I think I bought an unknown that may have not been discovered. I know this is a touchy subject but have to ask about the difference between the Type 1 and Type 2. I know the engraver was incensed when he had to redesign the die but could he have made a die that has not been seen yet? I will wait until asked before I describe it because it could be a touchy subject in mixed company. This is purely a coin question and nothing else.
This might help. http://coins.about.com/od/famousrarecoinprofiles/l/bl-standing-liberty-quarter-bare-breasted.htm
Look at the boob! You can see one on the type 1, you can't see one (it's covered by chain mail ) on the type 2. There are other differences....If the coin's really worn, you can look at the rivets on the shield.
Perhaps the pronounced nipple on the 1917 is what he's trying to avoid saying. It is more pronounced on the 1917 type 1 than the 1916 type 1. Or possibly just better struck...
It is a five pointed Star (but you can only see four of the points) that looks like a raised pasty that covers her exposed nipple. I have searched many coins of the same type but so far have not found any with a pasty. It is graded by PCGS MS64FH and David Lawrence gave it a star.
Yes MacNeil did create another design that most people have note seen when he was asked to revise the quarter in 1917. But that design was nothing like the adopted design. It can be seen in Roger Burdette's book. Something else that should be remembered is that MacNeil was NEVER requested to cover Liberty's bare breast. That was NOT the reason for the 1917 revisions.
That deserves PICTURES and further review. Closeups if possible. I would be suspicious of Post Mint engraving.
I got the coin in hand yesterday but could only view it under 4X mag (two pairs of 2X reading glasses and flashlight) and it looks like either bag marks or something wrong with the die. The picture that is under high mag from David Lawrence looks like a raised five point star so I will have to buy a loop and look at it under 10X. I do not know how to post a picture of it but a guy at work is good with computers and I will ask him to help me post it. It has the clearest raised full head that I have seen yet and all of her toes are plainly visible in the David Lawrence high mag photo and has full mint luster that I did not need to magnify. I hope that I did not buy a pig in a poke due to fancy optics and lighting. Thanks for the responses.
