It’s a Very Cool Coin, But…

I have this great 1859/8 that found its way to me a few weeks back.  I didn’t buy it on purpose; it was in a group of about 30 coins or so.  I often buy groups like this.  They keep me honest when I’m trying to establish the relative scarcity of varieties or die pairs.  It’s hard to have good numbers if you are constantly cherry picking, so I often buy groups.  The particular 1859, 9 over 8 in question was not identified up front, it was listed as a narrow 9.

I reached for Turners The 1858 Cents of Provincial Canada, Volume II where Rob documents each obverse, reverse and die pairing for the 1859/8’s.  It turns out to be an RD3/OA1.  The RD3 reverse is not that common but it’s not scarce either.  Rob has identified it as having coined about 5% of the overall 9/8 mintage.  The obverse on the other hand gets around a bit more.  The OA1 obverse has coined about 8% of the 9/8’s and is also paired up with 2 other overdate reverses.  Rob shows that this particular obverse is also associated with 3 different 1858 reverses, all of which are quite scarce.

Here’s the cool thing about this coin.  It has a cracked planchet that is so severe, it looks like the coin is going to break right in half!  As soon as I saw it I knew I would be keeping the coin.  The crack is right through, edge to edge, and shows clearly on both sides.  I’m not exactly sure what’s holding it together.  From the edge of the coin, the crack splits L3 in the middle, runs between the E of ONE and the T of CENT, splits the 5 and the 9, bisects L8 and out to the rim. Flipping the coin over we pick up the crack at the rim splitting the first A in CANADA, straight up Vicky’s neck, across her jaw, through her cheekbone,  exiting about mid nose, and on to split the A in VICTORIA and out to the edge.  This is a great break and it will make a great conversation piece. 

OK here’s the rub.  I’ll always have to describe the coin with the word “but”.  “Hey, have a look at this 9/8.  The planchet is seriously cracked. It’s very cool, but someone cleaned it.” I say.  Yeah that’s too bad. A great piece and a sought after die pair, what a shame” you lament.  “But that’s not all” I say, “look closer and you’ll see someone took what looks like an awl to the coin and marked it up, both sides”.  “Man, that’s too bad” you say, handing it back.

In this case I’m able to live with the “but”.  I didn’t put out 9/8 money for the coin.  It was a surprise in a bulk lot.  If I had however shelled out the cash for that coin individually, I can tell you that each time I looked at it, the cleaning and the defacing would bug me to the point that I wouldn’t show it to anyone.  Sooner or later I would get rid of it and be done with it.  How do I know this? It’s because I have bought coins in the past that had that effect on me.  I should have left them at the coin shop, show or walked away from the auction before I was high bidder.  I get no pleasure from a coin that I have to describe with the word “but”. 

I know a dealer that says there is an owner for even the most scudzy coin.  That might be so, but I’m trying hard to make sure it’s not me.  Leave those scudzy ones where you find them if you’re anything like me.  You will cringe every time you have to apologize for the look of your coin.  Here is my scudzy 9/8 with the really cool broken planchet.  Click the photos for a better look, if you dare.

The Collectable Clash

I like die clash markings.  No getting around it, I’m fascinated by the “extra design elements” on the coin.  There isn’t a date in the Victoria series that doesn’t have a visible clash on some coins.  I can’t keep them all, so what’s collectable?  For me it’s the unusual ones.

I stumbled on clashes by accident.  I wasn’t looking for them but they just started to pop out at me.  Knowing where to look is the key to finding cool ones.  Knowing where to look comes from knowing how a clash occurs .  Let’s explore that first and then move on to the cool stuff.

We all know how dies clash together, the planchet fails to show up between the dies when the striking motion occurs.  This can impart design elements from one die to the other.  The operative word here is “can”.  Even if design elements are transferred, they can be polished out of the dies or just plain worn out with use.  So what do I mean by the phrase “can be transferred”? 

Thinking this through a bit leads us to consider the designs on the dies, and what happens when they come together.  First, the dies design elements are mirror images of what we see on the coin.  Second, what is raised on the coin is incuse on the die.  When the dies strike a planchet with appropriate force, the metal on the planchet flows into the incuse areas of the dies creating the raised elements of the coin.  When the two dies come together without a planchet in between, there are 3 possible outcomes:

1.       Field to field - Since no design elements are present, no design is transferred

2.       Design to design - Since both elements are incuse there is nothing to transfer

3.       Design to field – Ah, now something happens.  The field from one die flows into the incuse area of the other die creating a raised element in the field of the first die.

