Peckris 2

What is, and is not, a variety is something of a 'grey area'. Decades ago, 1961 halfcrowns without the engraver initials EF on the reverse were considered to be a variety. However as soon as it became clear that it was the result of a filled die, it disappeared from the list of varieties overnight. Only very rarely are such things classed as varieties, the exceptions being things like the 1946 ONE' penny. They are accidents of the minting process rather than design changes and therefore only collected by a small group of people.

I have an iPhone 15 Pro Max and it's now my main camera.

Were they the band that had a big hit with Carabao D'Amour?

It looks to me like a repunched R (not extreme). The underlying letter looks offset to the left and a bit lower, and I can certainly see the traces of the right leg of the R

Topless unless my eyes deceive me!

"Your coin will be carefully packaged in protective materials". WHY???

That size would make it a shilling. The one that's dated 1711 is the "no E" type (E is for Edinburgh where many of the post-Union - England and Scotland - coins were minted, and the E would be below the bust). The other shilling we can't see the date of, but it's a "plain angles" type - i.e. there is just blank space between the shields of the royal arms; the alternative would be roses or plumes between them.

I suppose we'll have to arrive at the identity of whoever it is/was by a process of elimination. Could you give us a teeny weeny clue - a long term member or more recent? (Ah, no need. I've seen another 'Guest' post where it was edited before the member left...)

It's a very specialised area - I would guess that the vast majority of collectors aren’t especially interested, or see them negatively as a defect?

No!

It's a bit confusing as the so-called 'single line' actually isn't - it's double but the lines are so close together it appears single, unless you view it through a magnifier

Freeman estimated they were about 1 in 20 - i.e. 5% - based on his enormous survey of circulating coins in the 60s. Good luck with getting a high grade - I bought one from Colin Cooke in the 90s, he told me then that top grades of it are rare.

Just to add a bit more: the first few years of the changeover to bronze saw a helluva lot of repunching of date digits and legend letters. Bronze is a harder metal than copper, and the coins were thinner in size, so dies got worn relatively quickly. As well as that, the Mint is reported to have experienced a lot of problems caused by the change of metal, which the huge number of varieties (major, minor, and micro) in the first few years can attest to.

I'd say those are more than reasonable!

Yes, most certainly a worn die. And a truly shocking price which would be way too high even for a good strike UNC example. Here's a much better example at a reasonable price: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/157378763239?var=0&mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=710-53481-19255-0&campid=5338946167&toolid=20006&loc=&customid=4581527531114051_710033490_o.9beeaa501cf11ef92efac014f4958c05&msclkid=9beeaa501cf11ef92efac014f4958c05