Thanks for the identification. Two questions.
1. Many of the marks I examined on PCGS seem to be much thinner. You mentioned the spine on this example. Was this punch over-hammered? i.e. is the mark supposed to be only the spine, and someone drove it into the die so deeply that we are seeing the recesses of the punch?
2. The article I read claimed there is a flat spot in the upper loop. Is that really the distinguishing factor? Or is the difference that the tail seems to have a flattened end, compared with the very rounded Type 2?
Thanks for the help. =)
1. Many of the marks I examined on PCGS seem to be much thinner. You mentioned the spine on this example. Was this punch over-hammered? i.e. is the mark supposed to be only the spine, and someone drove it into the die so deeply that we are seeing the recesses of the punch?
2. The article I read claimed there is a flat spot in the upper loop. Is that really the distinguishing factor? Or is the difference that the tail seems to have a flattened end, compared with the very rounded Type 2?
Thanks for the help. =)






















