| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 1,146 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2490 Posts |
This 2½ Gulden has been cleaned, the weight and diameter are right as is the edge lettering but I'm a little worried about the beard. There seems to be a loss of detail inconsistent with the amount of wear.  |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21786 Posts |
I agree with your comments, but not to write it off immediately.
Would it be possible to compare the ping tone with another
'Twee en Halve Gulden' coin of the same vintage and specification?
Just rest the coin on the tip of your finger, and lightly tap the edge with another coin.
Edited by sel_69l
06/02/2019 10:18 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
266 Posts |
2 things would worry me about this coin if I were looking to buy it, one is the details around the eye, compare this one to the example posted on the NGC site. https://www.NGCcoin.com/price-guide...uid-1430825. The eye on your example looks empty in comparison. Second is I get suspicious when I see a large coin such as this with absolutely pristine fields, even the uncirculated one in the link above has some bag marks. And also upon further inspection the dentils get fully weak on the reverse from 7 to 10 o'clock and overall do not have the best shape, again compare to the above link. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United Kingdom
2490 Posts |
NGC link doesn't work but I have ping tested this against a silver crown and it seems OK.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4212 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2490 Posts |
Fellow collector has just tested it as silver and, in hand, the reverse denticles are fine. I'll try to get a better focussed image up. The focus here is just a little soft.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3402 Posts |
Other than a cleaning...I don't see an issue with this coin.
KK
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
Other than chemical over exposure it looks good to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2637 Posts |
This is mine   |
|
Valued Member
United States
414 Posts |
@fioti - the forgery in your Numista link is incomparable to this example. It is a rather poor replica.
This coin looks good to me. I did notice a subtle difference in the eye, but I believe that's just due to lighting and the angle of the picture (not direct overhead as the comparisons).
I have five examples of this coin in my collection (various years), and in my experience, I have come across only 1 example that was a forgery. The forgery was that of a key date (1853). This particular year, is fairly common and it is probably less likely to be copied.
Please post images of the edge of the coin. The weight would also help. One of immediate giveaways in the case of my forgery was the star separators were actually asterisks. Also, it was slightly more underweight than normal (if I recall, 24.71g in my case). Most of these examples will be extremely close to 25g, especially considering the little to no wear of your example.
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,146 |
|
Posted 06/02/2019 11:02 am
