Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="SuperDave, post: 2871354, member: 1892"]Um, more experience with Morgans than the next five of us put together? <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie1" alt=":)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" /> This is one of those which you suspect the moment you see it, simply because of the overall mushy look. There are details appropriate for a worn coin - the "expanded" letters, the lack of detail in the hair, the "rounded" look of some of the wreath leaves. There are also details appropriate for a coin which is not worn - the relative completeness of neck and chest feathers, and lack of flattening at the wingtips. The obverse letters are in places almost a caricature of the original. Yes, given that the letters are tapered, they seem to "expand" as the coin wears, but for them to have "expanded" this much, the rest of the coin should be very worn. If the near-unconscious impressions formed by the experience of looking at thousands of Morgans are insufficient - I understand "because I say so" isn't necessarily diagnostic to someone who lacks that - let's look at the notch cut out of the major wreath leaf underneath the second A in AMERICA. This is a "feature" which has been seen on counterfeits before....[/QUOTE]