Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dave_bender, post: 491279, member: 16675&quot;]<b>Thank you</b></p><p><br /></p><p>Thank you all for looking and setting me straight.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I wouldn&#039;t have asked under normal circumstances. In this case there were such a small number of the 1856 struck that it seemed possible to me that there could be in this case an extremely small number of the restrikes. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>The 1856 was a sample that was supposed to be returned to the mint, thus making the surviving 1856 very rare. Were the ones that were returned to the mint melted or destroyed? Or is it possible they were struck 1857?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Under the microscope, my mind really sees the remnant of a &#039;6&#039; there. I try to see the &#039;8&#039; but it still looks like a &#039;6&#039;.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Under normal vision, it is clearly a &#039;7&#039; and not a skewed &#039;8&#039;.&nbsp; It was bought as an 1857.&nbsp; The photo below shows the same &#039;7&#039; as others are struck.&nbsp; It seems unlikely that a knife and a hit could form such a perfect 7 to me....</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><img src="http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k43/bythevineyard/coins/043cropped.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Just a newbie.... so this is all educational to me.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Again, thank you for looking.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in