Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;jgenn, post: 2993343, member: 78525&quot;]On CCF swamperbob said: &quot;There is no obvious percussive impression on the reverse which is a common flaw on forgeries that were made recently&quot; in reference to the supposed Portuguese countermark.&nbsp; He also said: &quot;The Minas Gerais stamp was struck using a press that is incorrect. The image produced was categorically not made on a screw press produced in Portugal or Spain.&quot;</p><p><br /></p><p>These statements lead me to believe that genuine countermarks (official single-sided) and counterstamps (official double-sided) for both countries were applied with a screw press.&nbsp; A percussive impression would be made by a different technique (e.g. using a hammer press) that would typically leave a &quot;rim of the percussive impact&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p>The flat spot will always be created by the application of the single-sided countermark, regardless of the technique, slow-pressure in a screw press vs. quick-pressure in a hammer press, because the opposite side of the coin is on a harder, flat surface and will not yield to that kind of pressure, therefore it&#039;s the coin&#039;s reverse that will yield, creating the flat spot.[/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