Went back to the "FIELD" UPDATED

[aloldstuff]

Drove by my favorite farm this AM and noticed it had been plowed in spots but not planted. U turn, went home, changed cloths, went back to the field.

I managed #16 and #17 coppers from that field. The first one is a CT copper but I can't see a date. The second is a 1838 LC.

Also managed two buttons, one with a back mark, but I can't read it and the other has a basket weave pattern on the front. Both are shankless.

Thanks for reading and HH everyone.

UPDATE; Going to take a stab at id'ing the CT copper. After careful studying of the Whitman Encyclopedia of Colonial and Early American Coins, I think it is a Miller 24-g.3. It is a URS 6. Only 17-32 known.

After some consultation with DEL we have come to the conclusion that the coin is a Miller 24-g-5 URS-7 33-64 known

 

[BTV Digger]

I've got a few plowed/unplanted fields near me as well that I need to get permissions for. Nice decision on the u-turn, definitely payed off for you as both coins are in really good shape for field coins. Congrats and HH!

John

 

[del]

That field just keeps producing!! Al they were sure busy and loyal to the new fledgling country at that farm , heck of a lot of state coppers found there .

 

[Bucknut]

Funny how seeing a plowed field changes ALL of your priorities for the day! Congrats on the coppers!

 

[The Rebel]

WTG Al. Love the finds, especially the CT. Love my CT's!

 

[OxShoeDrew]

They must have been very affluent! How long have you been going there Al? That's a super amount of coppers!! Congrats!

 

[aloldstuff]

They must have been very affluent! How long have you been going there Al? That's a super amount of coppers!! Congrats!

Affluent?......don't know about that cause the silvers have been small, 1/2 reale, seated dime, merc and rosie. No quarters, halves or dollar coins. The coppers have been KG's, Ct's and LC's. Couple of IH's and wheat's.
Started there about 6 years ago, went twice, got a couple of toasted coppers and a couple of IH's. Just didn't go back cause I had another field in another town which was producing lots of seated dimes. So I'm guessing I started back there maybe 2-3 years ago.

 

[Lodge Scent]

I hope that was a legal U turn Al. We don't condone scofflaws on this forum.

Couple nice coppers. You just keep squeezing them out of that field.

 

[aloldstuff]

I hope that was a legal U turn Al. We don't condone scofflaws on this forum.

Couple nice coppers. You just keep squeezing them out of that field.

Every thing is legal if you don't get caught....

 

[MangoAve]

Nice finds, Al. I'm surprised Dan didn't try to date the CT for ya. There might be enough detail to figure out. I can automatically say it aint an '85 having a left facing bust. Looks almost like the matron was to be cut... or just kissed by a plow that didn't fold it somehow. I saw a field like that recently. I thought it was hayed, but now its plowed as of two weeks ago. I was wondering why it went from hay to plowed.. and why plowed so late.

 

[del]

Al i can only speculate the copper is a 1787 form what i can make out .

I'm surprised Dan didn't try to date the CT for ya. There might be enough detail to figure out.

Dan has to see the detail from a large enough picture to do that Jim , the eyes are the first to go after 40 my friend .

 

[aloldstuff]

Al i can only speculate the copper is a 1787 form what i can make out .




Dan has to see the detail from a large enough picture to do that Jim , the eyes are the first to go after 40 my friend .

Read the update. Pretty sure I figured it out.

 

[del]

Read the update. Pretty sure I figured it out.

Al , Identifying the 1787 varieties are the hardest to do with about 241 examples to choose from it can get very confusing , I know i do at times . With that being said (and after copying you photos and blowing them up to see up close) , I think your half right.

I show you why ....

look at the reverse , where the top of the olive branch is yours is about even with the bottom dot of the colon and the g.3 variety actually comes higher than the colon .

 

[aloldstuff]

Al , Identifying the 1787 varieties are the hardest to do with about 241 examples to choose from it can get very confusing , I know i do at times . With that being said (and after copying you photos and blowing them up to see up close) , I think your half right.

I show you why ....

look at the reverse , where the top of the olive branch is yours is about even with the bottom dot of the colon and the g.3 variety actually comes higher than the colon .

OK, I am assuming that the 1/2 that is right is the Miller 24. On page 135 top right, the - + - INDE:- + -- + - That's what I see so does that mean that none of the reverses match?? Seeing that only the C of CONNEC is on the coin and on the reverse none of the ET LIB is there, possible that coin is struck off center??

 

[del]

OK, I am assuming that the 1/2 that is right is the Miller 24. On page 135 top right, the - + - INDE:- + -- + - That's what I see so does that mean that none of the reverses match?? Seeing that only the C of CONNEC is on the coin and on the reverse none of the ET LIB is there, possible that coin is struck off center??

To me the g.5 looks closer than the g.3 reverse but I'm not 100% convinced that it though . Look for yourself Al , you tell me what you think ?

 

[aloldstuff]

To me the g.5 looks closer than the g.3 reverse but I'm not 100% convinced that it though . Look for yourself Al , you tell me what you think ?

I'll agree with the colon but the hand placement isn't right. Mine looks to be at the D and not in between the D & E

 

[del]

I'll agree with the colon but the hand placement isn't right

In what respect Al ? if you notice the outstretched arm on the g.3 its almost a "stick figure " arm while the g.5 has a larger "forearm" like your coin . the actual hand placement is close and very subject to the angle of the photograph , the stem under the "fist" is much longer on the g.3 and not so on the g.5 , closer to your coin is it not ? then we come to the filled in "E" and the top of the "D" missing like they are in the g.5 and not like the g.3 .

 

[aloldstuff]

In what respect Al ? if you notice the outstretched arm on the g.3 its almost a "stick figure " arm while the g.5 has a larger "forearm" like your coin . the actual hand placement is close and very subject to the angle of the photograph , the stem under the "fist" is much longer on the g.3 and not so on the g.5 , closer to your coin is it not ? then we come to the filled in "E" and the top of the "D" missing like they are in the g.5 and not like the g.3 .

Great points, all of them. I would never have looked at the arm size or the branch length beneath the hand. Seems that I was going by the written word in the book and not letting my mind take in the whole picture. G.5 it is.

Dan, I have to say that this has been fun. I hope I can find another CT so we can do this again. Thanks for the help

 

[del]

Great points, all of them. I would never have looked at the arm size or the branch length beneath the hand. Seems that I was going by the written word in the book and not letting my mind take in the whole picture. G.5 it is.

Dan, I have to say that this has been fun. I hope I can find another CT so we can do this again. Thanks for the help

Al , your welcome . I just hope there are some good examples to compare it with for the next one , seems like the two in the book for this one was lacking in good detail (especially that g.5 example) . there wasn't anything on the internet either to help .

 

[aloldstuff]

I have to say that it took me a long time to figure this out (well almost). Not having the date, I started with the 1785's and moved on. I hate to admit it but the dashes, dots, + signs, really didn't hit home at first. Then once I figured that out it went a lot quicker.