I bought this coin at a Stacks auction back in 1989. It was fairly bright when I got it, but the cataloguer did not mention any cleaning in the description. I have put it out on a tray to tone naturally on-and-off over that least 30 years or so. The peripheries have acquired some toning, the centres remain mostly untoned. I am certainly not an expert, but I don't see any signs of a harsh cleaning. Only the marks and scuffs one may expect from a circulated coin. What is your opinion? (Actually, for whatever it's worth, the coin was briefly mentioned in a Coin World description of the Stacks sale). The pictures fairly adequately show the way it looks. Thanks!
My gut reaction is that the coin has the remaining detail of a 55. BUT, I see no evidence of luster anywhere but you will have to confirm or correct since photos can lie on that. AND, I think it looks cleaned at one point. PLUS, there's a good bit of chatter and slight rim ding on the reverse. So, for a straight-grade, I'd give it either a 45 or 50.
In the first set of images it looks to me like someone dragged a pencil eraser or other soft abrasive instrument across the surface above the eagle to clean the coin. The same appearance may show up elsewhere on the coin, and not be so obvious in the images . . . or maybe, just maybe I'm imagining things.
Thank you. The surfaces have very little if any lustre left at all. There are no signs of an aggressive cleaning, that I can tell. Does the fact the surfaces were bright when I bought it mean that it was at least dipped? (I guess this is obvious, hmm?) I am also suprised that it has not retoned, even after prolonged exposure to sunlight.
Looks nice but I think it was cleaned some time ago. Not harshly but with something like an eraser. With as much detail as that coin shows you should see done luster. It may have been dipped. If it was dipped it was dipped too long.
