USA 2 Cents 1869 - Shield

[vathek1984]

Proprio qualche giorno fa avevo scritto ad un amico del Forum, che spero ci legga, come era da un pò di tempo, complice anche l'estate, che non trovavo una occasione interessante per la mia collezione di statunitensi...ma finalmente nei giorni scorsi ho beccato sulla baia questa moneta ad un prezzo di saldo e non ho esitato un istante ad aggiudicarmela.

Si tratta di un pezzo da 2 cents, denominazione di breve durata, introdotta nel 1864 al fine di sopperire alla carenza di circolante che caratterizzava il periodo al termine della Guerra di Secessione e coniata per l'ultima volta nel 1873.

Segnalo che per questo millesimo sono stati coniati solo 1.546.500 esemplari, in quanto già dopo i primissimi anni di produzione le tirature subirono un drammatico calo...pertanto non si tratta del "solito" 1864 "Large Motto" che appare abbastanza di frequente in giro (e che avevo già in collezione da tempo).

Che grado di conservazione gli dareste?

 

Modificato 25 Settembre, 2016 da vathek1984

[villa66]

Come dici tu, 1869 è una data più dura per queste monete. (Ma interessante in quanto è di per sé sia all'interno del suo contesto storico—1869 è stato l'anno di Ulysses S. Grant fu inaugurato come presidente—devo supplicare "sonno" e semplicemente ottenere questo 2-center di grado.)

 

Spero di non deludere, ma (forse) a causa della luce, non riesco a vedere nessuna traccia di "WE" nel motto. Che significa, per me, dalle foto, questa moneta è VG = VG8 = B.

 

(Non posso andare VG+ = VG10 a causa di vari tocchi sullo schermo.) Ma una moneta bella, suggestiva comunque. Come me lo ricordo, queste cose circolavano fino a circa la girata del secolo—e la terribile condizione di molti dei sopravvissuti sembra sostenere l'idea di una carriera lunga circolo.

 

Molte di queste monete, naturalmente, sono stati riciclati da parte delle autorità. e più tardi divenne centesimi di Indian Head.

 

Dormire!

 

v.

 

------------------------------------------------------------

 

As you say, 1869 is a tougher date for these coins. (But interesting as it is both by itself and within its historical context—1869 was the year Ulysses S. Grant was inaugurated as President—I have to plead “sleep” and simply get to this 2-center’s grade.)

 

I hope not to disappoint, but (perhaps) because of the light, I can see no trace of “WE” in the motto. Which means, for me, from the photos, this coin is VG = VG8 = B.

 

(I can’t go VG+ = VG10 because of the several taps on the shield.) But a nice, evocative coin nonetheless. As I recall it, these things circulated until about the turn of the century—and the terrible condition of many of the survivors seems to support the idea of a long circulating career.

 

Many of these coins, of course, were recycled by the authorities, and later became Indian Head cents.

 

Sleep!

 

v.

[vathek1984]

Il "We" del motto "In God We Trust" (ricordo come su tale nominale sia la prima volta in cui compare questo famoso motto), è visibile solo dal vivo ed in controluce ed è certamente molto usurato...tuttavia, è interessante notare la differenza di importanza che possono assegnare a determinati dettagli dei collezionisti d'oltreoceano, come @villa66, ed i collezionisti italiani...per me la moneta è in qBB o al limite MB/BB per via dei colpetti visibili nei campi, molto accentuati dalla foto...perchè i rilievi maggiori ("We" a parte) sono tutti ben visibili e non ci sono colpi rilevanti ai bordi...il B non mi sfiorerebbe nemmeno il pensiero di assegnarlo ad una moneta del genere..

Invece, come ben so, i collezionisti americani hanno dei metri di riferimento ben precisi per ogni tipoplogia e se manca un determinato dettaglio ne risente, anche drammaticamente, la quotazione complessiva di tutta la moneta...mentre ad esempio i colpi ai bordi sono ritenuti molto meno deturpanti rispetto che da noi..

