1898 Morgan proof diagnostics? (Now with pics of my coin!)

mattniss

Can anyone in the know share what they are?

DorkGirl

1898 Proof

Here you go.

mattniss

Based on the proof diagnostics, I think what I have may be a proof, but I would appreciate forum input! Thanks in advance and pardon the photography!

crypto79

looks a little different and hammered. is there the die chip in the wing?

mattniss

To the naked eye I see no die chip. Unfortunately I don't own a loupe so I'll have to use my digital macro to take some photos of the area where the die chip should be to see if it's there. The slanted date is clear, and I'm pretty sure I see the diagonal die polishing over the eye - two of the three Die #2 characteristics ain't bad. :-)

Kove

One of the first places I look to get an initial read on whether a coin like this is a true proof strike vs a circulation strike is near the edge, where the denticles meet the rim.

On proof coins, the denticles meet the rim in a very sharp, clean, squared-off manner. This is because the proof coin was struck more than once and the metal flowed everywhere it was supposed to with two strikes.

A circulation-strike coin will often have a rounded, less-even appearance where the denticles meet the rim. This is because the coin was only struck once, and the metal in this area didn't flow out and fill up all the crevices near the rim (it typically takes at least two strikes to do this).

A second diagnostic on a raw coin is to look at the reeding on the edge. Proof reeding is very "sharp' and squared off from multiple die strikes filling in the collar. It has a distinct feel to the fingers. The reeding is more rounded on circulation strike examples.

These aren't end-all diagnostic methods, just a way I use to get an initial gut feel to see if a coin is a proof.

At first look, the appearance of your coin where the denticles meet the rim suggests a circulation strike.

Frankcoins

Looks like a polished business strike.

greghansen

Wow. Kove, excellent pointers. I'm not a proof collector buy you were able to communicate very clearly a solid 'pick up point' to start any proof vs. circulation investigation. Makes sense intuitively and the photo's show your remarks are dead on. This is the kind of sharing that makes it worth wading through 10 'Are Dealers Passe' or 'My grades are taking too long' threads to get to the pearls of wisdom like this. Thanks again!

Edited to add: I agree that based on my newly acquired knowledge; your coin does not appear to be a proof IMO.

7Jaguars

Looks like polish left in the numerals also...

AUandAG

Look impaired via a polishing wheel. Leaving the residue of the polish about the
numbers and stars. Maybe just the pic. Fingerprints on both sides. Sorry, but
I'd go with Frank and just a hammered business strike that was polished.

bob

mattniss

Thanks for all of your input. I'm going to try to take additional photos because I feel that the coin in hand does appear more as a proof than the photos represent. Either way, this has been a great learning experience, not to mention that that coin was purchased when silver was ~$14. So I'm a winner either way!

magikbilly

Hi,

I don't have it in hand, but you say it has some of the diagnostics - I am not seeing them from here but then I would not, apart from the chip (which I don't see at all). But, where are the mirrors, wire rim and so on? Even if messed with, a Proof coin - even after light circulation - will retain some level of mirror and wire rim.
The look the coin sports now might suggest an old polishing with the yellow/brown tone coming on after. Why do you think it is a Proof? No one asked that yet. What is stuck inside the date and around the stars etc.? Polish, frost or business strike frosty luster?

Best,
Eric