I could use some help with this. I listed this coin on eBay and received an e-mail from a collector saying he thought the coin was "most likely a fake, that the date is thin and doesn't match any of the known die varieties. "0" is too rounded." I removed the coin from eBay to get more information. I would appreciate some opinions from the members/readers of the forum as to what I have. Thank you.
I would agree with his statements about the date, especially the 0. It should be more elongated than round.
I see nothing obvious which would make me not think this was a S-237 including the Reverse which shows a couple of die subtle die cracks from the rim to the top of M and through I. The crack on the right fraction bar and from the rim through N to the leaves is also present. I don't see the TAT rim break of the terminal die state, but something looks like it's starting there so definitely a late die state. The Obverse has the broken lower left foot of Y which helps differentiate it from the obverse of S-235 which is close to a twin. I don't like using the opposite side of a coin to differentiate varieties. I could miss a mule that way. Strangely enough, it's one of the few varieties of 1802 I don't have since I concentrated on the rarer varieties. I show it as an R3 rarity. Others are S-225 R3-, S-227 R2, S-228 R2, NC-2 R6 (thought I had one, but was S-230), S-233 R2+ and the above mentioned S-237 R3. I look for rarer die states on the more common varieties. If it's a fake, it's a very good one and would have to be a transfer die to retain the markers I mentioned. But I can resolve the Attribution of this coin or the mother coin if it is indeed a fake. It is definitely not different from known varieties, though there are a few stem directions which might be affected by natural copper movement and wear. It's close to a fallen berry stem, but not quite. More parallel than falling. I see nothing wrong with the 0. In fact, the 2 looks a little more different than my comp, but not enough that it can't be accounted for by a minor ding or wear on either of the two. There is a flat spot at about 11 on the 0 which does make it look a little rounder, but it's a characteristic of that variety, at least in common die states.
A lot of suspicion of surfaced challenged early copper especially with the experts and TPGs these days... This is not one of the varieties we have seen as a struck counterfeit but as Marshall noted one could look for other examples with similar noticeable marks to see if there are others out there. I would like to see edge images and the weight but see no reason to suspect it a counterfeit just from your posted images (I am an image comparison type; like visuals when reviewing an example). Curious where you got it and when- hopefully didn't originate from China!
Thank you for your information. I'll try to get some edge shots to show you later in a day or so. I purchased this from a dealer at a coin show in Indianapolis in 06/2009.
I now have the coin and it weighs 161.4 grains. These are edge shots from top to bottom at 12 3 6 & 9. Obverse down.
I still think it's real, but the FAKES are so good, all I can do is determine whether it would require a transfer die. That narrows down the search for sister examples of the same variety with the same PMD nicks and cuts which would only occur on an actual transfer die. But you need examples of authentic coins in the same of later die states without these diagnostic marks to determine a transfer die was created and used. I'm sure there are other signs, but that's when I ask the Authentication Expert (Jack.) If the photos are insufficient, I'll send him the coin for a detailed exam. Either it's authentic and it has a good home with me or it's not and I give it to Jack for his research. Either way, it will wind up where it needs to be.
Thank you for being a conscientious seller and listening to others and then taking responsible actions. eBay needs more like you.
I've narrowed down the Die State to Breen Die State IX. In this case, Noyes actually breaks this into Reverse Die States F & G though the comments combined them as F. The photos are clearly labeled F - with the Rim Break over TAT and G - with the Rim Break extending back to S(TAT). This would be Noyes Reverse State F. I found 1 called Die State VIII/IX and 1 called Die State VI which I believe to be in error with the Rim Break over TAT. I just found a Terminal Die State G which is well photographed. The highest grade was the one called VI in XF.
Really a cool post; I would expect an "Authenticity Unverifiable" from PCGS if submitted... Here are images including the edge of 2 1798 S-158's in my collection. The 1st is a genuine one with the often seen reverse die break starting at the "T" of united. The 2nd is one of the struck counterfeits, imaged by PCGS after I agreed to send it to them for review; like other struck counterfeits for some reason the counterfeiters removed the die break (it starts at the rim to "T" but then removed either from the source coin or die).
Here are the Breen Die State IXs broken down to Noyes Reverse States F and G. Neither are common die states, The most common are IV to VIII.
