| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 2,682 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
I was browsing Goldberg's upcoming auction catalog online a few minutes ago when I came across this lot http://images.goldbergauctions.com/...=2407&lang=1This is the description given: Quote:
1876-CC. Mint Error. Sharpness of VF. The design appears to have been struck in an incuse fashion on both sides. Interesting, and highly unusual.  What is this? It has peaked my curiosity. -MV |
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
7075 Posts |
That's weird. It's the opposite of what it should be -- doesn't seem likely that it's a mint error at all.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5828 Posts |
 I looked up the definition for incuse, and they all suggested PMD: in·cuse inˈkyo͞oz,-ˈkyo͞os noun an impression hammered or stamped on a coin. verb mark (a coin) with a figure by impressing it with a stamp. adjective hammered or stamped on a coin |
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Bizarre. My first reaction is, "Goldberg forgot how to numismatic."
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1626 Posts |
I've seen pictures of coins where the previously struck coin stuck in the press and struck into the next planchet causing an incuse design. A double sided one seems unlikely to me though. I also don't like the looks of the metal in this coin. Looks more like zinc than silver. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4691 Posts |
Looks like something I'd expect to see in a dealer's junk box.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5825 Posts |
Possibly a trial piece of some sort.
Testing the hubs?
I wouldn't touch it unless it was authenticated.
And shame on them for not going through the certification process.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1657 Posts |
Both a hub trial or being pressed by an already struck coin would leave the impressions reversed as well as incuse. This is really weird.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
Yea, really weird, my first thought was a really bad cast. but that didn't make sense either.
incuse is just wrong. I would not bid on it. but hey you never know !
Tony
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4409 Posts |
Another thought occurred to me why wouldn't Goldberg's publicizing this mint error instead of putting it in the Budget session of the auction? Surely it would be a highlight of a sale, I imagine errors on Seated coins would have to be fairly scarce if not rare. -MV |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
2668 Posts |
Danger, Will Robinson!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
Now that... is unique. How in the...? Does not compute.  Edited by SteveCaruso
01/09/2015 4:52 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
I haven't seen this with silver but I have seen it with large cents. The result of some kind of acid corrosion that attacks the raised features faster than the field to he point the features normally raised are incuse in the coin and NOT reversed. I have a 1798 S-152 with the reverse like this.
It could result if the coin is coated with something such as lacquer or wax and then the coating is worn offor removed from the devices and then exposed to a corrosive environment. the coating on the fields would protect them while the exposed areas are eaten into the coin.
Either way it is NOT a mint error.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1536 Posts |
Huh, how about that. I agree, it looks like something from a junk box. I have a Barber dime that reminds me of it and here I thought it was junk. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
This lot realized $165. And no, I didn't bid on it.
-MV
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
I never found the coin nearly as bizarre as the fact that they didn't write a word about it.
|
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 2,682 |
Posted 01/08/2015 5:27 pm
