Leaderboard

If the dot is associated with a flaw in the die, could it have been added to the die to stop a crack developing? Apologies if I am totally wide of the mark. Ian..

Thanks very much for getting back to me about this Brian. You have noted that your own coin is paired with an OT reverse, rather than a PT reverse like my own coin…….this is the interesting thing, please read on. Now that you have confirmed your own coin has these identical and unusual obverse features I attach a close up of the ‘dot’ between the I and A of GRATIA. Under high magnification, but still not immediately obvious, it can be seen that there is a faint die flaw running underneath the A towards the bottom of the dot and then exiting at the top of the dot and proceeding all the way up to a border tooth (see the red arrows) Bearing in mind that the deterioration of a die, and associated progress of a flaw, represents a timeline, and that we now know these dots appear on a single obverse which is paired with both an Ornamental Trident and Plain Trident (and in a year where the PT was first introduced), I think it would be of much interest to determine whether the PT preceded the OT when paired with this obverse……..or vice versa. It is difficult to see without good close-ups whether your own piece also exhibits such flaws in these exact same locations? Whilst I believe there are very few decent examples of 1853PT paired with Gouby Style A Italic 5 obverse (Gouby Style C being far more common), may I ask whether any other member has an 1853 ‘dot’ coin, PT or OT, with these same date and legend features? If so, please could you report back on any findings regarding the state of the flaws through the dot? P.S. I can add a couple of other close ups of additional unusual obverse features which are a trade mark for this particular die should any member feel that the date and high I in VICTORIA and insufficient to convince that it is the same obverse die which is paired with both an OT and PT reverse.