Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Sign in to follow this  
azda

1905 Halfcrown In hand pix

Recommended Posts

Having looked in detail at both sides, and at your side-by-sides, I can say that the fake - as a starter, before getting down to specifics - just doesn't "feel" right, mainly with respect to wear patterns and definition.

• the legend on the garter should be the FIRST place to wear, yet there is none whatever

• the rim doesn't look right, I can't say any more than that

• the legend and shield beading look absolutely unworn and yet the crown and fleur de lys look severely flattened

• the Scottish lion looks blurred, more than merely a worn die would

• on the obverse, the wear pattern to the beard compared to the totally unworn legend, just isn't right (those coins don't wear that way)

• essentially, the coin is a patchwork of absolutely unworn features, compared with other features which are flattening more than a little

I suppose it's easy with hindsight - would I be able to tell if you hadn't told us it was a fake? I'm not sure. I can tell you this - on close inspection and comparison it doesn't look or feel right. But at a glance it would certainly pass muster.

I completely agree Peckris. The 'something not right' feeling for me, anyway, is the almost complete lack of marking or texture in the fields, compared to the obvious wear in the design. Presumably, in creating a die from an original coin the design wear would be replicated in a lack of die detail whereas tiny bag or handling marks in the fields would be flattened out. Nevertheless, it's much easier to spot these things with hindsight!

I beleive they were artificiely worn by rubbing across a piece of leather. I tend to wear the high areas leaving the low areas pristene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-462-077915500 1300639978_thumb.jpg

The signature and the colon after GRA are different, your signature seems to be nearly on the neck whereas mine is lower

I think the difference between the A of GRA and the colon dot is that your coin has lost the tip of the serif making the gap appear wider. What we need is someone in the know to come along and point out the differences. I do hope your coin turns out to be genuine all the same.

I think the serif Gary is minimal in relation to how near your colon is to the A, even if the serif on mine was there it still would seem further. What about the signature? Yours seems higher, nearer the bust compared to mine. This is a good and useful thread for anyone considering buying a 1905 HC

Edited by azda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had confirmation from chris that the coin is genuine happy bloody days :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×