| Contenu de l'article |
- From copperclem@comcast.net Fri Oct 03 10:47:41 2003
Return-Path: <copperclem@comcast.net>
X-Sender: copperclem@comcast.net
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 14610 invoked from network); 3 Oct 2003 17:47:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Oct 2003 17:47:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO sccrmhc11.comcast.net) (204.127.202.55)
by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Oct 2003 17:47:40 -0000
Received: from dad (h0020781856b1.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.61.97.237])
by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP
id <20031003173554011006vsmce>; Fri, 3 Oct 2003 17:35:54 +0000
To: <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: JPL's images
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 13:36:05 -0400
Message-ID: <LPBBKJNANGIPBNPALMHPIEEODMAA.copperclem@comcast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
In-Reply-To: <blkbqq+9h4c@eGroups.com>
Importance: Normal
From: "Clement V. Schettino" <copperclem@comcast.net>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=152333477
X-Yahoo-Profile: copperclem
Yes John,
I am receiving your images privately. Not to seem ungrateful but the quality
of the images is not the best. It is difficult for me to tell much from
them. But I do thank you for sending them.
Clem
-----Original Message-----
From: John Lorenzo [mailto:jlorenzo@ob.ilww.com]
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 1:32 PM
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: Interesting item on eBay web site
item#3050934013: 1793 BERMUDA 1 PENNY KM-5A BRONZED PROOF 65
Bill's only comment on the previously mentioned 1778 AK variety
thought of as a 1773 he indicated poor strike may be causing this
interpretation on this plated specimen or on specimens tou may own???
Just relaying this over to confirm or deny - makes no difference to
me and no need to reply as I have no further ideas or opinions on
this matter.
This 1778 example looks good when viewing "in-person" but certainly
there is room for doubt just viewing an image. I will try in
the "near" future to pull-out another 1778 for sale with a much
stronger last digit - if possible. Clem should be getting images of
this coin already based on my previous promise. Clem???
--- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Byron Weston" <bkw11@p...>
wrote:
> Just checking in before I must turn around and check back out
again,
> John, but will comment further on Evasions when I have more time
> later.
> Re: 1778 - I think my comments before the coin was posted on eBay
> still stand. It is definitely not 1778, regardless what the other
two
> higher grade pieces last numeral may look like to Bill, and a
variety
> I believe that I may have seen before, and maybe even have one
> myself. I'll check the archives later.
> Byron
>
>
> --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "John Lorenzo"
<jlorenzo@o...>
> wrote:
> > So now that we are done with this boring piece let me ask a
> question
> > with no argumentative response allowed by JPL:
> >
> > Since no evasion copper is known in "CAST" and Cobwright making
the
> > statement that he believes most were made in and around 1795 for
> his
> > own perasonal reasons....what is your take on the production time
> > period for evasions...possibly within the George II regal period
or
> > strictly a George III regal period issue???
> >
> > Cobwright has never discussed with me his reasons. This is a
> complex
> > question. Very interested in your response as with the 1778
issue.
> > This is not a trick question on my part.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "Byron Weston"
<bkw11@p...>
> > wrote:
> > > --- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "John Lorenzo"
> > <jlorenzo@o...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Did some further magnification checks it looks more like a
> tagged
> > > > pennant to me making it either a much more common Proof
(still
> > > doubt
> > > > its Proof status as a Pridmore 6A (i.e., tagged pennant
> reverse)
> > > and
> > > > more likely a later tagged pennant restrike example.
> > > > I just dont get any relective surfaces coming at me from this
> > scan
> > > > since I do own a bronzed Pridmore 6A and the surfaces are
quite
> > > > reflective.
> > > > Yes Byron I am a bidder just to "bookmark" this example
during
> > the
> > > > bidding process. Based on population counts in the CNL
article
> by
> > > > Sportack nice true UNC business strikes are "more" difficult
to
> > > > purchase than proofs of the Pridmore 6A type due to heavy
> > > circulation
> > > > seen with these issues. I agree with Phil & Mark S. these
> pieces
> > > > based on these factors seemed pulled out of circulation
heavily
> > and
> > > > the ones remained were heavily utilized in commerce.
> > > > I have asked the seller to inform if this piece has the S/S
> > > > diagnostic. Further, once this is confirmed Droz the engraver
> for
> > > > Boulton on this piece only appears on certain die marriages
> > talked
> > > > about in the CNL for later business strikes. Droz does appear
> on
> > > BOTH
> > > > Proof die marriages (P-5A,6A).
> > > > No real mention was taked about in the CNL article on some
> later
> > > > business strikes that come on thick/thin flans in detail -
> other
> > > than
> > > > that the article was indeed a "big'leap forward.
> > > > Its intersting as Sportack mentioned to me as we examone some
> > > further
> > > > examples from Bill's collection that all the Pridmore 5A's
> > > originated
> > > > from the Byrne collection and as mentioned previously 5/6 are
> > > > accounted for at this time. Is this the missing specimen???
> > > > Probably not due to a tagged pennant reverse and the S/S
> response
> > > > which hopefully should be NO (i.e., business restrike).
> > > > Byron-the S/S disagnostic is ALWAYS clear as NIGHT AND DAY.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the feedback, John, but it's largely all Greek to me
> as
> > > this certainly isn't my specialty. I appreciate the information
> > > nonetheless, though.
> > > Byron
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
colonial-coins-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
|---|
| URL source |
|
|---|
| Date publiée |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
