Question about reeded edges 1 1

[Trevor Vilsack]

hello everyone! im fairly new and was curious about your opinions. On numista this coin is 26.52, it weighed at 25.9. It also was not magnetic. It is supposed to be reeded as shown in the second picture, the last 3 pictures are the pictures i took of this coins edges. Seems to be very faint reeds on about 40% of the coin, the other part is pretty flat and smooth. Was curious if this would be normal wear and tear for a reeded coin from 1751? Thanks for any replies!

[Greenstang]

First, never hold a coin in your bare hands, the oil from your skin can cause fingerprints and greatly devalue a coin.

Also those are not reed marks, it is a pattern around the edge of your coin. It looks like the edge has just been worn down either intentionaly or unintentionaly.

Almost forgot, welcome to the forum

Edited March 31 by Greenstang

[Bishop j]

Weight 5.54

1.7 

[Trevor Vilsack]

ahh ok! so you think it is probably a genuine coin then? .. thanks for your reply and welcoming me! : )

[powermad5000]

Hello and welcome to the forum!

I resound the statement made by @Greenstang. NEVER hold a coin by its surfaces if you have to handle the coin at all. In the event you have to handle a coin by hand, only handle it by its edges. You can impart permanent damage to its surfaces by touching them.

Now that you have been properly admonished again to drive the point home, I also agree there is no reeding on the edge of your coin and I am sure I will be corrected by member Sandon of the proper year, I do not believe coins were imparted with reeded edges until the early 1800's (1836 for US coins). I do see some type of pattern or design on the edge of your coin.

I would say it is a two part issue here. Due to the coin's age (1751), the process of minting coinage was still rather crude and I am sure that the processes to impart the design to the edge were not perfect. What I mean is that the coin could have been made without the design going around the entire edge to begin with. Combine that with general wear on the coin and you could easily lose part or most of the rim design as is the case on your coin.

As for the given weight, I am not sure what the weight tolerance would be for this coin, once again due to its age, and I can only hazard that there was not close tolerances for the coinage process as there are in today's terms, so I think the weight of yours is close enough for the coin to be deemed close to its ideal considering it lost some of its initial weight due to the wear present on your example.

As for it being a genuine example, the coin would have to be reweighed on different scales to make sure its true weight is established and it would have to be remeasured, and metal tested by either an XRF tester and if that test was inconclusive, a specific gravity test to determine its metal content and if that matches a genuine example, as well as a thorough in hand inspection of the details to make sure they match a genuine specimen. Trying to determine authenticity from just photos can be nearly impossible unless there is very blatant and obvious signals such as missing or incorrect details.

[RWB]

Italian States LUCCA Scudo KM# 60. 1751.

Obverse Legend: LUCENSIS RESPUBLICA ( Republic of Lucca) ; Reverse Legend: SANCTUS MARTINUS (Saint Martin).

Reverse depicts "Saint" Martin on horseback cutting his cloak in half to share with a beggar. (The horse turns to watch the action...probably thinking "Better that cloak than me.")

Edited April 2 by RWB