Nessun dispiacere ovviamente, solo curiosità sul differente metro di valutazione adottato...aspetto altri pareri motivati sulla moneta...;)

Modificato 26 Settembre, 2016 da vathek1984

[nikita_]

1 ora fa, vathek1984 dice:

Invece, come ben so, i collezionisti americani hanno dei metri di riferimento ben precisi per ogni tipoplogia e se manca un determinato dettaglio ne risente, anche drammaticamente, la quotazione complessiva di tutta la moneta...mentre ad esempio i colpi ai bordi sono ritenuti molto meno deturpanti rispetto che da noi..

Anch'io non sono d'accordo sulla valutazione data, posso capire che è la quotazione a subirne le conseguenze di un siffatto "difetto", ma non il grado di conservazione.

Non mi esprimo quasi mai sulle condizioni delle monete che via via vengono proposte in questa sezione poichè le foto ingannano parecchio, ricordo certe situazioni che si è passati, per la stessa moneta su cui si chiedeva un parere, dal quasiBB a fdc con lustro.....

Per me indiscutibilmente questo 2 cent va ben oltre l' MB.

[vathek1984]

Concordo con te...del resto il famoso "We" si trova proprio nel punto con i rilievi più alti del diritto ed è senza dubbio un punto critico dove osservare l'usura della moneta...tuttavia in questo caso l'usura di tale particolare non mi sembra conferente con l'usura generale della moneta che ha ancora dei buoni rilievi..

E' la prima volta in tanti anni che c'e' una differenza di valutazione così ampia con @villa66, per questo sono molto curioso di conoscere il suo pensiero al riguardo...

Modificato 26 Settembre, 2016 da vathek1984

[giulira]

per me B e' un rottame a malapena leggibile.

Qui si vedono benissimo la data e il nominale. Poi i rilievi ci sono quasi tutti, la perlinatura c'e' ancora tutta, i fondi sono un po' bucherellati ma tutto sommato  in  condizioni decenti.

Che dire....  MB/BB nel complesso.

Qui le scale nostre e quella americana non sono assolutamente confrontabili. Come comparare mele e pere. Mi viene il dubbio che sia cosi' per tutte le monete.

Visto che non colleziono monete americane, d'ora in poi non daro' piu' nessun peso al grading di oltre oceano per la mie reccolte.

[villa66]

5 ore fa, vathek1984 dice:

E' la prima volta in tanti anni che c'e' una differenza di valutazione così ampia con @villa66, per questo sono molto curioso di conoscere il suo pensiero al riguardo...

I knew when I wrote that late last night that I was going to get into trouble!

 

But these are my favorite moments on Lamoneta, because—and I’m not kiddng—watching my own national hobby collide with other national hobbies is extremely instructive for me. I’ve learned so much on Lamoneta, and here’s another chance.

 

I’ll be back tonight, but already:

1)     1)  The American VG is not the equivalent of the Italian B, despite what catalogs say, and I knew it, and should not have expressed it that way.

2)    2)   An American VG—especially with regard to earlier American coins—is an eminently collectable grade.

3)      3) The 2-cent piece of 1864-73 is especially idiosyncratic when it comes to grading—which I’ve just learned this morning (thank you vathek and my other Italian friends .)

4)      4) A quick lunch-time look at my 2-cent pieces has caused me to down-grade it from to VG to G, and made me wonder what I could have been thinking those years ago when I graded it. (again, thank you vathek, et al! .)

 

With apologies for English-only, I’ve got to go; talk with you all this evening…..

 

v.

[vathek1984]

Discussione che si fa sempre più interessante! Se @villa66 ha il tempo, dopo potrebbe postare le foto del suo esemplare da 2 cents appena passato da Very Good a Good, per fare qualche confronto...

[nikita_]

Incomincio a postare la mia comune del 1864, non sono interessato alle conservazioni, per me è già meravigliosa così  ma se proprio gliene debbo attribuirne una... direi  MB.

 

Qui ce ne una del 1869 su ebay periziata NGC VG-8, in pratica la precedente conservazione consigliata per la tua  - a me sembra che il confronto non regge minimamente,  i rilievi sono molto usurati, il motto manca quasi del tutto e la perlinatura è quasi assente.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/381740837117?rmvSB=true

[NoNmi4PPLICO]

Per me entrambe le monete post#1 e post #9 sono nella scala del VF. Quella di nikita soffre di debolezza di conio sia al D/ che R/ ma nell'insieme è superiore di poco a quella di vathek 1984.
In italiano potrebbe essere MB+ post #1 e qBB post#9.