Since the resulting new element is a raised spot, or high point, in the field on the die, it will impart an incuse element on the coins produced after the clash of the dies.  The results are the markings I look for.  The real cool ones I keep. 

So what is there to look for and where do you need to look?  Since the design elements of a die are mirror images of what is on a coin, we need to think in mirror image to visualize the impact areas on a coin.  Look in the fields of the coin for these incuse design elements.  The two overlay graphics below will help you peg the areas to look for and what design elements you can expect.  You will often need to tilt the coin back and forth against a fixed light source in the same manner that you would check for luster.  This will cause a clash to “pop”.  Start looking for cool die clashes to add to your variety collection.  You’ll be surprised at what you will find.

I had originally published the photographs of clash examples used below in the CN Journal , Vol. 53 Number 2, March 2008.

Potential reverse element locations on the obverse side of a coin due to a clash. These will only be in the fields.

Potential obverse element locations on the reverse side of a coin due to a clash. These will only be in the fields.

Reverse bead clash between head and obverse bead line.  This is fairly common.

Obverse head clash just under the bead line. This is fairly common.

Throat and chin clash.  Note how it wraps the 6.  These are less common.

Forehead and nose clash on the right, bun clash on the left.  These are less common.

E and T clashes.  E sticking out of the forehead, the T from the nose and lips. These are fairly scarce.

Obverse beads and lettering in the leaf and vine line.  This particular one is quite scarce.

Variety of the Month – 1899’s

I hadn’t thought that much about 1899’s until several of us were working on the large cent variety section in the Charlton Standard Catalogue of Canadian Coins, 65^th edition, 2011.  All the cool action for this date is on the reverse, and all of it is associated with the final 9 in the date.  Three 9/9 over-punches can be easily seen with a 10 x loupe.  Two are dramatic and the third more subtle.  All are collectable and considered reasonably scarce but not rare.  Expect to pay a modest premium, perhaps up to double trends, when you find them in stock from knowledgeable seller.

The first 9/9 shows evidence at the bottom left and is the remnant of at least two previous attempts at placing the 9 before finally settling on its original position.  This is the most dramatic offset of the three different examples of 9/9 for this date.

The second 9/9 shows evidence directly below the 9.  This is a single re-punch.

Finally the third more subtle 9/9 shows on the right at the bottom.  This is clearly the least amount of offset for the 9/9.

In addition to these, the font style of the final 9 can be different as well.  The final 9 can be much thinner, shaped a bit different and generally more delicate than the first 9 in the date.  This one is fairly common. This I’ll let you discover on your own, the others are pictured below.  

These original photographs were first published in A Charlton Standard Catalogue, Canadian Coins, Volume One, Numismatic Issues 2011, 65th Edition., W. K. Cross editor, and are published here with permission.

Happy Hunting!

Figure 1: 9/9 shows below to the left.

Figure 2: The 9/9 shows directly below with a nice offset

Figure 3: The 9/9 shows modestly at the bottom right.

Cherry Picking According to Jack.......... (Collecting Griffin Rarities)

It’s really hard to be a Canadian large cent variety collector without knowing about Jack Griffin.  Jack was a long time collector and researcher from rural southern Ontario.  He was meticulous about documenting the detail he saw on various coins in his note books and on his 2x2 holders.  In 1992, Jack’s work was published with the assistance of Brian Cornwell as “Some Die Varieties of the Large Cents of British North America and Canada”.  This monograph listed almost 1,000 different die varieties spanning 1858-1920 for Canadian material and including Provincial ½ and cent issues as well.  This original work is hard to find but it is out there.  A couple of years back The Charlton Press republished the work in 3 separate monographs including photographs of a number of the varieties to aid in identification.

To be sure, Jacks work was not a complete variety catalog and he never sought to promote it as such.  The fact that the title says “Some” indicates that the publication of his notes was a snapshot in time.  His work did however serve to jump start variety collecting which had stalled after Hans Zoell’s efforts of the 1960’s.  New varieties are discovered all the time.  The definitive work on this is not yet written.  There are currently several researchers that are systematically picking away at uncovering and documenting die varieties. 

