It wasn't described as a proof when I bought it many years ago. But as I'm trying to clear a lot of my old purchases, I took a good look at this particular Crown and I feel it could be a proof version with a mintage of 1,084? Albeit an unloved one. There's definitely a lot of glare from the light which is not similar to any business strike. Do any of you see the same or am I just willing it to be a proof Crown? Just took some hurried shots with my phone.
Hard to tell for sure based on the pictures. It certainly does look like a lot of reflection/glare coming from the surfaces. They just aren't in focus enough for me to tell for sure. Man, I love British Crowns. Not super fond of this Victoria portrait...but the over all design is beautiful.
I agree with the bit about edges not looking right. If interested will post my 1887 proof as it does not look like this. There were many PL coins of all silver denominations struck during this period. Sorry to say I vote not proof.
Not a fake, simply PL. Yes, like the proof you just showed! Mine I got from Baldwins auction years ago and will post later today.
Ah, waiting for son to get going....The wonderful blue iridescence does not show through, but it does also show the edges and crispness of strike, especially the reverse:
Yes that's a lovely example @7Jags but to be fair, both the example i posted and your coin are mint state possibly PF64 or higher whereas the one I've got has been circularised. The lace on QV's veil behind her ear, is well worn. I'll take a PL as I don't remember paying very much for it.
Thanks, and I agree. TBH, I love these big crowns; I tried to get the Widow head by regnal year but trying to find decent specimens of some is rather difficult.
