Shield nickel

[nyiangelo]

Well the back looks like an error to me. The front however I have no clue. It's strange how if another coin was hammered over it then there should be something on the shield. But there isn't just around the edge. Only coin in hole. thanks.

 

[rockdude]

Looks like a re-punched denomination error to me. The obverse if the numbers are incuse looks like a hammer or vise was used with another coin against it leaving the impression in your coin.

 

[DaChief]

That is clearly an error. I would have it accessed by an coin expert. It may already be mentioned in some literature on errors. Most have been discovered and written about so I would assume this is not the only one like it. It is still most likely a rare error though. I would think it would be worth well more than one of the same year without this error.

DaChief

 

[BuckleBoy]

It looks like someone put an 1863 IH over top of the nickel and hit it hard with a hammer (which oddly enough didn't spread the metal--unless the nickel is larger than a regular shield nickel...). Then they used the same coin at a different angle to create the date which you have listed as "1823." (Both images are backwards images of the 1863 date from a cent, and the correct placement of the word "UNITED" in the legend from an IH cent.)

The back of the coin has me perplexed, since there is a second "5." Is this second top of the number "5" raised, or is it inset into the coin's surface?

It reminds me of Don's "3 in 1" copper:

http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,151352.0.html


-Buckles

 

[Bigcypresshunter]

I looked in my old known error book and didnt find it.

 

[texan connection]

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=52065


This is a Link to a coin forum nyiangelo gave me permission to post it on.

I belive I would send this one in myself, even if a counterfiet it could be a good one. I belive the one side was tampered with, but the other side seems to be a legite error.