Large date.
They always over grade Morgans. The label probably says MS63. There's a chance it could be AU.
I don't see any doubling, either. I'll make another Jack&Coke and check again.
Yes, C-5. It looks like AU Details (old cleaning). That's just my opinion; I'm not a professional.
"In short, a collector purchased these rolls and stored them in the bank." "...the hoard consisted of over 320,000 coins..." "...it required a...
I guess I would have to see it in person, then. They don't look like D's from the pictures. Not to my old, lion eyes, anyway. :) [IMG]
I saw that, too. 3! (factorial) would be 3x2x1=6 (as you correctly point out). The OP's serial number is so small, that it found a bug in the...
Cool! [ATTACH]
What do you mean? d's?
The reverse is an interesting example of how PMD can alter devices. Sometimes, the PMD isn't so obvious and can look like a Mint error.
A Year of the Dog silver bar...not a coin. [ATTACH]
Please don't let him relieve himself on the Queen! :eek:
F12-F16 seems about right.
Welcome to CT! Your coin screams "Fake!" to me. The wear is all wrong, but more specifically, compare the right end of the IGWT ribbon...or wing...
If they're silver proofs, I would keep them.
Lol...when you said, "Toward the end of the turn of the century", I just assumed you were talking about 1899 to 1900. :oldman:
Thanks! I thought there was just one type of doubling.
Absolutely beautiful! I love the old style stars!
MS64 Obverse, MS66 Reverse...Net: MS65 (very nice!)
The obverse contact marks, along with the tired die and soft strike, makes me think MS64. If I'm wrong, I blame the photographer. :)
Separate names with a comma.
