Grading the Rare 1720/18 George I Crown & 1741 George II Crown: How Condition Separates Treasure From Trinket

Condition Is King: A Grader’s Secrets for 18th Century British Crowns

Let’s be honest – condition is everything when it comes to 18th-century crowns. After handling thousands of these silver masterpieces, I’ve seen how a keen eye for detail can transform a £10 coin into a £1,000 treasure. The real magic lies in spotting three make-or-break factors: diagnostic wear patterns, original luster, and distinguishing strike weakness from circulation wear. Take that heated forum debate about the 1720/18 George I Crown and 1741 George II Crown – perfect examples of how PCGS/NGC grading nuances separate the ordinary from the extraordinary.

Why Early Georgian Crowns Make Collectors’ Hearts Race

When you hold a George I or George II crown (1714-1760), you’re touching a revolution in minting history. These hefty silver pieces (38-40mm of glorious 92.5% silver) emerged from the Tower Mint’s screw presses with uneven strikes that still challenge graders today. That 1720/18 overdate crown causing all the buzz? Its R2 rarity ranking in Cope & Rayner means only 13-25 EF specimens survive. With PCGS having graded just four across all grades, this crown exemplifies condition rarity at its most tantalizing.

Cracking the Grading Code: A Collector’s Field Guide

Wear Patterns Tell All

Think of these crowns as elderly aristocrats – their high points reveal life stories first:

• Obverse (Portrait Side): That proud cheekbone, delicate hair curls above the ear, regal shoulder drapery
• Reverse (Coat of Arms): The lion’s majestic mane, crown ornamentation’s intricate details, center cross fleury

The 1741 George II crown’s high relief portrait plays tricks on even seasoned eyes. As our forum friends discovered, you must distinguish:

• True wear (metal loss creating flat, lifeless surfaces)
• Strike weakness (those tantalizing untouched rounded surfaces where metal never flowed)

The Luster Detective’s Handbook

When that forum member noted “better than average lustre” on their 1720/18 George I Crown, they touched on numismatic gold. Original luster on these crowns dances differently:

• George I issues: Vibrant cartwheel effects that make you catch your breath
• George II later strikes: Subtle semi-prooflike fields that whisper rather than shout

Here’s my ritual: Rotate the coin under a warm 75-watt bulb at 45 degrees. Watch how light glides across fields – uninterrupted flow means virgin surfaces. Broken cartwheels? Alas, cleaning or wear has robbed its soul.

Under the Loupe: The 1720/18 George I Crown

Let’s examine that forum specimen through a PCGS lens:

Strike Character (4/5)

Central shield details leap out with all quarterings present. Slight softness on the lion’s head – typical for this die marriage. Peripheral lettering mostly sharp, though 7 o’clock reverse shows the mint’s struggle.

Wear Truths (AU-55)

• Obverse: Gentle friction on the highest curl, cheekbone still proudly untouched
• Reverse: Crown ornaments whisper of circulation, lion’s mane roars with 90% detail
• Fields: Honest bag marks tell its journey – no harsh cleaning scars

Eye Appeal (Collector’s Dream)

Cobalt-blue and amber toning frame the rims like stained glass. Even wear distribution creates visual harmony – those surface marks? Just character lines on a venerable survivor.

The 1741 George II Young Head: Beauty With Bite

Don’t let its “second most available” status fool you – this crown grades like a Shakespearean tragedy:

Grading Traps

Its dramatic high relief hides pitfalls:

• Portrait brow ridges deepened by amateur “improvements”
• Weak strikes masquerading as wear on flowing drapery
• Reflective fields conspiring to hide hairlines

Crossover Realities

Our analysis of forum images suggests harsh truths:

• EF-45 Details (Environmental Damage): Crypt-like deposits in crevices
• VF-35 Baseline: Drapery and lion’s mane lost their vigor
• Silver Lining: Russet reverse toning adds numismatic charm

Population Truths & Market Wisdom

That forum sage nailed it: “Is this coin as good as your collection needs?” The numbers don’t lie:

Here’s the staggering reality: For R2-R4 crowns (13-100 survivors), waiting for perfection means watching history slip through your fingers. That forum member’s 1720/18? It represents the collector’s eternal balancing act between rarity and condition.

The Collector’s Crossroads

When our forum colleague said “This coin is as good as it will get for me,” they voiced every serious collector’s truth. These Georgian beauties demand we reconcile:

1. Technical perfection (PCGS/NGC gospel)
2. Survival rates (Cope & Rayner’s cold math)
3. Heart-stopping personal satisfaction

Here’s the unvarnished truth: A “flawed” 18th-century crown with original luster, honest patina, and survivorship often outshines sterile perfection. Like that forum’s closing wisdom suggests – when you find one that speaks to you, hesitation invites lifelong regret. In our world, “good enough” condition frequently masks numismatic greatness.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• Decoding Authenticity: Expert Guide to Spotting Fake George I & II Crown Coins – With Counterfeits Flooding the Market, These Diagnostic Points Could Save Your Collection After three decades of hands-o…
• George I 1720/18 Crown Errors: A Hunter’s Guide to Die Varieties & Hidden Fortunes – The Collector’s Blind Spot: Where Fortunes Hide in Plain Sight What separates a casual glance from a collector&#82…
• The Tumultuous Era Behind George I’s 1720/18 Crown and George II’s 1741 Crown: Coins of Crisis and Ambition – The Historical Significance of Two Monarchs’ Coinage Hold history in your hand. These magnificent 18th-century Bri…