Paddy

... and it turns out the lines were some kind of glue/varnish residue. Same coin after an acetone bath:

OK - thanks, no problem!

The other pick up today was this 1874 Penny. I think it is 8+G making it F77, but feel free to correct me if I am wrong. The lines in the fields, particularly on the reverse, are confusing. My original thought was die-clash, but I can' make out which parts of the design they could represent. The coin is currently taking an Acetone bath to make sure it is not some glue residue!

I think the 1927 florin (and also threepence?) are a target as these dates are not available in circulation coinage. For the date-run collectors they are appealing once the usual dates have been acquired. The 1927 proof Half crown would be far less appealing as the date can be ticked off with a circulation issue, even though the design is totally different.

I am here to eat humble pie! Having considered this coin for a while I finally got round to doing some direct comparison work, and have to conclude the doubters were right and it is not a recessed ear. Here is a comparison picture: On the left is my "normal" 1915. In the centre is my existing 1915 "recessed ear" complete with the indicative broken tooth. On the right is the one I hoped was a better "recessed ear", but side by side it clearly isn't. I had put too much faith in the depth of the trench to the left of the ear, whereas the fineness of the top of the ear and the absence of the rib in the centre of the ear seem to be better indicators when the broken tooth is absent.

Yes, I would go with repro too. The over-detailed eyebrows and moustache just don't seem to occur on genuine coins, even proofs.

Sadly passed in 2002: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Unwin_(comedian)

ESC mentions a variety with no stop after HIB, but not one with ne stops at all on the reverse.

Seems fine this morning. Thanks for your efforts @Chris Perkins

I guess we are under attack again as everything very slow...

I would say the second is definitely 1859. Here is a snip of mine for comparison. It is a common confusion - we often see either mis-labelled on Ebay and even on proper auctions.

Yes, that one is definitely a Star stop.

As far as I can see from my old copies of Krause, all the centrally issued coinage in the name of Canada has been decimal. The earliest seem to be around 1858, although the Dominion coinage starts in 1870. There were some halfpenny and penny token issues in some of the provinces during the 19th century and even some in the denomination of "sou" derived from the French.

First and third are definitely cinquefoil. I can't make out what is going on with the middle image. Coins of England (the Spink book previously) has a good image of both stops - page 511 in my 2024 edition. Note also that for a long time a star stops version of 1845 was listed, but this has now been debunked and it is not listed in the more recent books. Star stops only occur on 1844 Crowns.

I am confident enough that it is a recessed ear, and that is good enough as it is going into my own collection. @Martinminerva also expressed the opinion that it was right in a previous post in this topic. I already have an example with the broken tooth in only slightly worse condition, so I will keep both to cover my bases. Neither will be sold until I pop my clogs, by which time I won't care anyway!

I now have the coin in my possession. Seems pretty nice condition for one of these, despite the odd mark in front of the King's nose:

I thought there was something in the law that said coins remained the property of the Crown, at least until demonetised?

I wonder if it may be Father Andrew Alexander's collection? I made contact with my old school. Father Andrew's collection was passed to his brother on his death. I asked if they could pass on my contact details to the brother, but I have heard nothing since.

That looks a really good shout @jelida

Welcome @Halfcrowned I would love to give a definitive answer, but the books are very sparce on dimensions for the 18th century coins. There is always some variation in size, but 34.5mm does seem big. My 1745 halfcrown is almost exactly 33mm. By the way, this thread appears in "Decimal Coins", which may make it more unlikely that the specialists in this area will see it. Maybe @Chris Perkins can move it to a more suitable section?

That one is more worn, but doesn't look the same. On the one I posted before the trench is more noticeable down the left side and around the lobe.

For me it is the "trench" around the ear that struck me. The actual design of the ear is unchanged, but as the name suggests, it is recessed into a hollow. I am very poor at identifying all these varieties. Even "colon to gap" and "colon to tooth" often leaves me puzzling which I am looking at!

I agree - I find these very difficult to sport generally. I was fortunate this time that the next image was a 1916 in similar condition and the difference in the ears stood out, even to me! Here is the 1916:

This 1915 Penny looks very much to be a recessed ear variety, but seems to lack the broken tooth. Any thoughts? (Screenshot from online so no sharper image possible.)

Welcome @Jackbillfred! Not really an error - restruck date numerals I suspect. T prolong l=the life of the dies some details were re-punched as they became worn down. As discussed elsewhere, this was very common in the Victorian pennies. Probably of passing interest to a collector but not a "variety" as such.