

 

Also, the coin Hoot posted is the most eye appealing coin posted in this thread.

 

So Mark, cmon, there was no claim of Hoot's that warranted your response. It just wasn't nice, as justified as you feel, give the guy a break. Be nice. Don't be not nice.

[MarkFeld]

Hoot, sorry you took my post as "a sideways put-down", as it was not intended as such. I had stated that "I think the coin looks quite nice...", and meant it.

 

Thanks Mark. I realize that the written word can be read and misread with all kinds of inflection. I suppose I should err on the side of "no harm intended" rather than allowing myself to be trapped by my interpretations.

 

By the way, a collector need not be wealthy to acquire a coin like the one I posted - it brought $368 when it sold in auction a few years ago, and I doubt that the price would be dramatically different today.

 

That's surprising, and goes to show what time and demand can do to change matters. The landscape for late date large cents (and others) has changed, I believe, since the Rasmussen and Reiver sales. These coins now bring much stronger money than they once did. I have a client who likes late date cents in MS64-65 grades, but only likes to spend around $500 max per coin. I have a dickens of a time snagging 1839-57 cents at that price, with any color variation. I'd pay $400 for the coin you posted any day of the week if you have it to offer.

 

Thanks to all for your comments and clarifications.

 

Hoot

Hoot, thanks for your comments, as well. Sorry, I don't have that coin to be able to sell to you

 

o Mark, cmon, there was no claim of Hoot's that warranted your response.

Mike, I have stated more than once in this thread that my comments were not based upon anything Hoot claimed or said. They were based upon others' posts, which were opinions I disagree with, but consider just as valid as mine.

[lkenefic]

I didn't see anything overtly antagonistic in Marks response. I respectfully disagree with him about this particular coin though. While I'm sure he's seen many more than I, I still liked the details and the overall "look" of this piece...especially given what I usually collect [and in the price range in which I collect]. I view this as simply an aesthetic issue...there are many that prefer Jackson Pollack over Rembrandt...

 

Leo

[al_e_gator]

I think the eye appeal is fantastic. It looks like someone took a charcoal pencil and highlighted every last detail. Awesome, IMHO. Different strokes for different folks.