I Bought This From A Customer In My Store Today,i Found Some Doubling On The Obverse,anybody Know If There Is A Reference To This In Any Books? Thanks
It could be a small date (It's either small or large. I'm afraid don't know the distinguishing characteristics though ) and worth about $500. Sorry, I'm not much help. Ben
good suggestion,it weighs 0.535 oz. troy.(16.6 gr.) which with the amount of wear seems right to me,but i'm no expert! the book says 16.718,what do you think? and thank you and it is 27mm
Well I'm no expert either, but the surface of the coin makes me suspect. I would suggest that you have a dealer you trust examine the coin. As for the doubling, I'm not sure that I see what you are seeing - because I really don't see any.
To me it looks like there might be a slight bit of machine doubling...but that is all I see. When I first looked at the coin I thought fake----but then I don't collect gold coins and haven't seen many fakes. Speedy
Im sorry to say this. but the arrows look a little odd. I have seen a good number of real and fake gold coin. and that one might actaully be made of gold but it might not be a REAL coin. Those rippled arrows make me wonder. Do you have any of the same design to compare it to? IN PERSON
Your coin appears to have a large date, however, the 5 is not closed, which makes me further suspect the coin. Is the 1 plainly doubled to the naked eye? It would be the base of the 1 btw.
no doulbling on the 1 ,i don't think the coin is fake,the surface of the coin that was mentioned in the other post is due to i being nicked and dinged up it was worn as jewelry,if it is fake it was not cast,that i know for sure,i'm a bench jeweler and caster myself,i don't understand why people here on the forum see red flags with this coin,am i missig something?
I'd say it appears to be real as well, but very banged up, which might make sense if it was in jewelry. However, the color of the coin in your images is terrible, which may be throwing some people. Also, most of us are used to looking at less worn gold coins, so it throws people to see a worn one. I also think it's a real stretch to say there's doubling on your coin.
This is what concerns me - see the raised bumps I have circled ? And all of the small raised bumps below the line I have drawn ? Marks like that are not present on struck coins and they can't occur as the result of wear or post mint damage. I've been wrong before, but such marks are certainly reason to be concerned since they are one of the hallmarks of a counterfeit coin.
Another thing that is suspcicious about this coin, is that there is a small and large date. The small date has a closed 5, and the large date has an open 5, with doubling that should be naked eye visible, I should also mention that the large date rather rare.
Breen (B-6890 to 6892) mentions a large & samll date, small date is supposed to be very rare. This piece does not match that shown by Breen. Anso, regarding the repunched date, Breen does not mention one as known to him.
