Sylvester

Well it'd be a very unusual mint error and i've never come across one of these dated like that before. Are you certain it says 1898 (and not say 1888?). The only way i could tell you if you've got an error or a fake would be to see a picture. Sometimes fakes are very good though. Sovereigns and half sovereigns have been some of the most faked coins in the World, alot came from the Middle East in the middle of the last century. Many are made in gold of the correct fineness and weight, the collector's premium often made it profitable to actually make them full weight using real gold. So even as a fake it might still have bullion value but no collector value. But as i say a photo would be needed.

Fake more than likely.

Not real gold eagles anyhow, only that bullion rubbish!

Letter at 3 o'clock looks like a C, i can't see any D knocking around so it might be HENRIC, (rather than RICARD). I can't narrow it any further than that though.

Sounds like a fake to me. There's alot of fake £1 coins around.

Not really my area either, this is a new one on me. I only collect Romans haphazardly.

I'll confess that i couldn't tell the different between a UNC Circ. and a Maundy.

York would be the place to go.

Ah but you don't come across much quality Anglo-Saxon or Norman stuff on Ebay. Ed Confess & Æth Unready excluded of course.

I've long said that Ebay's rubbish for hammered coins.

What the guy that lived in the big house with the golden chandilibres balanced over the curleywurly stail all the way upto the ceiley? Matriblo interpre?

Now that's what i call a Maundy set!

It's even worse if you bring scrabble, tiddly winks and dice in on it as well.

I love those Long-Cross pennies! Edward I 'New Coinage' (1279-c.1335) being my favourite. Florin coinage and after they start getting stupidly small.

Not bad condition at all actually, a little water worn perhaps and a bit ragged but it has been buried so that's not unexpected with these, put it this way there's alot worse out there, some are found folded in half or in quarters and need to be straightened out (hence why some on the market are described as 'creased', i.e because they've been unfolded) Now i don't have my reference books with me, but a coin of this nature could fetch anything from say £600-£1000 or more depending upon 1) if it's real, 2) what type or class the coin is from. Rarer classes obviously command more. Edward III though is a rather complex series with many types. Half nobles are particularly scare though and tend to trade at prices closer to full nobles. If i were you i'd get it taken to a coin dealer and get their appraisal of it, it's one of those things you really have to see in the flesh and examine in hand to get an clue of it's authenticity or it's class/type.

If it's a real one then yeah it's worth something alright. If you can get better pictures so i can read the writing then i'll try and attribute it for you. What diameter is it? (Looks half nobley to me, but clipped nobles can look like that too).

Looks a bit like that one Lawrence Chard had.

I have a passing fondness for farthings also, it's a size thing.

American Dimes, Quarter Dollars, Half Dollars and Dollars issued upto and including 1964 are 90% silver. Coinage issued thereafter is what is known as 'Clad', basically copper and nickel layers bonded together in sheets, cut into coin blanks and then struck. They contain no silver at all. Except for the half dollars issued from 1965-1971 which were struck in copper/silver bonded layers, these contain 40% silver, after 1971 the silver was replaced by nickel. UK coinage, tiny silver threepences upto crowns issued up until 1919 were 92.5% silver, from 1920-1946 they were 50% silver, 1947 onwards they are a copper and nickel alloy. Most stuff issued after 1937 is pretty worthless unless in brand new condition (if it looks like a 2005 or 2006 penny from change then they might be worth anything upto £5 or £10 if you're lucky). If they're worn then there not worth a great deal monitarily, although they might be good to hang onto for sentimental value. There's not alot of money in post-1800 British coinage (unless they are in very high grade of preservation with no wear, no scratches and most importantly uncleaned).

Shill bidding.

Uniquely presented i'd say. But hey at least they told the truth.

That's a new one on me i have to say!

It's not my area either so i can't add upon what you've already said. If it had been a few centuries earlier then i could have been of assistance. The likely reason for the date being out of synch with the mintmark is either the use of the Julian calendar (as you have pointed out), or a new variety.

Oh she's blonde... On second thoughts you can have her.

That's a squirrel.