| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 2,375 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2403 Posts |
A friend of my wife's found this in her house and gave it to us. She had no idea what it was.Heck I had to look it up in my RedBook to see what it was.  As you can see there is just enough detail left to say it is a US 2 cent coin, but as for what date, somewhere between 1864 and 1873 that's for sure. Your guess would probably be better than mine. What ever the date is, it is now my oldest US coin. |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1475 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2403 Posts |
Thanks Coconutjoe.  I always thought in order for a coin to be gradable the date had to be legible. Am I wrong on this? Edited by MontCollector
01/10/2018 03:53 am
|
|
Moderator
 United States
15437 Posts |
Quote:
in order for a coin to be gradable the date had to be legible You are correct. There is a condition lower than PO01 and this 2 cent piece has reached it .... it's known as basal state .... and as such does not qualify as PO01. Still an intriguing piece of USA coinage history.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1609 Posts |
It's an eighteen sixty something. Can't tell the last digit but my guess would be 1865, 1866, or 1868.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Date doesn't have to be legible. but it does have to be identifiable. For example a 1794, 95, 96 or 97 liberty cap Half Cent usually has to have a readable date to grade Po-1, but a 1793 liberty cap Half Cent doesn't because it is the only one where Liberty faces left. You know the date even if it can't be read. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
That's as far gone as I've ever seen one.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188660 Posts |
Very nice! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2403 Posts |
Thanks all!! Quote:
It's an eighteen sixty something. Can't tell the last digit but my guess would be 1865, 1866, or 1868. You got better eyes than I do...Just for the heck of it, here is a close-up of the date area.  |
|
Rest in Peace
10197 Posts |
Mont, population. 1864, and 1865 were many made with 1868 a runner up. I've seen mostly 65's, then 64's.
Now if you can tell the size of letters on the ribbon above the shield, that may indicate a 64....ya, what ribbon!
Edited by Crazyb0
01/10/2018 3:38 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
That is a coin that did it's duty. It may be worn but it's due respect, nonetheless.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188660 Posts |
Quote:
That is a coin that did it's duty. It may be worn but it's due respect, nonetheless.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1609 Posts |
On second thought, I can only see the 18. After overlaying an image I cant figure what decade it is.
|
|
Moderator
United States
15437 Posts |
Quote:
Date doesn't have to be legible. but it does have to be identifiable. Fully concur ... My reply was not intended to be a lesson on criteria for certifying lowball coins ... simply suggested that for a newcomer to the topic the vast majority of true certifiable lowball need a verifiable date/mm ... single year type coins examples that can be certified even in basal state abound throughout the USA coinage history. 1921 high relief Peace dollar ... indeed. 1915-S Panama Pacific Half Dollar ... indeed. Your suggested 1793 Liberty Cap Half Cent ... indeed. Others? ... indeed These exceptions share the characteristic of being 1 year type coins with singular identifiable features even in basal state ... I do not know of any USA 2 cent piece that could meet this 'exception' criteria ... hence my original reply suggesting this is basal state and not PO01. David |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2205 Posts |
I love coins that appear organically. It just walked into your life, not from the Internet, not from ebay, just found its way there. Nothing special numismatically, but a whole lot of mystery and intrigue as well as many stories to tell if it could talk. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5029 Posts |
when I hold my head just right I think I can see the lower part of a 5 on your close up. However, I am likely simply seeing something out of nothing = PareidoliaI like it none the less. Thanks for sharing.  |
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 2,375 |
Posted 01/10/2018 01:51 am