The top three questions on any variety collectors mind, in no particular order, are;

1. What is it?
2. How difficult is it to find?
3. What’s it worth?

Without making further comments on the limitations of the publications of Jacks work, he addresses the first two questions but not the third.  He documents his observations and gave each die variety a rarity rating

Griffin’s rarity scale was 1=very common to 10=extremely rare.  For reference here, 4=scarce, 7=almost rare, 8=rare.  He never used level 9 or 10.  Jack listed a mere twelve die varieties at rarity 7 and a further six at rarity 8.  The following table sums up what Jack felt were Canadian large cents with a rarity rating of 7 and 8 between the years of 1858 and 1901.  I personally use Turners more up to date reference for the 1858’s and 1859/8’s.  Several of these were featured in the 65^th Edition of the Charlton Standard Catalog of Canadian Coins.

Just for reference, Jack lists the rarity for a 1859 DP#1 as a 6, the 1859 DP#2 as a 4 and the 1884 Obverse one as a 6.  Happy Hunting .

Rarity	Year	Comments
8	1859	Small date with a slight 5/5. ONE CENT looks smaller
7	1859/8	1 in the date is re-punched and shifted left
7	1859/8	Narrow 9/8 with a slight 5/5 as well
7	1859/8	Narrow over wide.  8 re-punched and 5 re-cut
7	1859	Tall slim 5 over shorter 5 with a great amount of offset. O in ONE is re-cut
7	1859	The N in CENT is re-cut showing at the top and bottom
7	1859	The T in CENT is not filled in at the top, also at the foot
8	1881	Single serif N in CANADA and REGINA, same style as in 1876
8	1881	Die clash of obverse beads on the reverse in the leaf 8 and 9 position
7	1890	Die clash of reverse 0 under Victoria’s chin and beads under bust truncation
8	1893	9/9/9

Accumulations – Hoards – Collections

I read an article in the EAC publication Penny-Wise a while back that got me thinking about this topic and my Canadian large cent stash.  In trying to decide whether I’m a collector, accumulator or hoarder I had to give some thought to what those terms meant to me.  

My first inclination was that I was a collector.  I have a collection of large cents, housed in 2x2 cardboard holders, all properly attributed, sitting in a couple of double wide red boxes.  The first attribution I make is the date of the coin.  This almost seems redundant to me, since the side of the holder that I make note of the date, is the side that shows the reverse.  Then I note obverse type and any variety designation that is appropriate.  If there are catalogs I’m using that identify die pairs, I make note of reverse and obverse die on the appropriate side of the holder. Finally, since pictures of some of my coins show up in books and articles, I make note on the holder where a picture of that coin has been used.  Sitting back quite smugly, I decided I was a collector.

But wait my wife said, what about all that other stuff sitting in jars you have stashed in the corner. Hmm… Oh yeah, that stuff.   Looking over at them, I have a stash of large cents that sit in about 4 basic groups. The first group is a container of mixed dates that I have not got around to sorting out yet.  The next group is sorted by date and sitting in various jars and such.  The third group is a box of mixed dates that I sell and trade from, and finally the last group is a group of Obverse 1x coins that I’m currently studying.  "So what about all that stuff?" is now ringing in my ears.  I’m hard pressed to call it a collection so it must be either a hoard or an accumulation.

Digging into this a bit, I decide to look through my 1882 Obverse 2 coins.  I don’t have any particular attachment to this group so I think it’s a good test group to decide if it is an accumulation or a hoard.   Since I’m currently studying Obverse 1x coins this seems like a good choice. (I’ll come back to this in a moment).  Out they all pile from a couple of containers onto my desk and I start to look at them.  I realize that I have previously just tossed them into this group based on Obverse and nothing else.  I have a couple of 1882 Obverse 2 coins in my collection.  I have collected those based on grade it seems.  What is sitting in front of me is a pile of VG-EF coins.  I start looking at them and putting almost all of them back into the jars, still not separating them by anything.  The ones not going into jars I toss into my sell or trade box.  I’ve almost worked my way through the entire pile when I stumble on a hub doubled Obverse 2 over Obverse 1.  These are really quite scarce!  I’m aware of 2 known types so I start to check my reference materials. The first I check is the variety section of the “Charlton Standard Catalog of Canadian Coins, 65^th Edition (2010)”.  It’s not the one featured there so it must be the other, less dramatic one.  I know there is a picture of the other one in Turners “Dies and Diadems (2009)” so I check that reference.  Yep, that’s the one.  One last check is the CCRS discussion board.  I remember a thread about this recently.  A search there confirms that the coin in hand is the lesser known of the two hub doubled coins.   OK so this one gets flipped, attributed and put into my collection.  Sitting back now, I decide that I have just collected a coin from my accumulation of 1882 Obverse 2 coins. Clearly I must be an accumulator as well as a collector.

