1852 Dahlonega Half Eagle ---- Grade revealed
BECOKA
Posts: 16,961 ✭✭✭
Just curious what a consensus would be on this coin. I have my thoughts on whether I agree with the slabbed grade or not but first lets see what you guys think.
Also please provide any other comments (I can take it). For instance something like "while it looks heavily circulated there may have been some additional cleaning to boot". etc...
Grade is NGC XF40
One thought I have on this early gold is how all of the dates look like there is a personal touch to them. They are not generic like the later dates.
Example:
Also please provide any other comments (I can take it). For instance something like "while it looks heavily circulated there may have been some additional cleaning to boot". etc...
Grade is NGC XF40
One thought I have on this early gold is how all of the dates look like there is a personal touch to them. They are not generic like the later dates.
Example:
0
Comments
i agree with doh. nice coin. 30-35.
to get an idea of a rough 40-45 check this one out for comparison.
and yes it is not southern... i am just using it as an example.
breast, and the liberty's hair.
i just cannot see it at 25. 30 though i can agree with. 35 on a good day.
40-45, i just expect more of the coin in all aspects. detail, luster, etc..
the hits on the coin really do not bother me. we are looking at such
big pics.
<< <i>a 25 normally has more wear on the tip of the tiara, the eagle's
breast, and the liberty's hair.
i just cannot see it at 25. 30 though i can agree with. 35 on a good day.
40-45, i just expect more of the coin in all aspects. detail, luster, etc..
the hits on the coin really do not bother me. we are looking at such
big pics. >>
This is actually really close to my thinking. The hits don't bother me either, they actually add to the character in this grade range because they are not in prime focal areas.
I will post the grade/grading company and what I think it is tomorrow.
More thoughts?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I'm probably wrong, but ... I like it
I guess a 35/40 would be better.
The coin looks like it has been cleaned along time ago, but not harshly. I say that because of the way the darker reddish color clings to the devices and the fields are relatively bland and straw-colored.
Overall, a decent coin.
I also like the way the dates have the "personal" or handcrafted touch.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>40 and too many marks for a sticker. Sorry.
Ahh shoot.
An ok strike. Liberty's hair on the neck is struck up nicely. the eagle's breast shows considerable detail. the denticles are struck up much better (but still not perfect). notice the shield and how well it is defined, one can almost even make out the left hand side lines on the shield which should be two lines showing its depth.
here is the example coinfacts displays, each one is slightly different but gosh golly, look at the reverse on that coin! too bad liberty's hair did not get struck up just a wee bit more.
so in summary, saying all 52-D were poorly or weakly struck is not
quite an accurate description. each one is different then its brother. It may very well be the case that a super well struck specimen simply did not survive. Please compare the pics and determine for
yourself if all 1852-D were poorly or weakly struck. Only the top pic
of the first coin gets a "MUSHY" strike label in my book. The other two
are steps above that.
even the well struck 54-D's show weakness in the denticle area.. yet is described as "This is one of the seldom encountered pieces that is fully struck throughout."
no feelings were hurt during the creation of this reply and i enjoyed
writing it.
<< <i>A weak strike. Notice the hair on liberty's neck and beneath the tiara. Notice the eagle's breast. Notice how the denticles look really bad in some areas. One can say this coin was weakly struck for a 1852-D. Mushy even.
An ok strike. Liberty's hair on the neck is struck up nicely. the eagle's breast shows considerable detail. the denticles are struck up much better (but still not perfect). notice the shield and how well it is defined, one can almost even make out the left hand side lines on the shield which should be two lines showing its depth.
here is the example coinfacts displays, each one is slightly different but gosh golly, look at the reverse on that coin! too bad liberty's hair did not get struck up just a wee bit more.
so in summary, saying all 52-D were poorly or weakly struck is not
quite an accurate description. each one is different then its brother. It may very well be the case that a super well struck specimen simply did not survive. Please compare the pics and determine for
yourself if all 1852-D were poorly or weakly struck. Only the top pic
of the first coin gets a "MUSHY" strike label in my book. The other two
are steps above that.
even the well struck 54-D's show weakness in the denticle area.. yet is described as "This is one of the seldom encountered pieces that is fully struck throughout."
no feelings were hurt during the creation of this reply and i enjoyed
writing it. >>
Thanks fc,
This was a well thought out educational reply. Exactly what I was looking for. Hopefully this thread will be useful in the future as well.
