Grade These Four Seated Liberty 20 Cent Pieces...(GRADES REVEALED!)

[Forest City]

...of Peru!

 

I sent them to NGC and will reveal the grades after a couple days of guesses.

 

And I'm adding one Peruvian Medal I also sent in. So five total. What do you guys/gals think?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Forest City]

Not sure why the photos aren't working. Can anyone help?

[clarkbar04]

Delete the initial "

[Forest City]

Thanks, that worked. The photos are huge (sorry about that), but at least they're there.

[physics-fan3.14]

EF details, scratched

 

AU (although the stain on the reverse is weird and unattractive - if it is environmental damage, this one may also bag)

 

MS-65 (the obverse field to the left of Liberty's arm looks like it may have contact from circulation. This one may be hiding a trace of rub on the high points - it is really hard to tell. It is the most attractive coin in this bunch, however).

 

MS-64

 

AU

[Walkerfan]

Thanks, that worked. The photos are huge (sorry about that), but at least they're there.

 

Although large---the pix are decent.

 

What type of camera did you use?

[Forest City]

They aren't photos I took. They are photos from ebay auctions I won.

[KMAG100]

I don't think the first 3 will grade...the 4th one I'd go ms63/64....the last one looks cleaned also, but if not AU 55....the 3rd one has too much rim damage for me to grade...

[clarkbar04]

Scratches? Heavy die clashing.

 

I'd wager the 1896 is as-struck too.

 

1864 is strange looking, and also has an overdate. The others look ms and the 17 is quite stunning.

 

62

63

64

66

??

[Forest City]

Any other guesses before the reveal?

 

Interesting responses so far.

[brg5658]

AU55 (clashed dies)

MS64

MS65

MS64

 

On the medal, really hard to tell luster -- but anywhere from AU55 to MS63, assuming it doesn't have an old cleaning that got it Details graded.

[Forest City]

Ok here we go...

 

1875: Graded MS 62

 

Comments: Yes, those are indeed clashed dies. About as severe as you can find on one of these. They appeal to me. I can understand someone may see the long thin clash behind Liberty's head as a scratch, but after examining the rest of the obverse, it should be clear it's a clash. As for grade, I was between 58 and 62 when sending it in. On the one hand, it has unbroken, if a bit subdued, full luster. On the other hand, Liberty's hair looks a bit worn, but it could be strike.

 

1890: Graded MS 63

 

Comments: This one is difficult. The obverse is beautiful, with a solid hue throughout, but the luster is very low. The reverse has the large splotch (not unattractive in person, but curious), and also has hairlines throughout the entire reverse. I'm not sure what these hairlines are. They aren't the normal hairlines of cleaning, but it also doesn't resemble the die polish lines I'm used to seeing. Was the reverse cleaned of some substance at some point? Or was it struck that way? I don't know. I was inbetween UNC Details because of the hairlines and 62, because of the lower luster. It is a coin with eye appeal, and clean fields, so I guess that's why it got the bump up. A very difficult date in UNC, the only graded at PCGS/NGC.

 

1896 TF: MS 63

 

Comments: I like this coin, and it seems that most of the commenters here did too as well. Yes, it has some adjustment marks (no scratches) up top. But otherwise it's textbook 64 in my view. And the adjustment marks aren't distracting at all in hand. I guess they took off for them anyway? And yet I've seen a 1/5 Sol with an enormous rim planchet defect make it in a 64 holder. For me, a 64, and a very underrated date. This is top pop by 2 grades, and one of only two graded.

 

1917: MS 66

 

Comments: I have to admit, I thought this was only a 64 when I sent it in. The luster is quite subdued on the reverse, and it has a fingerprint on the obverse. I can now see it should probably be a Gem, but I don't know about 66.

 

Medal: MS 63

 

Comments: This is one of those pieces that could go 58 or 63 on different days. The luster is seemingly full, though not in an absolute way. The nose is weak, but who can say if that is wear or not? From what I've seen of medal grading (not much), they always seem to grade up from where I'm at on them. I was at 62 when I sent it in.

 

Clarkbar was right on target, only one point off on the 1896. But I think it's a 64 too.

[brg5658]

You would have likely gotten much better and closer grade guesses if the pictures were

 

1) taken all at the same time using the same methods

2) sharp / in focus

3) smaller (grading from dinner-plate size images is misleading)

4) properly lit (some of the images have really flat/diffused light, which makes things like luster almost impossible to determine).

 

Nonetheless, they all seem reasonable grades, except I agree the 1917 is a bit over graded and the 1896 looks better than MS63 based on your image.

 

Congrats,

Brandon

[Forest City]

Brandon, I think your assessment is largely correct. Basically, I had these images from ebay (various sellers), so just went with what I had. And yes they came out larger than I would have liked on here, I'm still not sure how to get smaller images. I will note that most of the other images from ebay sellers I've saved are much worse than these.

 

I'm currently reading Goodman's "Numismatic Photography", and hope to get a copy stand in the coming months and work out taking high quality photos.

[brg5658]

These are really superbly designed coins, and a very affordable area to collect beautiful world coins. I like all you have posted here, and thanks for sharing your thorough assessment of the coins with the grades also. I wasn't trying to be "judgy" of the photography, just giving you some clarification why the grade guesses were a little all over the place. We can only grade what we can see...and even then, you have seen the coins in hand, we're just going from pictures!

 

 

Brandon

 

[Forest City]

Brandon-

 

You are right, the engraving on these seated Peru coins rival the Seated coinage of the United States. In 1858 Peru brought over Robert Britten from Great Britain to design a new coinage, just as George Morgan was brought over in the late 1870's to design coinage for the US. The old coinage was very crude and prone to counterfeiting. Britten obviously looked to the coins of the US for inspiration. His 1880 Peseta I believe was a take on the Morgan Dollar first issued only two years earlier.

 

 

He made these designs his own, however, and obviously had a skilled hand.

 

I like to say it's a joy to collect these series because I can buy a Gem Seated coin that is at least 10 times rarer than it's US counterpart for 10 times less than the US coin costs. My budget doesn't allow for Gem Seated Quarters, but I have an entire registry set of Peru Dineros and 1/5 Sols (check under custom sets if curious). It's a rewarding area to collect and study. Any die variety specialist would have a field day with the 1860's and 1870's coins.