The 1796 Large Cent is one of the most coveted early American copper issues, and its rarity has long made it a target for deception. This month’s full‑color rendering captures not a genuine Mint product, but a modern counterfeit—an object created not for commerce in the 18th or 19th century, but to deceive collectors in the modern market. Struck over a heavily worn “Cull” 1843 cent, the piece bears the date 1796 and the Sheldon‑85 attribution, but its surfaces and undertype reveal its true nature.

Unlike contemporary counterfeits that circulated as small change, this example belongs to a more insidious category: fabrications designed to command thousands of dollars from unsuspecting buyers. The counterfeiters exploited the prestige of the 1796 date, pairing it with a host coin of the correct weight and fabric to pass casual inspection. Only under magnification do the irregularities emerge—traces of the 1843 undertype, repeating depressions, and mismatched details that betray its origin.

The coin’s inclusion in the Jack Young “Dark Side” Collection underscores its importance as a teaching tool. Young’s research has documented dozens of such deceptive pieces, building a reference archive that protects the hobby by exposing their diagnostics. Far from being dismissed as curiosities, these counterfeits now serve as cautionary artifacts—reminders of the need for vigilance in a market where rarity commands high premiums.

This rendering emphasizes the paradox of the piece: visually compelling, historically false, yet numismatically significant. The warm copper tones and worn surfaces are faithfully captured, but the narrative is one of deception rather than authenticity. In this way, the drawing functions as both documentation and interpretation, preserving the counterfeit as an object of study while reminding collectors of the risks inherent in chasing rarity. The rendering also highlights how artistry can transform even a fraudulent coin into a valuable teaching aid, bridging the gap between aesthetics and scholarship. By placing the counterfeit within the broader story of American numismatics, the study affirms that even false pieces can illuminate truth. It also underscores the role of collectors and researchers in safeguarding the integrity of the hobby, ensuring that knowledge and vigilance remain the best defenses against fraud. The fact that this piece is preserved and studied rather than discarded ensures that its deceptive origins are repurposed into educational value. In that sense, the rendering not only records the counterfeit but redeems it, giving it a place in the historical record as a warning and a lesson.

For the Print of the Month archive, the 1796 “Counterfeit” Large Cent stands as a counterpoint to genuine key dates. It is a visual record of numismatic fraud, but also a testament to the scholarship that unmasks it. By rendering it in full color, the study elevates the counterfeit from a mere warning into a subject of historical inquiry—an artifact of the “Dark Side” that deepens our understanding of both coins and the culture that surrounds them.