<< <i>52-D's come weakly struck. For the detail grade, I would guess 35, but would not be surprised if it were in a 40 holder. I owned a PCGS XF-40 that had about the same amount of detail.
The coin looks like it has been cleaned along time ago, but not harshly. I say that because of the way the darker reddish color clings to the devices and the fields are relatively bland and straw-colored.
Overall, a decent coin.
>>
I agree
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Nice pick up, btw B-dawg!
C'dude
"I was wondering....
Couldn't it be that this area shows die erosion on the denticles? I believe this happens in large cents of the time (something I'm much more familiar with) -- you'll see a very strong strike yet weak denticles, and it is not a strike issue but a die issue. Just wondering if that's not what causes this here.
Repsectfully...Mike"
<< <i>mikeinfl wants to ask this question:
"I was wondering....
Couldn't it be that this area shows die erosion on the denticles? I believe this happens in large cents of the time (something I'm much more familiar with) -- you'll see a very strong strike yet weak denticles, and it is not a strike issue but a die issue. Just wondering if that's not what causes this here.
Repsectfully...Mike" >>
I don't know the answer, fc... but your earlier post in this thread has to be one of my favorites. It was educational, enlightening, and matter of "factly".
<< <i>A weak strike. Notice the hair on liberty's neck and beneath the tiara. Notice the eagle's breast. Notice how the denticles look really bad in some areas. One can say this coin was weakly struck for a 1852-D. Mushy even.
An ok strike. Liberty's hair on the neck is struck up nicely. the eagle's breast shows considerable detail. the denticles are struck up much better (but still not perfect). notice the shield and how well it is defined, one can almost even make out the left hand side lines on the shield which should be two lines showing its depth.
here is the example coinfacts displays, each one is slightly different but gosh golly, look at the reverse on that coin! too bad liberty's hair did not get struck up just a wee bit more.
so in summary, saying all 52-D were poorly or weakly struck is not
quite an accurate description. each one is different then its brother. It may very well be the case that a super well struck specimen simply did not survive. Please compare the pics and determine for
yourself if all 1852-D were poorly or weakly struck. Only the top pic
of the first coin gets a "MUSHY" strike label in my book. The other two
are steps above that.
>>
to my eye all of those 52-D's show considerable strike weakness. Not a single one of them have any detail in the eagles talon's and none of them have complete detail on the stars on the obverse. I do agree that each on is different and also that perhaps a more accurate statement would be that a hammered strike example did not survive, thus only examples showing weakness in strike are available..
I agree with 90% of the posts. This should be a VF30-35 coin at first glance but when die state and strike are taken into account It is a VF35-XF40 coin.
This will be cracked out and sent to PCGS, this is my poor mans Dahlonega Half Eagle, can't afford the nicer examples. I would bet that PCGS grades it VF35 but it could cross on a good day.
<< <i>, this is my poor mans Dahlonega Half Eagle, can't afford the nicer examples. . >>
LOL, there is no such thing as a poor mans Dahlonega Half Eagle!!!!!
A weak strike in my mind is represented by the first coin. The eagle's
breast for example.
A hammered strike is the opposite. Every detail including the denticles
are well defined.
So that leaves us with the middle ground of an OK strike or an average strike.
I am suggesting that the other two coins are just that. An ok strike.
I can show you coins from the 1890s from P, for example, that i used
to own that could be described as an average strike. a
normal strike. The hair was not very well defined for example yet everything else was. hammered means everything is struck up perfectly.
My point is that to describe a mintage of almost 100,000 D half eagles
in 1842 as all weakly struck is not very accurate. To give them a bump up
of grade based on that without treating each coin as an individual is
not very accurate. I think that Becoka's coin shown in the first post
is a ok/average/normal strike for a D half eagle.
The coin below could be just as tough to grade as a 1852-D half eagle if you do not understand weak/normal/hammered strikes.
die erosion adds a whole nother dimension to the question that
i find interesting and cannot dig much up on. For example a search
on heritage's archives under half eagle for "erosion" does not get
a single hit!