Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;red_spork, post: 7836312, member: 74282&quot;]Thankfully, Richard Schaefer has completed much of the &quot;Heavy lifting&quot; here. His die study illustrates 13 examples of the variety with &quot;AL&quot; mintmark(shown at top), 5 with the dots(all from the same reverse die as mine, at bottom left), and 7 examples with no dots and no mintmark(bottom right) and no reverse die represented in either of the other groups appears to be a candidate for being an earlier or later state of this reverse die.</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1347290[/ATTACH] </p><p>[ATTACH=full]1347292[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>There is also the larger <a href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1995474" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=1995474" rel="nofollow">Crawford 110/1a issue with &quot;Wreath&quot; mintmark</a>, which is a sibling issue that is very closely related to the &quot;AL&quot; issue as well as all of these coins with no mintmark or dots, however we can rule out all the &quot;wreath&quot; reverse dies because they all use a different form of &quot;A&quot; in Roma where the crossbar comes from the right, instead of coming from the left as it does on all the coins illustrated above.[/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