So, spank me again!

I think it would get holdered myself, probably an AU-58. Its a nice piece.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes get it checked out. Does it have a ring of embezelment to it or was it born that way? I've seen both. If it was in a bezel there are usually marks you can see with a loupe. It has a dandy strike, clear D, and free of distracting baggies.

 

Dutchman,

I have seen this same ring on hundreds of genuine Indian $2.50 and $5 Gold Coins that had never spent time in a bezel! This is the same area on other coins where one would expect the ticking inside the rim. It apparently has something to do with Die Deterioration that occurred with many Indian Gold Coins...especially in the Late Die Stages of the Dies. This ring can be found on the Obverse, on the Reverse and sometimes both and was not made by the coins being mounted in a bezel. I may be wrong with my assessment but hope not for the OP's sake! I would imagine that PCGS would still slab the coin as "Genuine" even it has resided in a bezel at some time in it's life!


Frank

 

Frank,

The reason I thought bezel rather then die deterioration was the fact that the area on the obverse between the stars on the right looks like a scratch or just a heavier "rub" area rather then raised as I would expect to see with die deterioration. Die deterioration on these coins was once described to me as having a "pie crust" look to it. This means that it is usually not uniform in its distance from the edge of the coin where as a bezel will almost always leave marks the same distance from the edge. I'm still leaning more towards a bezel. I am definitely interested as to what the TPG will say about this one.

Matt

 

Just for reference here is what die wear looks like on an Indian gold. Not uniform in it's distance from the edge, much closer to the edge, and raised.

 

Did this coin ever get sent in??

 

Nice work, LD. Instructive and appreciated. Sharp photo.

When comparing this photo to the OP $5, realize that LD's "die wear" photo is a $2.5, so there's a "scale" issue.

I think the OP coin is em-bezeled.

 

I inherited some bezeled goin coins. After taking them out, definitely the toning of the coin around the edge is different than the rest of the coin.

I'll have to agree with the Dutchman. I think this coin has been mounted and I wouldn't submit.

Obviously, none of this detracts from the sentimental value of the coin being owned by both parents.

 

I don't think the coin was used as jewelry. I have an Indian with a similiar mark in the same spot as well. Mine came back from NGC as 'improperly cleaned' - but no mention of ex-jewelry. I have seen quite a few with this.

 

most pieces that have been put in jewelry will be labeled as improperly cleaned as well from the rubbing on the clothes and the grading companies will usually only give you one reason even if there are more then one, it's usually the easiest one to spot.