| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 2,587 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
As I delve deeper into my Canadian holdings, I begin to wonder if you people up there deliberately set about to mete out chaos into future Canadian coin collecting or if I just got lucky. Anyway, here's my next travelogue. I traced it as far as I know how. I think it's number 80 in Eugene G. Courteau's - 1919 THE COPPER TOKENS OF THE BANK OF MONTREAL. What fun I had tracing specific flaws and die markers! Did you guys ever learn to mint a dull old coin? Is it #80? Does that affect the desirability of the beast? How would it grade? How might its present owner best send it out from hiding and back into the world where it was born 176 years past? As always, any crumb of knowledge will go down for me as a feast. Courteau discriminates against certain die cracks while liking others. I like this one. The lovely crack must have been around 102 years past -- before his book was born. Would anyone pay a premium to own it, do you think? Anyone dare to advance a ballpark value for me? Kevin    Edited by Kcm
11/15/2020 08:38 am
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9863 Posts |
Something about that token doesn't look right.
You'll have to wait for an expert to chime in.
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Very crude-looking for sure.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5585 Posts |
It looks very strange to me as well. Maybe Gene or ColonialTokens will chime in.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1326 Posts |
Here's mine   |
|
Valued Member
 United States
284 Posts |
@otto What a beautiful coin you have! It just adds to my confusion over crazy Canadian coinage. Too bad we cannot consult E. Courteau. But..., bear in mind, I bought this whatever half a century ago and it would require a well-endowed idiot back then to produce it.
Kevin
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Agree, hard to imagine this being counterfeited.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
666 Posts |
I think the token is OK. The OP's photos look focused on the background instead of the token. Or were enlarged so much as to blur the details.
It is not Courteau #80. It is Charlton PC-1B4 or Courteau # 47 thru 53. None of which does Courteau mention die cracks on the obverse.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2781 Posts |
OP's photo of this token appears almost cartoonish, like it has been subjected to a pixlr or befunky filter.
that said, the 1844 can be had in abundance in AU/MS grades. for this reason alone I have not delved into this series.
not trying to take away OP's enthusiasm, as I tend to cherish any pre-1858 issue, but it is what it is.
die crack or not, it is a $15 coin
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1326 Posts |
Quote:
hard to imagine this being counterfeited. I agree, too. Notice the lettering on the two reverse ribbons. They match up well. |
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
I appreciate the learning. Please spare no concern for this new member's enthusiasm. My curiosity/enthusiasm ratio on most of my coins is 97/3. When it come to my Canadians (which I know so-o-o little about) it adjusts to 99/1.
Sorry about the images. I should have checked them more carefully -- especially the die crack image. My software reduced the 6.5MB original to 147KB to fall within CCF's permitted range. I redid my process, this time reducing it to 246KB, still in range, but much more usable -- and I checked it before posting it this time. Lesson learned.
I don't think messing with the Obv. and Rev. photos would change much, but if keener eyes advise I'll redo them.
Kevin
|
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
Nah! On second thought, I owe it to the coin to struggle a bit longer to get clearer images. My lousy ones have been replaced. More lessons learned.
Kevin
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2781 Posts |
MUCH better pictures, especially of the die crack here's a little more info on your piece: https://www.coinsandcanada.com/toke...itle=&id=131I also suggest you pick up books Canadian Colonial Tokens by W.K. Cross and Guide Book of Canadian Coins by J.Haxby (a member here and expert in the 1859 large cent series) Here is only example  Edited by Wade
11/15/2020 10:58 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
666 Posts |
Much better pictures. I now see that it is the short nose beaver, heavy trees variety - making it Charlton PC-1B3 or Courteau 54 to 63. Here is my example:  |
|
Valued Member
United States
284 Posts |
I thank the responders to this thread. I now know my Canadian coin is a bit of a mongrel, fifteen bucks at best. They must have minted a mint load of them and many were collected. Having learned that much, I had a sneaking suspicion I'd do well to check some more of my Canadian boxes of envelopes and 2x2's. Here are my finds. The counterpunched one (Can anyone shed light on that phenomenon?) was particularly intriguing. It held still to have its obverse photographed, but keeping it still to photo the reverse was an awful chore. To make it short, after I did photograph it, I put my phone into stopwatch mode and gave the coin a flick of my wrist. It stopped spinning only after ten full seconds. The coin does not show its cupping. Whoever did the counterpunch did not support his coin so as not to fracture it. The "G" looks gilded. The chopped up coin has its hole plugged with what looks like lead (Can anyone shed light on that phenomenon?). I do understand the community preference for one coin per thread. Perhaps I'll be forgiven for my fun at putting two more up on this one. It won't become a habit. Kevin    Next one:   |
|
New Member
United Kingdom
13 Posts |
Quote:
The counterpunched one (Can anyone shed light on that phenomenon?) was particularly intriguing. It held still to have its obverse photographed, but keeping it still to photo the reverse was an awful chore. To make it short, after I did photograph it, I put my phone into stopwatch mode and gave the coin a flick of my wrist. It stopped spinning only after ten full seconds. The coin does not show its cupping. Whoever did the counterpunch did not support his coin so as not to fracture it. The "G" looks gilded. The G counterpunch is recent. What appears to be gilding is just the shininess of fresh cut copper. If you look at the top of the G you can see that the punch has been made through all the verdigris which has been pushed into the cut. Additionally, you say that it is cupped due to the punch, but you can't see that looking at the photos. If it had ever circulated with the G present then the wear would be more noticeable on the opposing high spot. I also think the crack is a planchet flaw not associated with the counterpunch. |
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 2,587 |
|
Posted 11/14/2020 6:40 pm
