| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,630 |
|
|
New Member
United States
3 Posts |
Hello, I'm new to the forum and have read lots of articles on the web about how double headed coins are not possible, but, I recently received an antique coin collection from my deceased Grandma that had what appears to be one in it. This collection had lots of Buffalo nickels, old pennies, Mercury dimes in it. It also had several half dollars with Ben Franklin on them from the 1940's. I found in the bottom of the bag an envelope that contained three coins from my Great Granddad. They were Morgan dollars, one from 1879, one from 1890, and then there was one that had a 1890 head on one side and a 1892 head on the other side. This coin rings just the same as the other coins, doesn't thud when you drop it, and I can't see a seam with my naked eye. I know these coins have been in the family since the 1930's if not earlier and I can't believe anybody in my family was skilled enough to make it. Is there any chance this is genuine? If it was would it be worth much? How do I go about verifying it's authenticity? Thanks, Thomas |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4541 Posts |
 to the forum...  I am not going to say its a fake but it is most likely not genuine.. But I know there is someone here with a little more info that can elaborate Edited by daviscfad
10/05/2008 11:59 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
no chance it is real.
First, if it could be and was real there would be others. Things like this could not be unique.
Second, the obverse and reverse dies do not fit in the others' holes in the press. It simply cannot happen.
Third it would be very highly unlikely for two different dates, especially two years apart, to be on the same coin.
I know how easy it is to believe something like this is real, but I assure you there is no way.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
The only exception I can think of is one verified two-headed coin, confirmed by PCGS. This is an 1859 Indian Head cent with two different 1859 obverse dies used to strike both sides. As mentioned, hammer and anvil dies are normally shaped differently and can't be switched. Chris Pilliod and Rick Snow suggest this happened because the die settings for the previous Flying Eagle series was unusual, where the obverse was struck by the anvil die and the reverse by the hammer die. Early in the transition to Indian Head cents, there must have been some confusion as to die placement and the double-headed coin was struck. Currently only one coin is known, but there may be others in existence which haven't been confirmed as genuine. Not to confuse the issue here, because this case is certainly the exception--and it suggests how unlikely these die pairings are. The info above was taken from Rick Snow's attribution guide. Edited by KurtS
10/05/2008 2:50 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
I agree for the reasons stated above.
Thanks,
Bill
PS: I do believe there is a known two tailed quarter dollar as well. Tome Delorey places it in the 1965-66 era based upon the characteristics of the dies used.
There is also a legitimate two tailed dime that has been certified.
Edited by foundinrolls
10/06/2008 10:07 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
I believe the 1859 cent mentioned was a trial pattern piece, and not a coin meant for circulation. In other words, I believe it was struck with two heads on purpose. I hold my statement by rewording slightly to state that making two headed coins at the US Mint 'accidentally' is rather impossible.
|
|
New Member
 United States
3 Posts |
Thanks for the info. I know it is almost impossible for it to be real, I just was having a hard time believing that anybody in my family was capable of creating it, especially back in the 1930's.
I would have thought that it would have been noticed and gotten rid of back in the day when there were a lot more common instead of stored away in a family vault for almost 80 years.
Should I just accept the fact it's a fake, or should I get an expert opinion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Chuck- I just mentioned that as an interesting story where apparently die settings played a part in this unique striking--according to Chris Pilliod in Snow's guide for 1859-69, PT5 page 25. Who really knows if it was struck in error or intentionally? All the same, I'd guess the latter--it's considered a pattern, an obviously unique situation--I'm not disputing anything you said.  Edited by KurtS
10/05/2008 5:10 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1077 Posts |
Seams are very hard to see because they are not in the middle of the edge as you would expect. these coins are not ususally made by sanding two coins down and sticking the 2 halves together. What I mean is, one coin is in effect hollowed out like a bowl with its edge and milling intact. The diameter and thickness of the other coin are then reduced so that it effectively fits inside the other coin.
Hopefully that makes sense.
Have a look on the faces of the 2 sides for a seam, near to the edge.
Do you have any close up pics or scans?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1077 Posts |
I also have to agree that the fact that the years are different pretty much rules it out as being genuine.
|
|
New Member
United States
3 Posts |
I'll try to figure out how to post some pictures in the next couple of days. I did look at it a little closer and in some different light, trying to find a seam, and it kind of looks like there might be some kind of seam on the edge of the coin but it is intermittent, and it meanders from one side to the other. All the Reed Marks line up and appear to be unbroken so I'm not sure it is a seam. As far as I can tell the two heads are in perfect alignment although facing different directions. This coin weighs 22 grains more than the other two. Thanks again for all the responses, the rest of the family still would like to have it professionally evaluated, just to be sure. It would be about my luck for it to be genuine and and worth a little bit of something and have it setting in box and no one ever knowing about it. Who would a person contact to have this done? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7629 Posts |
NGC, PCGS, or ANACS...or all three, since each one will tell you the same thing. The coin cannot be genuine. It's not an effect of 'almost' can't be genuine...it 'cannot' be genuine. There's also a rather high likelihood it entered your family the same way a lot of double headed coins enter families. It was found in change. A large number of these coins are accidentally spent by someone who knows exactly what it is and loses track of it. Sets it on a dresser, etc., then someone else comes along and spends it not realizing what it is. At any rate, you've got my professioanl evaluation with nearly 30 years experience and direct communication on a regular basis with a number of coin book authors and researchers. If you HAVE to pay money to be told it's altered you should probably go with PCGS. They are at https://www.pcgs.com |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
I believe the 1859 cent mentioned was a trial pattern piece, and not a coin meant for circulation. I have difficulty believeing it to be a true pattern or trial piece considering one of the dies is broken and has a strong rim Cud. I believe it is a piece-de-caprice. There are also a couple other two tailed coins known and they are also almost certainly pieces that were deliberately manufactured by a mint employee. Quote:
This coin weighs 22 grains more than the other two. This also clearly points to the fact that it MUST be fake. The legal tolerance on the Morgan is +/- 1.5 grains. At 22 grains it is almost 5% off=weight. There is no way they would have used a planchet that much off spec. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5318 Posts |
Quote:...considering one of the dies is broken and has a strong rim Cud. I believe it is a piece-de-caprice. I see that now...and one side the die is noticeably misaligned. There were a number of interesting transitional IHC patterns for 1859. I had a chance to pick up a Judd-228 (Shield reverse of 1860), but passed for now. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
Another note on the Dollar coin: Back in the day:-) (Whatever day that was) Dollar coins were used to make these things as novelty items. They made them as a gag coin to be used in a coin toss. Just call heads and you win.
Edited by foundinrolls
10/06/2008 10:04 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
On the two-headed 1859 Indian Head cent, It is thought by some, Chris Pilliod for one, that a die intended to be used for a reverse was mistakenly hubbed with an obverse sometime late in 1858. It is thought that the coin was accidentally struck after a normal obverse die and this one wrongly hubbed reverse die were set up in the press for normal production. http://www.coinworld.com/news/071006/BW_0710.aspThanks, Bill |
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,630 |
|
Posted 10/05/2008 12:09 pm
