would a Pillar dollar (1758) in UNC state

Hyperion · November 6, 2009 4:14AM

Would a Pillar dollar in UNC state show die polish?? I'm closely examining a coin which appears to me, on gut instinct to be 'too white'.

However, I don't really detect a disturbance in the fields. There is AU'y contact in the primary areas, but in the protected areas of the coin the surfaces don't show any obvious harsh cleaning, abrasions, or evidence of whizzing.. I can only assume a dip, anyway, there are a few places I can see parallel lines which do not run across devices.. I have to get this under a loupe and confirm that the 'line' run directly into the device and dont stop short, however, that's the way it appears in hand.

anyway.... die polish in effect in these old issues? again, I've only seen a heavily worn example so I dont have basis for comparison...

For the record this was a sedwick coin auction win, coin was billed as lusterous AU.. if the coin was darker Id say it was perfect, and I guess Im happy with it but Id feel better if I could explain the lightness of a 261 year old coin

Hyperion · November 6, 2009 4:29AM

auction image...

MrEureka · November 6, 2009 6:31AM

If this was a Lightside thread, we would be at 100 already.

Yes, there could be some die polish on the coin.

Anyway, I'm sure the coin was cleaned to some extent. But you already knew that.

MacCrimmon · November 6, 2009 6:47AM

For that coin, try a Taco Bell napkin.....then, it'll be "double-original".

Hyperion · November 6, 2009 8:31AM

<< If this was a Lightside thread, we would be at 100 already.

Yes, there could be some die polish on the coin.

Anyway, I'm sure the coin was cleaned to some extent. But you already knew that. >>

sure, it's too light, that being said, Im just trying to determine the nature of it.
I can't see any physical abrasions, or whizzin, so I can just assume dip I guess... if you're trying to look for reasons to counter your gut instinct, I guess you're whistlin' past the graveyard.

either way, for me to aquire this as type, Im happy with it, the image doesn't give a true indication of the sharpness of the detail and the force that had to be applied to the chops... Ill try to image...

Hyperion · November 6, 2009 8:37AM

I wonder if it'd slab

Hyperion · November 6, 2009 1:06PM

this wont slab, I still like it for it's detail, but I'm curious about the lightness...

dip or old abrasive cleaning? no abrasion on the devices, but I guess it could have 'circulated' off, but... if it circulated enough to wear the devices, I think the overall coin would have a different appearance.

It's just bugging me what happened to this pillar dollar, so I'm curious what other people think about it.

zeebob · November 6, 2009 3:47PM

Hyperion,

I love that photo through the loupe. Is that a Zeise loupe? Very nice.

(I'm down to finishing a garage cabinet for the wife tomorrow and I hope sorting the Polk dollars on Sunday - watch your mailbox next week).

theboz11 · November 6, 2009 8:26PM

Die polish line are raised, while cleaning marks are recessed. If you had a binocular microscope it would be easy to determine

Hyperion · November 6, 2009 9:22PM

<< Hyperion,

I love that photo through the loupe. Is that a Zeise loupe? Very nice.

(I'm down to finishing a garage cabinet for the wife tomorrow and I hope sorting the Polk dollars on Sunday - watch your mailbox next week). >>

yep... poor man's "digital microscope".. done freehand

Lancastercoin · November 7, 2009 12:03AM

I have seen a few UNC and AU pillar 8's (and 2's) that show medium to heavy die polish.

MrEureka · November 7, 2009 7:00AM

There are a few remaining spots of black encrustation. That should give you a sense of what the coin probably looked like before it was cleaned. Most likely, the piece was found as part of a shipwreck or buried hoard, was encrusted in all kinds of ugly stuff, and was subjected to a non-abrasive cleaning, and I don't mean a dip. Sorry I can't be more precise than that, but someone else should be able to enlighten us.

Hyperion · November 7, 2009 8:32PM

<< There are a few remaining spots of black encrustation. That should give you a sense of what the coin probably looked like before it was cleaned. Most likely, the piece was found as part of a shipwreck or buried hoard, was encrusted in all kinds of ugly stuff, and was subjected to a non-abrasive cleaning, and I don't mean a dip. Sorry I can't be more precise than that, but someone else should be able to enlighten us. >>

that makes the most sense to me considering the source of the material, and original source....

Id rather have original than white, but id rather have white than encrusted...

MrEureka · November 7, 2009 10:51PM

Now that I think about it some more, the chopmarks probably mean that we can rule out the shipwreck theory.

Hyperion · November 8, 2009 8:49AM

<< Now that I think about it some more, the chopmarks probably mean that we can rule out the shipwreck theory. >>

I questioned auctioners about it directly and they a said maybe an old soap and water type cleaning but nothing obviously harsh or chemical to them based on examination of the surfaces..

Hyperion · November 8, 2009 8:51AM

<< Now that I think about it some more, the chopmarks probably mean that we can rule out the shipwreck theory. >>

there's no pitting or anything else that Ive seen which might come from exposure.. oh well. call it old silver cleaning nice for type and we'll move on....

dizzlecc · November 8, 2009 9:14AM

I have seem only au condition pillars up close enough to detect polish lines.

Considering the age and the many of the coins from that time period were at least lightly cleaned at one time. The odds are the lines are from some type of cleaning.

Even so, it is still a nice looking coin with a good strike.

I wouldn't worry about getting it slabbed. Many of the older world coin collectors prefer them raw.

sumnom · November 8, 2009 2:50PM

<< Now that I think about it some more, the chopmarks probably mean that we can rule out the shipwreck theory. >>

I think the chop marks also rule out the UNC theory. If it has chop marks, it circulated.

Hyperion · November 8, 2009 11:30PM

<< 

<< Now that I think about it some more, the chopmarks probably mean that we can rule out the shipwreck theory. >>

I think the chop marks also rule out the UNC theory. If it has chop marks, it circulated. >>

Not necessarily true, at least in the case of PCGS and at least Trade Dollars and chop marks... you can have T$ slabbed UNC (no perceptable wear) even tho common sense says it's post-mint, circulation related 'damage'.. there have been liteside threads discussion it ad nauseum..(spelling!)

sumnom · November 9, 2009 1:26AM

Interesting.

In the end, however, I am more interested in whether I happen to like the way the coin looks. On that standard, I do like the way your Pillar looks!

ColinG · November 9, 2009 11:03AM

The existence of chopmarks does not necessarily rule out shipwrecks. I have a chopmarked Indian rupee with what appears to be sea corrosion. I have seen other chopmarks coins that have been found on wrecks.

ColinG · November 10, 2009 1:39PM

<< 

<< I think the chop marks also rule out the UNC theory. If it has chop marks, it circulated. >>

Not necessarily true, at least in the case of PCGS and at least Trade Dollars and chop marks... you can have T$ slabbed UNC (no perceptable wear) even tho common sense says it's post-mint, circulation related 'damage'.. there have been liteside threads discussion it ad nauseum..(spelling!) >>

See the recent 74th Anniversary Stack's Sale. They had 10 or so chopmarked US Trade $, all graded MS-62 to MS-64. For example:

http://www.stacks.com/lotdetail.aspx?lrid=AN00153882
and
http://www.stacks.com/lotdetail.aspx?lrid=AN00153888

Just to give two examples.

would a Pillar dollar (1758) in UNC state

Comments