La scala del VG si riconosce perché non si legge più nessuna parte del motto.

Il famoso "we" se leggibile, invece identifica la scala dei XF.
Riassumendo e semplificando:

VG= no motto leggibile
VF=motto senza "we"
EF= motto completo

Saluti Simone

[villa66]

8 ore fa, nikita_ dice:

Qui ce ne una del 1869 su ebay periziata NGC VG-8, in pratica la precedente conservazione consigliata per la tua  - a me sembra che il confronto non regge minimamente,  i rilievi sono molto usurati, il motto manca quasi del tutto e la perlinatura è quasi assente.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/381740837117?rmvSB=true

 

Come quella moneta entrato in un VG8 slab mistifica me.

 

v.

 

---------------------------------------

 

How that coin got into a VG8 slab mystifies me.

 

v.

[villa66]

What I’m quoting is in English, so for the balance of this thread—I hope it’s okay with everyone—I’ll just remain there.

 

The Redbook, on the definition of “F-12 Fine” for the 1864-73 2-cent piece: “Complete motto visible. The word WE weak.”

 

And from GRADING COINS BY PHOTOGRAPHS, by Q. David Bowers: F-12, 15 (Fine) Obverse. WE is the defining factor and is very weak, but readable, if only barely….”

 

Also from GRADING COINS BY PHOTOGRAPHS: “VG-8, 10 (Very Good) Obverse. WE is gone, although the ANA grading standards and Photograde suggest “very weak.” IN GOD and TRUST are readable, but some areas may be weak….”

 

Held in the hand there might well be enough of WE visible on vathek’s 1869 to make Fine, but in the photo I just can’t see it, and in U.S. grading of 2-cent pieces, no WE, no Fine-12!  And note, that’s under Bowers’ more lenient standard—he says the ANA grading standards and Photograde suggest at least a little WE is necessary to even get to VG, let alone to F.

 

But on to less parochial aspects….

 

v.

Modificato 27 Settembre, 2016 da villa66

[villa66]

I've been looking at non-American coins for a long time now, and I've learned that one problem in grading coins that I don't see often is that I don't know in my bones how the coins looked when they were new--it's tough to know how nice a coin is, or is not, when you don't always know how it came from the mint (seeing here on Lamoneta, for instance, the FDC coins of the Italian Kingdom has been a real revelation for me--turns out some of my Italian coins weren't nearly as well preserved as I thought!)

 

Here's an 1864 2-cent piece I graded as EF+ a couple of decades ago, but may regrade as AU50:

 

 

 v.

[villa66]

10 ore fa, vathek1984 dice:

Discussione che si fa sempre più interessante! Se @villa66 ha il tempo, dopo potrebbe postare le foto del suo esemplare da 2 cents appena passato da Very Good a Good, per fare qualche confronto...

By request, a grading mistake I can't explain, except maybe to say I was very young, and extremely hopeful!

 

An 1870 I had listed as VG, but instead is a textbook Good:

 

 

 v.

[villa66]

But even Good can look...well, good, when you see how many of the survivors fared:

 

 

 v.

[villa66]

Finally, because it's late, again--and we're about finished with the big television program, here's an 1867 that I had graded years ago at VF+ (BB+).

 

If this was a non-American coin, I'd give it an easy EF. But it's not, it's a coin attended by a relatively strict set of grading standards (of which, unfortunately, I'm aware  ). I have to give exaggerated attention to WE (not unlike looking at the crown on a Swedish coin being graded by Swedish grading standards.) 

 

There is one more thing that has occurred to me about grading 2-cent pieces, but it'll have to wait.

 

I thank you all for some fun today, and I go to bed maybe a little better educated. I close with this 1867:

 

 

 v.

[derek83]

Magari con queste foto prese da PCGS riusciamo a confrontare un po...
Concordo abbastanza con quanto detto da Villa nel post #12 in quanto a conservazione.

Io ho due pezzi in collezione del 2 cent di bassa qualità, ma sinceramente non è una tra le mie monete preferite...magari comunque piu avanti se avrò modo cercherò qualche pezzo di conservazione migliore!

