Madkev

The size and weight would tell you whether it was gold or even a simple trip to the man on the market who buys gold would of done this FOC with his potions. I believe with out being slabbed it would of generated more on Ebay as a raw coin. Yes - if you review the thread I new it was gold before sending it to CGS. The reason for sending it to CGS was that there was much sceptisism on this Forum that it was a fake! Kevin So now it's been established as authentic, although field damaged, - any thoughts on value? Kevin

The size and weight would tell you whether it was gold or even a simple trip to the man on the market who buys gold would of done this FOC with his potions. I believe with out being slabbed it would of generated more on Ebay as a raw coin. Yes - if you review the thread I new it was gold before sending it to CGS. The reason for sending it to CGS was that there was much sceptisism on this Forum that it was a fake! Kevin

Well the coin has just arrived back from CGS and it's been encapsulated which I understand means that they believe it to be authentic. The details of the label are as follows: Great Britain Guinea 1722 4B.HI err. Field Damage F CGS variety 04 25226 - 1G.G1.1722.04 So it's authentic but is classed as Field Damage - so CGS will not give a value. But it's pure gold and not a forgery - well chuffed and worth the £30 charge for peace of mind.

Thanks for that. Package on it's way - recorded and insurred - fingers crossed for a positive result. Kevin

Platinum has a very high melting point, and was not a common metal in the early 18th Century perhaps putting it out of the counterfeiters' reach. Its also much harder than gold which has made it recognized as a difficult metal to coin. Its an intriguing puzzle - the coin is the right diameter and about the right weight, given its apparent state of preservation loss of 0.1g from the anticipated range of 8.3 to 8.4g is not unexpected if the coin was indeed genuine. Its colour is not unlike some shipwreck gold, but if the coin has been in the family for a long time - which shipwreck might it have come from that didn't require modern techniques to recover it. If the coin is genuine, perhaps submersion in seawater could be responsible for the loss of much detail. But I don't think that's the answer. Given its dimensions and weight, that suggests that it is at least gold. I would think any pawnshop could verify whether or not it is gold and what carat fineness - should be just less that 22k (and recheck the weight). The rim is wrong, not bearing milling, but could be like this due to having been filed down for its miniscule amount of gold. The top right sceptre is interesting in that it is clearly broken in the middle. Seems an odd detail for a counterfeiter to bother with. Also, interestingly, there seems to be something going on under the U of DUX. Again, why would a counterfeiter bother? And yet the general presentation of the coin, with its clumsy detailing and textured looking fields gives the overwhelming impression of being a low quality copy. If you are going to get a reputed coin dealer to have a look at it, I'd suggest a personal visit rather than sending the coin through the post. Interesting - please do let us know how you get on with verifying the coin. Hi just thought I'd give you an update.I took the coin into a dealer in Manchester, he took the coin in it's bag and felt the weight in his hand and declared it was the wrong weight and not gold. Now I may sometimes not look the brightest but he was actually claiming that he could tell the coin isn't the correct weight when it's only 0.1 of a gramme light!! So off to another Manchester dealer who was excellent - he could not help with authentication of the coin but he did a 'touchstone' test and delared the coin to be pure gold. I now believe I may have a rare coin that is a 'good un'. I've since contacted a chap who used to work for the Royal Mint and advertises on the net as doing authentications - unfortunately he's not doing them at the moment, Any ideas where I should go? Regards Kevin

I did see a Edward VII gold two pounds that had been worn as a jewellery item, it's edges were very much erroded and rounded. It did have obvious mount-marks however. For the edge of this coin to be rounded, it couldn't have been protected by a ring mount. You absolutely can't write it off, it could have spent some time in a sandy/beach environment, anything's possible, the weight's in your favour. I think, as peckris said, that it needs an in-hand appraisal unfortunately. What we need is a good die-study of all those coins with known fakes haunting them. Where 'modern' milled is concerned, we are back to the provenance thing again. If I was ever to buy a Gothic Crown again, it would have to come with some substantial paperwork and/or catalogue history that predates these arses who are bombarding us with all this tat! Thanks for all the feedback. I think that I would like to get an in hand appraisal. I live in macclesfield, but spend alot of time in Scunthorpe and Newark-on-Trent. Can anyone suggest a reputable place I can get the in hand evaluation? Regards

In the first post I described the edge as milled which I thought was the pattern on the perimeter of the faces.Following your comments I now realise that it is the actual face of the edge of the coin - this appears fairly smooth apart from what looks like general knocks and knicks. The thickness is 1.1mm in the centre and 1mm at the edge. I believe it's starting to look like something that has been in the family for many years is not what it seems?!! Regards How many years, if you don't mind me asking? I only ask because the Chinese fakes are comparatively recent, but there was a great spate of Middle East fakes of gold coins in the 1970s. If it goes back a long way, it is less likely (though far from impossible) to be a fake. However it could be a counterfeit which would make it of historic interest, and of course the gold value is not to be ignored. I don't mind you asking at all. The coin was found in the possesions of my grandmother who was born in 1900. I don't know when she aquired this or if the coin had been in the family prior to this, as the house she lived in had been in the family for a previous generation.

In the first post I described the edge as milled which I thought was the pattern on the perimeter of the faces.Following your comments I now realise that it is the actual face of the edge of the coin - this appears fairly smooth apart from what looks like general knocks and knicks. The thickness is 1.1mm in the centre and 1mm at the edge. I believe it's starting to look like something that has been in the family for many years is not what it seems?!! Regards

Hi Now have an accurate weight: 8.2 gms Regards

Hi again, I hope these images are more satisfactory (used photobucket). Will get an accurate weight from a jewellers thurs.Regards

Away from home for a few days but when I get back I will try and get better pics and the edge details plus a more accurate weight. Thanks for the response Regards

Hi Thanks for the reply. I'm new to using forums so hopefully the images are ok Regards Kevin

Hi I have a coin in my possession which appears to be a George I (1722) Guinea. The colour appears to be gold, it weighs 8grm, is approx 25mm dia and has a milled edge. The reverse is as per images and info I have found in research. However all the research I have done would indicate that the face should have the following letters: GEORGIVSDGMBRFRETHIBREXFD My coin has no second B so reads GEORGIVSDGMBRFRETHIREXFD Any help in identification please