Now I turn to my 1882 Obverse 1x group.  This is part of the group of coins I’m currently studying.  I go through the same process.  Out they all tumble onto my desk from a couple of jars.  I’m looking at them now and sorting them as well.  Obverse 1 coins in one pile, Obverse 1a in a second, and Obverse 1a/1 into yet another group until I’m all done.  Then I’m back at them, sorting them further based on anomalies on each coin until I have many different piles.  This caused me to have to get little bags, make notes on the bags so I can remember what each pile is, and then put each pile into the appropriate bag.  None go into my collection and none got pitched into my sell box.  Sitting back, quite tired from the exercise I discover that this is a hoard.  I’m not willing to part with or move any part of the group to my collection until I’m done with them as a whole.  OMG! I’m a hoarder!

My wife laughs as I confess that I’m an accumulator first, a hoarder second, and lastly a collector, all at the same time.  What are you?

How much do you need to know?

A collector posed that question to me the other day.  Not in those exact words, but when boiled down, that was the essence of the question.  If I look at any old Canadian coin catalog or Trends, I can find lists of coins by date with the occasional variety tossed in.  For instance 1894 and then the fat 4, 1896 and the far 6, 1859 and the 9/8, you get the idea. Is this sufficient?  Perhaps so, for the more casual collector that isn’t concentrating on the series but has a wider interest across a broader field of collecting.

But what about other varieties, those that are not published in the major catalogs?  Take for instance content you find on discussion boards or specialty web sites.  People post their findings as they look at their coins.  Lots of varieties are brought to light by collectors taking just a bit more time and looking at the detail on the coin.  If you are starting to specialize any series, you probably pay attention to those finds and add them to your list.  The 1876 full serif T, the 1881 micro D or spike leg N, how about the 1899 9/9’s.  Ah the list.  Here it is again but now a bit longer as I add mine and others findings to it. 

Charlton has been publishing variety sections in the back of their catalog for the past few years now.  The current years catalog, 2011, 65^th Edition, has published over 80 different Victoria large cent varieties complete with photographs illustrating the variety and an index with comments regarding cross references to Griffin, Zoell, Turner and Gravestone numbers, scarcity and demand.   We are now beyond just a list and are working from a photo guide with references back to older published works and specialty items still in the pipeline.

But is that enough? For many this is the cats meow. Up until 2007, lists ruled.  In 2007 however Turner published his ground breaking epic, “The 1858 Cents of Provincial Canada”.  If you have not picked this up, it is well worth the read.  Turner takes a page from the U.S. variety researchers play book and goes right to the die level, matching obverse and reverse die pairs and stringing out the hierarchy.  In his follow up with Vol. II in 2009, he expands to the 1859 W9/8 as well.  Now we have die pairs and die families.  You really start to get a feel for the “why” some things you see on certain coins are the way that they are.

Perhaps the question is really are you a casual collector or do you specialize?  Specializing requires a deep dive, deeper understanding and a look across relating series.  For instance, can you study Provincial Cents of 1858 and 9 without understanding what was going on at the Royal Mint, and the changes in planchet alloy, die steel, the coining equipment etc.

Seems to me there is a gradient here.  You will find yourself somewhere on the curve, from the most casual of collectors to the researcher.  Your knowledge needs will be different and you will be able to answer the question as it pertains to you.  For me, it’s the deep dive.

How do you like your reference material?

By looking at my desk on any given day, one would have to conclude that I prefer my reference material in the form of books.  I no longer even attempt to put some of them back in the bookcase.  Some of them lay open to the last topic I was researching or just generally reading about.  One on top of the other, both to the right and left of my work space.  Yes I like books.  I also use various web sites for shorter reads, discussion insights, new stuff (until it’s published in books) and the like.  I have a few books in pdf format that I use on my screen.   As easy and simple as that is, I just don’t use them all that much.  Time and time again I reach for the physical book and not the electronic one.  How about you?  Let me know your preference.