[giulira]

In effetti non sono abituato a una tale precisione sulle basse conservazioni, da noi un rametto mb/bb dell '800 lo prendi proprio se ti piace...e a prezzi stracciati. Un b/mb lo tieni per questioni affettive ma va a peso.

[vathek1984]

Una discussione davvero istruttiva in merito ad una tipologia che si è rivelata decisamente ostica da valutare correttamente...ho apprezzato molto tutte le immagini postate ed anche il prospetto riepilogativo allegato da @derek83 ...mi fa piacere che la mia modesta monetina abbia ispirato tutto questo...

In futuro mi auguro che troveremo il modo di dedicarci così approfondidamente anche ad altre tipologie made in USA.

Modificato 27 Settembre, 2016 da vathek1984

[villa66]

20 ore fa, giulira dice:

In effetti non sono abituato a una tale precisione sulle basse conservazioni, da noi un rametto mb/bb dell '800 lo prendi proprio se ti piace...e a prezzi stracciati. Un b/mb lo tieni per questioni affettive ma va a peso.

This is such an interesting comment—and a lot of what makes Lamoneta so worthwhile.

 

The reason for the American coin hobby’s attention to lower grades is that coin collecting has been widely popular in the U.S. for some 160 years now—ever since the debut of the small cent in 1856-7 and the resulting disappearance from circulation of the old large cent.

 

Coin collecting in the U.S. has been—is—enthusiastically practiced within even the humblest economic circumstances. Which permits humble collections. Which welcome humble coins.

 

Collecting from circulation by date and mintmark has also long been an American tradition—spurred by the regularity of the coinage and the easy availability of inexpensive coin folders from the 1930s on. Which means every coin is in some sort of demand.

 

Too, once upon a time, many valuable coins could be found in circulation.

 

But forget the money; it’s the fun…when I began collecting it seemed like everyone was “working on” several sets, depending on their circumstances. But heck, everyone could collect pennies. Just get the 1941-date album and go to town!

 

In my mind I can see a friend of mine in the attic of his house a few blocks over. It was years ago. He wanted me to look at some of the coins his mother had collected when she was a young woman. There was a stack of old blue cardboard coin albums.

 

I remember that first pair of albums, rubber-banded together. Barber quarters, both albums, for the entire 1892-1916 set. The albums had been used so long they were falling apart, or would have been, if not for the stiff and brittle tape holding them together. I gently opened them up and there they were, old Barber quarters, with only a few of the holes empty. Philadelphia, San Francisco, New Orleans, Denver. 1892-1916, almost complete.

 

Most of the coins were worn almost smooth. A few Goods, but most of them AG or even worse. The typical (harmless) album-toning was creeping into the coins from their edges. Really tired silver coins. But they were almost all there. And she had pulled them from circulation. All that time and effort—and what sacrifice to put them back….

 

But then a lot of folks did that. And so the American coin hobby paid—and pays—what must seem like a strange amount of attention to crummy coins.

 

Kind of funny, isn’t it (and this never would have occurred to me, if I hadn’t been writing on Lamoneta) that the same American coin hobby that so exalts super-high grade coins, also lavishes so much love and attention on its crummiest coins?

 

 

 

v.

[vathek1984]

Ecco, questa secondo me è la vera essenza del collezionismo numismatico...ogni monetina, per quanto mal messa ha una sua dignità ed è meritevole di entrare in una collezione...come tutti apprezzo le monete in alta conservazione, ma senza farne una fissazione come spesso recentemente accade..

[villa66]

This thread has changed my thinking about the 1864-73 2-cent piece.

 

I’ve added it to the list of “coins that can look really good but still get a bad grade.” (The two others on the list: Buffalo nickels of 1913-38, and Standing Liberty quarters of 1916-24.)

 

And I’ve finally faced the fact that I really hated my first 2-cent piece (an 1865), and finally realized why—it was a strong VG coin (like your 1869), but the missing WE just completely destroyed the integrity of the motto, which on another coin would have been okay. Like on the ’32 quarter, for instance, where the entire IN GOD WE TRUST was so weak that it had to be fixed….

 

 

But I guess I was just thinking that a broken IN GOD   TRUST is just no good on a 2-cent piece, because heck, the fact that it was the first U.S. coin with the motto is its main claim to fame.

