| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 2,330 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
68 Posts |
What makes you think this is a proof? I'm not seeing it as a proof...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6478 Posts |
Quote:
has the reflective surfaces when holding a light to it. Looks like it may have been cleaned. Does the coin have luster? |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
IMHO, looks proof to me. cleaned lightly at some time. lets see from PROOF experts.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
716 Posts |
There is only 1 obverse and reverse die for the proof that year, and the date is punched into the hub so there can only be one date position. The date position on your coin seems to match. As in your coin, the shield points are connected to the denticles and the olive leaves are away. However, on a proof coin, there is a very small die lump at edge of the denticle below the center of the one on the date. I can't see it on your coin, but the denticles below the date are slightly out of focus. Maybe you can see it. I hope this helps.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5828 Posts |
Not a proof coin IMHO. Keep in mind that in 1909 proof coins were stuck as Matte Proofs, not mirror proofs.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
68 Posts |
very interesting analysis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1510 Posts |
still very nice
Retired USAF 1983-2003
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I thought the Lincoln proofs of this year were matte, but the Indian proofs were mirror.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
68 Posts |
where did you purchase it?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4337 Posts |
beaglebaily is giving you the hints you need to track this down and solve your own mystery. Match the dies. Go look at known slabbed proofs of this issue and research against those. Date position seems to be a key player in this analysis as does the diagnostic on the dentils.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
709 Posts |
ebay, from a high volume seller. I knew it was cleaned. The squared rims were my initial reasoning for it might being a proof. I agree the date position looks right. But I'm not seeing any die lump below the 1. I also think I see what might be the large "L" over small "L" doubling on the designer initials, which I suppose would make it not a proof. Oh well..
Thanks guys!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
716 Posts |
Quote:
I also think I see what might be the large "L" over small "L" doubling on the designer initials, which I suppose would make it not a proof. Oh well..
I agree. If you can see that doubling on the 'L' then it is not a proof. It is also a very common variety because the doubling occurred on the master die. |
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 2,330 |
|
Posted 08/02/2015 06:22 am
