Does this affect grading? (small dip)

I should have started with welcome aboard...

Just afew other things to look for and think about.

You should take the coin out of the holder to look at the rim to be certain it is not an ex-jewelry piece- look for evidence of a removed bezel at 12 o'clock... an ex-jewelry piece really is the kiss of death with a coin such as this.

Also, not sure what side of the pond you reside at so I mention this because there really are differences between grading in the UK and in the States. In the UK... at least from my experience... there is a greater focus on the strike. Coins that are not fully struck may fall short of a practically as struck designation. Further there is the British AEF, EF and GEF. And with a coin such as yours, the focus will be on the portrait hair and the lions and harp on the reverse. The weakness in the strike is often punished even though these theoretical fully struck coins rarely or never surface.

In the states, weakness in the strike is anticipated and the focus is on the quality of the surfaces. And with British from these era, a dip is not the kiss of death unless the surfaces have been altered giving the coin a polished look or highlighting hairlines from an earlier or more abrasive cleaning effort. And this is when magnification helps- take a very close look at the fields to determine are hairlines in contrast to any of the other possibilities that include die flow lines; die polish or adjustment marks/lines.

Best wishes with your decision- if you choose to submit, please consider posting the results here. We don't see this type of coin here often and it is worth discussing

Details grade at least validates authenticity and ‘details’ grade. Nothing to lose. There are always pliers if you change your mind.

I know nothing about these but that is an amazing coin!

Best of luck... just curious... what does the Queen Anne 1706 5 G look like?

Welcome!

I would need to see the Queen Anne in hand. The details look to easily make the AU spectrum... it is the surfaces/fields I am having an issue with and I suspect that is in part due to the image. I am encouraged by the shadowing tone on the reverse lettering starting at 6 o'clock and ending at 9 at the lower portion of the crown. If this was enhanced, I doubt that would have remained. I think this is a coin any collector of British milled coinage would love to own. I think you made the right decision to submit both 5 G coins. I hope this goes well

I would not make any quick decisions on re-submitting. Take a close look at them after they are returned. I would look for signs of mounting on the rim. Based on the images, this does not seem likely... but then again, we cannot see the entire rim. The 1701 has an obvious issue on the reverse but that could possibly be attributable in part to impurities and or copper issues in the flan. Silver coins from the reign of both of these monarchs suffer from flecking and/or haymarking. These are distracting marks that are common but yet often present. TPG is unpredictable as to how it will treat these issues. I have personally experienced a Queen Anne crown that did not grade based on a finding of environmental damage which I did not agree with mainly because this is a known production problem/issue... its the way many of these coins were made. The crown I submitted came back as environmental damage which I think is a different code... perhaps 92 and not 98. You can't take a 21st century yardstick and apply it to coinage that is 300-350 yrs old. I am unable to opine whether flecking/haymarking is an issue on gold from this era. I suspect others on the World coin forum might have a more complete reply.

I suppose the bright spot is the coins are authentic and they reached an appropriate grade range (even though it is details...). However, it is not clear exactly what the damage is...if the surfaces were impaired from a cleaning, one would expect that the easier basis for the details grade would be to cite cleaning instead of damage.