1853 Arrows & Rays Seated Liberty Half Dollar - new images

[Afterword]

Any opinions would be appreciated.

 

 

[jpcienkus]

The shot on the chin and the field disturbances lead me to MS63.

[Coindude]

63 as well here. It bothers me that it's so white, luster looks muted, might downgrade because of that. But... it's A&R so that makes it sexy from the get go!

[Danye West]

MS63

[MarkFeld]

The coin looks odd, but I'm not sure if that's due to the imaging. Either way, due to the marks in the left obverse field, I'd go 62 at best.

[Afterword]

"The coin looks odd, but I'm not sure if that's due to the imaging."

 

 

 

They are auction images, which I believe to be scans. When I have the coin in hand, I will see if I can provide better images.

[$ilverHawk]

"The coin looks odd, but I'm not sure if that's due to the imaging."

 

 

 

They are auction images, which I believe to be scans. When I have the coin in hand, I will see if I can provide better images.

 

Clearly dipped, like many coins from this era, so what, no harm done. A nice MS63. Look forward to your in hand images.

 

Carl

[coinman_23885]

The images make the coin look weird to me. Assuming there are no hidden problems and the coin straight grades, I wouldn't be surprised by anything in the AU58 to MS62 range.

[BillJones]

The hits on the face and arm would drop the grade to MS-62 for me. Yes, it's been dipped, but the 1853 Arrows and Rays half in my collection has been dipped also.

 

The mintage on these coins was high for the period because the mint was in the process of replacing everything that it had issued previously because of the recent rise in the price of silver relative to gold due to the California gold rush. As a result these coins were often carelessly made. This one is no exception with lots of die breaks.

[$ilverHawk]

 

 

"As a result these coins were often carelessly made. This one is no exception with lots of die breaks. "

 

Bill,

 

Why do you equate die breaks with being carelessly made? Is that an issue with this particular mintage?

 

My primary collecting focus is on CBH's. Die breaks in the CBH series are very important in establishing mintage rarity. The deterioration of the die/dies give a great insight into the minting processes and establish a history for the series.

 

Is the presence of die breaks in this series different?

 

I know very little about Seated Halves---just wondering.

 

Carl

 

 

 

[Afterword]

These are not much better, but the best I can manage.

 

[MarkFeld]

Based on the new images, I'll go with 58 (shot 62) and possibly cleaned.

[jpcienkus]

Agree Mark. I'd go AU 53ish. I don't see the luster you do, but I do think I see signs of some cleaning.

 

Edited to add: I'd put more weight on Mark's answer than mine....

[Coindude]

I don't see any rub but the luster is very muted. I'll split the difference and call it 61.

[Curry]

MS60

[Danye West]

Based on the new pics AU Details or AU

[BillJones]

For comparison sake, here is a piece that our hosts graded as an MS-64. I know the one big fault that many will find with this piece is that it has been dipped.

 

[Afterword]

Finally found an angle that shows all the frost. The luster is somewhat muted, especially on the reverse, but both sides of the coin cartwheel.

 

[Afterword]

Thanks for the opinions all!

 

It will be a while before I send this in for grading, as I need a few more raw coins to send along with it, but when I do I will post the determination.

[Afterword]

NGC's determination is AU58.

[BillJones]

 

"As a result these coins were often carelessly made. This one is no exception with lots of die breaks.

"

 

Bill,

 

Why do you equate die breaks with being carelessly made? Is that an issue with this particular mintage?

 

My primary collecting focus is on CBH's. Die breaks in the CBH series are very important in establishing mintage rarity. The deterioration of the die/dies give a great insight into the minting processes and establish a history for the series.

 

Is the presence of die breaks in this series different?

 

I know very little about Seated Halves---just wondering.

 

Carl

 

Generally the U.S. mint system made an effort to issue attractive coins. This was especially true of the Philadelphia Mint which made a stronger effort than some of the branch mints. As those of us who collection Charlotte, Dahlonega and New Orleans coins have learned, those mints went through periods when at least some of their products were poorly made. By that I mean that the coins had weak luster, poorly struck design details, poorly prepared planchets and, yes, die breaks. When a die broke, generally the policy was to replace it if there was a replacement available.

 

As for the 1853 Arrows and Rays half dollars, the demand for new coins was very high because all of the previous pieces had a melt value that exceeded their face value. Getting new coins into circulation was a priority, and the Philadelphia mint pushed the dies to make as many coins from them as possible. There is also evidence that the dies were not taken down as often to be repolished in the interests of time. The result was coins with less mediocre luster, less distinct design elements and more minting defects such as die breaks.

 

Many collectors like die breaks today. They are a reflection of the minting process, and they provide evidence for emission sequences which offer evidence for the order that die varieties were issued. To the mint personnel of the time, however, they were a nuisance especially when a die failed soon after it had been installed on the press. It met that the die had to be replaced sooner which involved downtime, added expense and the need to make new dies which was costly.