 

Two more quick notes, and then I’ll thank you all for your forbearance and then shut up….

 

One, the “Plain 5” and “Fancy 5” varieties of the 1865 2-center alerted me to similar varieties on Italy’s 1895 20-centesimi; and two, your 1869 2-center, vathek, is better than mine—it turns out I don’t have one. Surprised me. So it may be that this whole thing has just been a fit of jealousy!

 

v.

Modificato 29 Settembre, 2016 da villa66

[giulira]

23 ore fa, villa66 dice:

This is such an interesting comment—and a lot of what makes Lamoneta so worthwhile.

 

 

 

The reason for the American coin hobby’s attention to lower grades is that coin collecting has been widely popular in the U.S. for some 160 years now—ever since the debut of the small cent in 1856-7 and the resulting disappearance from circulation of the old large cent.

 

 

 

Coin collecting in the U.S. has been—is—enthusiastically practiced within even the humblest economic circumstances. Which permits humble collections. Which welcome humble coins.

 

 

 

Collecting from circulation by date and mintmark has also long been an American tradition—spurred by the regularity of the coinage and the easy availability of inexpensive coin folders from the 1930s on. Which means every coin is in some sort of demand.

 

 

 

Too, once upon a time, many valuable coins could be found in circulation.

 

 

 

But forget the money; it’s the fun…when I began collecting it seemed like everyone was “working on” several sets, depending on their circumstances. But heck, everyone could collect pennies. Just get the 1941-date album and go to town!

 

 

 

In my mind I can see a friend of mine in the attic of his house a few blocks over. It was years ago. He wanted me to look at some of the coins his mother had collected when she was a young woman. There was a stack of old blue cardboard coin albums.

 

 

 

I remember that first pair of albums, rubber-banded together. Barber quarters, both albums, for the entire 1892-1916 set. The albums had been used so long they were falling apart, or would have been, if not for the stiff and brittle tape holding them together. I gently opened them up and there they were, old Barber quarters, with only a few of the holes empty. Philadelphia, San Francisco, New Orleans, Denver. 1892-1916, almost complete.

 

 

 

Most of the coins were worn almost smooth. A few Goods, but most of them AG or even worse. The typical (harmless) album-toning was creeping into the coins from their edges. Really tired silver coins. But they were almost all there. And she had pulled them from circulation. All that time and effort—and what sacrifice to put them back….

 

 

 

But then a lot of folks did that. And so the American coin hobby paid—and pays—what must seem like a strange amount of attention to crummy coins.

 

 

 

Kind of funny, isn’t it (and this never would have occurred to me, if I hadn’t been writing on Lamoneta) that the same American coin hobby that so exalts super-high grade coins, also lavishes so much love and attention on its crummiest coins?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

v.

 

Always great to read your stories and opinions about overseas coin collection!

[vathek1984]

5 ore fa, villa66 dice:

This thread has changed my thinking about the 1864-73 2-cent piece.

 

I’ve added it to the list of “coins that can look really good but still get a bad grade.” (The two others on the list: Buffalo nickels of 1913-38, and Standing Liberty quarters of 1916-24.)

 

And I’ve finally faced the fact that I really hated my first 2-cent piece (an 1865), and finally realized why—it was a strong VG coin (like your 1869), but the missing WE just completely destroyed the integrity of the motto, which on another coin would have been okay. Like on the ’32 quarter, for instance, where the entire IN GOD WE TRUST was so weak that it had to be fixed….

 

 

But I guess I was just thinking that a broken IN GOD   TRUST is just no good on a 2-cent piece, because heck, the fact that it was the first U.S. coin with the motto is its main claim to fame.

 

Two more quick notes, and then I’ll thank you all for your forbearance and then shut up….

 

One, the “Plain 5” and “Fancy 5” varieties of the 1865 2-center alerted me to similar varieties on Italy’s 1895 20-centesimi; and two, your 1869 2-center, vathek, is better than mine—it turns out I don’t have one. Surprised me. So it may be that this whole thing has just been a fit of jealousy!

 

v.

Ecco spiegato il perchè della tua "bassa" valutazione della mia moneta...il 1869 ti manca!