Henri Charriere

In my hardscrabble neck of the woods, crime is par for the course. I would not expect a crime of this magnitude to occur in Helena, the capital of Montana.

Now overseas, we do not know when that "mark" was applied or where -- or why. I don't know about intrusive surgery and shaving, but that is why bullion coins are reeded. A shady dealer I offered to sell my silver bar to stated he was going to drill a hole in it. I asked him what he was going to do with it then. He said, melt it! I said, "What for?" He smiled and pleasantly lying thru his teeth said, "We melt all scrap." I pointed out he was holding a bar with a universally-recognized hallmark (Engelhard) whose precise weight (100 ozs) fineness (.999) and specifications are known and available to anyone who inquires. I retrieved the bar and walked out. My feeling is the Double Eagle was defiled outside the country, a long long time ago.

Alright, alright... we see it.

(Just curious to know why you render the words, "I am," consistently and correctly as the contraction, "I'm," but decline to extend that courtesy to "I will," which you render inexplicably as the contraction, "il," -- with no capital letter i, no apostrophe, and only one l and not two?)

I am inclined to agree. There are ways to authenticate coins today that were not available years ago. Incidentally, when's the last time a TPGS defiled a coin in such manner to prove it was genuine?

(I must be losing it... I do not recall having written this post. I don't deny its provenance, but the "voice" did not resonate with me. I do not recognize it. I read it and then looked to see who wrote it, and was startled to find out it was me. It's not even a month. Whew!)

This same type of damage has been deemed "acceptable" by numismatists on Trade Dollars. My guess is, on a Double Eagle it would be unacceptable, but seeing as how the damage inflicted was intentional -- and somewhat unique, its value would similarly pivot on the focused demand of those who find the damage to be beguiling. In the absence of a back story, one pitch would be, as follows... Damage. What damage? Oh that! That's a rarely seen assayer's mark!

Thank you! My uncle z would beg to differ.

But, but... when I did a search, there was the name of the book, followed by "reviews." I should have "clicked" on it. There were a number of "error" books, but not that one. Great title!

Opening paragraph, notwithstanding, you can't leave everybody hanging... What was the "unexpected source"?

🐓 : What are you doing, Q? He said he doesn't want to hear anybody's life story, remember? Q.A.: You're right. I guess it's time to keep it moving.

Rank amateur here. In the absence of an official coroner's finding, here's the take from my perspective... All the numbers in the date appear to be "vibrating" suggesting machine doubling. The numeral 1 in the date, is misshapen; both the top and bottom appear to be skewed right. The leg of the numeral 7 in the date, appears to have been truncated. Re the D... You "read" that the D mintmark was stamped three separate times? If I may be so bold as to inquire, Where?

Is there a difference? Yes. Is it worthy of a dedicated New Topic? Probably not... Technically, little more than a convenient reference term, "A Guidebook of United States Coins," is universally referred to by the coin collector community, as the "Red Book." (It has a "companion" volume, commonly referred to as the "Blue Book.") Published annually and continuously since 1946, it is now available in a number of formats. In contrast, "Redbook" is the name of an American women's magazine [that terminated print publication about 5 years ago.] Red Book vs. Redbook magazine. That's it in a nutshell. (No difference in pronunciation.)

Sure it's real. Look at the name of the person who wrote it!

What we really need here is a few good close-ups, front and back. I approach any claim with an open mind, but I need something to sink my teeth into.

🐓: Hey Q! This thread's been revived! It'd be a shame to see it go to waste... 🤣 Q.A.: I agree. The following is going to earn me a whole new slew of enemies, but, ah, what the heck. I have never shrunk from my obligation as a coin collector to "broaden the body of knowledge," and I see no reason to do so now. In reviewing the foregoing thread, I have noticed the names of two alloys, brass and bronze, being used interchangeably. Each, however, is notably different. Generally, brass is comprised of two metals, in the following percentages: 67% Cu and 33% Zn. These levels can vary considerably, as seen in the specs of Lincoln cents, but no other elements, i.e., metals, are present. Brass is brass. Bronze is comprised of 88% Cu and 12% Sn (tin) + other elements such as aluminum, manganese, phosphorus and silicon. (Note: One 1943 cent struck in 86.41% Tin and 8.37% Antimony, with other trace metals, was authenticated by NGC in 2019.) While the composition of cents has changed over the years -- including a Cu-Ni alloy used briefly in the 1860's -- it has never deviated enough to justify the use of the term brass where bronze was indicated, and vise versa.

Q.A.: Thank you. I was just-- 🐓: Here, let me wipe that egg off your face.

Hi there! Greetings and salutations. I cannot resist the temptation to weigh in. You state you have a Double Eagle with "this marking where it should not be." Personally, I do not see the need for such marking at all, but if you feel it is "where it should not be," perhaps you can tell us where it ought to be. We take all customer complaints seriously. 🤣 (I am sure someone will stop by shortly to give you a valid explanation.)

I do not feel your questioned was answered, but without feedback, it is hard to know. The problem is your use of the term "submitting." Submission means only one thing: sending a coin in to be authenticated, graded, certified and encapsulated. So we are definitely not talking about "submitting" an already graded or certified coin. On the other hand, one does not "submit" anything to the Set Registry. It is basically an inventory tool. One "registers" one's coins by entering the certification number in the appropriate category. While it is true NGC permits registering PCGS slabs, there are a few exceptions, one of them being World Gold. I do not know if this clarification was needed, but I hope it was helpful.

I do recall hearing about this but there are many wrecks that have been found in the nearly ten years since this was discovered and I could not place it. Now it seems People magazine ran a story on it recently. The Spanish galleon "San Jose" was sunk by British warships in 1708 just off the coast of Cartagena, Colombia. (Now think about that for a moment... Colombia faces the Pacific Ocean. There wouldn't be a Panama Canal for another 200 years. That's a very long voyage in treacherous waters between the southernmost point of South America and Antarctica and many thousands of miles from England.) The then-president of Colombia declared this wreck to be the Most Valuable Treasure in the History of Humanity. Valued at $17B, it includes 11 million gold coins and 200 tons of silver and emeralds. The wreck had been tied up in litigation that has since been resolved and recovery efforts can now proceed. It will be interesting to see what they find.

Oldhoopster was special. He gave as good as he got. He was a worthy adversary, a contender, and a consummate gentleman. Neither of us stooped to the level of a junkyard dog. You would do well to honor his memory by similarly engaging in more productive pursuits.

Point. Counterpoint. 🤣

🐓 🐓 🐓 🐓 🐓

The peak years for overcrowding in the Federal prison system have long since passed. They have closed all the private "contract" institutions. There is plenty of space. The emphasis post-crack era is on recovery of property and assets forfeiture.

Passed on the ready cash. Passed on the gold. Early Morgans only... 🤔 Probably not an inside job, but insider information likely played a role. Had anyone expressed an inordinate interest for the old Morgans lately?