Unwilling Numismatist

@Peckris 2 Just to confirm - this is a JH 6d? It almost looks like JH 1+B but there isn't enough in the images to be sure it isn't YH to add confusion.

Add them all, I'm up for a laugh - once it stops raining I'll go outside again and wont be seen for another {however long}.

Its worth looking for the varieties in the Vickies as that can add a little to the sale price. I'm no expert on the others, although I'm sure any grade of 1905 shilling would be rewarding in itself. Note that the 1887 shilling (I believe based on guesstimated size from the image) looks to be a 1+b, tricky to find and would make someone a good gap filler. Can't really see enough of the other vickies to identify them.

1200dpi in scanner terms is very intense. I think my coin scans were about 300dpi to get a reasonable size and good quality... ensure they are output as jpg files.

Thank you @seuk this has been most informative! - If you'd be interested in my poor examples, please PM me your address and I'll pop them in the post.

Sad to hear it's a fantasy piece, but also good to know to watch out for them.

or liz@celticcoins.com - She'll be a good resource on it too. EDIT: I'm going to sit on the fence with the caveat: I think it should be properly appraised by a professional. If the internet cannot provide a similar example, it's either a contemporary forgery or real. It looks struck, not cast and that would entail quite a lot of work in order to produce a fake which would not have any intrinsic or implied value without any solid provenance. It is not impossible for it to be a new discovery. Good luck.

With closer 8's - they appear slightly wider around the H.

I said to Pete that I thought there should be evidence of the H as the bottoms of the 8's are visible, and using rarestpennies images I mocked up where the H should be - there are no remnants which would normally be visible, so its either altered very carefully or it wasn't an H to start with. The gap between 8's does look too narrow too. Edit: mock-up isnt exactly to scale but is a good representation.

And there was me having a very similar chat with Peter yesterday. The wrong obverse according to the "law" but absolutely no sign of an H ever existing.

Most of the stuff I buy seems to look like that

Even thicker, I have an 1819 in this box too!

This one definitely looks brass with a silver wash, given its state I decided a clean wasn't going to harm its value too much!

Certainly.

To be fair, the chaos doesn't ever seem to subside. Sometimes you need to part ways with it for a while to regain the will to try and overcome it.

Its so scabby I weighed it. Its only a little bit light 5g exactly. Fake 100% but I think contemporary rather than modern as it came from a neighbours fathers estate a few years ago.

Good day, hive mind. Is there an example anyone can point me to for reference of the said variety? I have one I would call "similar" but it would appear as it is quite abraded more potentially to be a H over Horizontal N. I have considered and referred to as many abraded 1820 shilling coins as I can find on the likes of Ebay, past and present and all of them show clear spacing between the bars of the H, even when almost flat, so I believe this one is different. I would appreciate any thoughts on this.

Update - Denver Mint type 1, lovely and lustrous. Not my cup of tea, but I'm sure it'll find a new home on Ebay soon. Being a Denver mint, it should be copper cored clad. I don't see any evidence of the copper line I see referenced, but Silver / Silver clad should be mintmark S from what I've read. I could be wrong. Only another couple of thousand coins to look through!

I've had this rolling around the bottom of a box for ... a few years. I was today old when I realised it might not be completely crap. Thoughts please!

Thanks, much appreciated!

One is ON the truncation (Rare), the other is UNDER the truncation (Common)

7 Million for 3rd (Veiled) portrait, 1300 for 2nd (Jubilee head) portrait.

Hi Chris, I'm just back catching up and this topic has piqued my interest - can you elaborate on the "rare 1887 6d" please? PS - Hi everyone else!

Thanks Stu, much appreciated! :)