Hello all. Looks like 1869 to me. But not sure. I welcome opinions. Im apologize for the delay.I am grateful for all the info. Very interesting as I dont know much about these types.
John
It looks like 1869, but can you try taking pictures at different angles, focusing only on the last two digits? I'm pretty sure with the right luminosity you'll be able to read it without much problem.
Yes, it is very difficult to make out. Could you provide a photo of the other side to help with some detective work? I was noticing the difference between the bottom point of the star and the date and from that clue I suspect a much earlier date as in Type 1 (1851 - 1853) because the distance appears greater than on Types 2 and 3. The photo would either confirm or negate my initial observation.
Цитата: "harryg"I was noticing the difference between the bottom point of the star and the date and from that clue I suspect a much earlier date as in Type 1 (1851 - 1853) because the distance appears greater than on Types 2 and 3.
Ah yes, technology. This old guy still relies on the eye and a jewelers loupe. Without the coin in hand I must rely on clues. I disagree with the notion that the distance between the star and the date is to be dismissed. If you look closely at the link provided by Camerinvs, the star on types 2 and 3 are significantly larger than type 1. The photo of the other side of the coin would have made it easy to determine the type as there are no embellishments inside the C. Then it would have been definitively narrowed down as to type and then just be a matter of determining the exact date.
Yes I made all those observations but the question was about the DATE. I focused on the DATE and the relative distance between the the STAR POINT and the DATE. I have a nice collection of these types and understand perfectly. However because his coin is so worn the legend was not the primary focus in answering his question.
Not everyone seems to agree that it couldn't be Type 3. Looking at the discussion, no one pointed out that the star points to a different letter at the top in Type 3, which makes it clear that johnspa's coin is not Type 3.
While it's always better to have pictures of both sides of the coin. In this case the obverse alone is needed to know it's not Type 3.
Цитата: "Camerinvs"Not everyone seems to agree that it couldn't be Type 3. Looking at the discussion, no one pointed out that the star points to a different letter at the top in Type 3, which makes it clear that johnspa's coin is not Type 3.
While it's always better to have pictures of both sides of the coin. In this case the obverse alone is needed to know it's not Type 3.
Exactly what I said in my previous comments. First comment "provide a picture of the obverse" - Second comment "There are no embellishments In the C" (on type one"). You keep pointing out matters that have already been established. My reference was the distance of the star to date which you at first did not even consider, you chose to reference something else but only AFTER I pointed out the obvious. I fully realize there are other indicators but at this point it is irrelevant. This thread did not have to get so complicated simply because you seem determined to do so.
1─I said earlier that I agreed with you: "Yes, harryg is right, it's most certainly Type 1 if you compare them in the catalogue."
2─When Essor Prof hesitated about the distance between the date and the star, I added a point that no-one had made, but is by far the most definitive given the poor condition of the coin: the star points to a different letter in Type 3.
Цитата: "Camerinvs"2─When Essor Prof hesitated about the distance between the date and the star, I added a point that no-one had made, but is by far the most definitive given the poor condition of the coin: the star points to a different letter in Type 3.
I didn't doubt it is a Type 1 because I saw clearly enough the date is 1853 which makes it unmistakably a Type 1. I only said the distance between the date and the star alone is not enough to determine the type because I've found immediately and without any effort several Type 3 coins where the point of the star was also not near the date. But I have to admit I was only looking at the distance star - date, not at the size of the star, nor at the distance of the other star points to the legend. And I didn't notice at all the upper star point was pointing at a different letter. And that I've found a very nice addition. Thanks Camerinvs.
Цитата: "Essor Prof"I didn't doubt it is a Type 1 because I saw clearly enough the date is 1853 which makes it unmistakably a Type 1. I only said the distance between the date and the star alone is not enough to determine the type because I've found immediately and without any effort several Type 3 coins where the point of the star was also not near the date. But I have to admit I was only looking at the distance star - date, not at the size of the star, nor at the distance of the other star points to the legend. And I didn't notice at all the upper star point was pointing at a different letter. And that I've found a very nice addition. Thanks Camerinvs.
I could have phrased my reply better, but yes, I agree with you: the distance alone between the date and the star is not enough to be 100% sure. And in this case we're dealing with a coin that is in a very, very low grade.
By the way, I'll soon post an 1845 large cent that I just won two nights ago. It is well circulated (F grade, I think, or maybe VG), but what's interesting about it is that the 8 in 1845 looks very small. It may well just be that the picture is misleading. I don't know that there is a "small 8" variety but I don't own any books specialized on the large cents and my quick search online didn't produce any results.
