Here's A Grade You Don't Hear Every Day

This is the ultra rare Proof 1895 Morgan silver dollar. Approximately 800 are known to exist. It is beyond the reach of most every collector so most collectors trying to assemble the Morgan dollar set don't include the 1895 in their mind set.

It's a proof coin that has been circulated. Au-53 means that there will be some wear and the field won't be pristine. Remember, proof is a manner in which a coin is minted. Technically, you could have a Pr-1 proof.

Thanks guys. That clears most of it up for me. One more question. If I were to have this coin in hand and in the other hand I had a PL coin, say the same year/mm, how could I tell which was the proof and which the PL? Or is that somethig best left to experts? I guess I'm just not up on just what the characteristics are of a proof coin as opposed to PL.

The old "Library of Coins" albums had black cardboard filling the "ridiculous keys" like 16-D dimes and 42/41 overdate dimes. I really like that idea. It shows that the collection is complete-within-reason, but the cardboard can be punched out if you actually get your white whale. (Some Whitman folders did the same thing, but folders are EVIL.)

When I was working on my Liberty nickel set, I considered buying a particular replica nickel -- it's a 2-headed V nickel with 1895 on one side and 1896 on the other... so it is both key dates. I considered it because the 2-headed nature made it OBVIOUSLY a replica so there would never be any chance of confusion.

OK then. Do I have this right? Every 1895 P is presumed to be proof since there has never been anything other than proofs found despite what the records say. Going from there, would you also say PCGS is making the same assumption and grading the coin accordingly as a matter of course? And not on its appearance? That sounds about right from what I've read so far.

But that still begs the question. With all the assumptions/presumptions aside, and not limiting this to just this particular year/mm Morgan, how DO they determine the difference between proof and just PL Not withstanding the grade of proofs (at least I understand that part of it now).

Sorry for all the dumb questions. Just trying to get a handle on it---- PL characteristics as opposed to Proof characteristics? DMPL, CAMEO, DPL are all ""fairly" easy to discern. Proof and PL--one in each hand seems a horse of another color. Somebody must know; afterall the TPG's "are" making those determinations.

While I'm not very familiar with Morgans, I would guess there may be only one proof die pair for the 1895 mintage, and that date position and other die markers make ID easy?