Oldhoopster

On many of these Spanish coins, there is a "series" date (1947 in this case) and a minted date. The minted date is located on the 2 stars on either side of UNA on the reverse. 19 is on the lower star and 51 is on the upper star. Later series such as 1957 only use one star with the last 2 digits of the date. I think this holds try for all of the minor denominations, but haven't looked them up for confirmation.

It's a clashed die. As @Mohawk posted, you're seeIng the eagle's head and scroll, since it was struck with a coin alignment

Can't give you a value, but there are a few rim bruises that will reduce the value and need to be considered

The Penny Lady isn't an error/variety specialist. The 2 dealer names that I've seen most often over the last 5-10 years are Mike Byers (I believe he is also associated with the Mint Error News), and Jon Sullivan. It was recently announced that Jon is going to take Fred's spot as the Primary error coin consultant/authenticator for PCGS. I'm not sure if NGC uses a consultant, or if it's all done in house. David Lange is a well respected researcher but I don't know if his expertise includes errors and varieties (FWIW, he may be very knowledgeable, but I'm not aware of it)

Re: slabbed cricket There is a backstory to the cricket and it was owned by Fred Weinberg. I'm not saying that justified the price, and I personally think it's ridiculous, but that may explain some of the bidding interest https://coinweek.com/auctions-news/greatcollections-offering-the-cricket-in-the-pcgs-sample-slab/

I agree with most of your points, particularly the "value" of minor errors. We need to keep pushing the education in a positive manner I wasn't aware this was a competition.

It must be nice to be the Self Proclaimed Arbitrator of Numismatic Collectability. I'll just stick with the old "collect what you like" philosophy. Members post on collecting topics that I find ridiculous and a waste of time and money, but who am I to tell them that I think they're wrong. They are passionate about their interests and share information. I don't see that as a reason for being condescending.

So what I hear you saying is that because YOU have no interest in this area of numismatics, it's ok to make make condescending comments about the topic. Correct? While your certainly entitled to your opinion, were your comments really necessary? Were the error collectors making fun of what you collect? Were they trying to convert you into becoming an error specialist? Why didn't you just say something like I didn’t get the appeal then, and I never have like you did in your last post? That would have worked without insulting other collectors.

Why would you call error collecting a fetish?

Debris (grease) filled die. Nice find

True doubled dies have specific characteristics. You can find them here https://www.doubleddie.com/58222.html There are also many, many coins with mechanical doubling or die deterioration, that are NOT true doubling, are not considered errors, and add no premium. https://www.doubleddie.com/144801.html Learning the differences will save you a lot of time and frustration, since you'll likely come across dozens and dozens (or more) of the worthless doubling before you find anything that was struck with a die that was doubled. It takes time to learn this stuff, but there are no shortcuts that I know. Another good site http://varietyvista.com/

I think @Conder101aand others are correct. It was struck by worn dies. I also think there is a PMD element. To me, it looks like their are numerous light contact marks that are contributing to the mushy appearance. what caused the contact marks - I don't know. Maybe tumbling, maybe bead blasting, maybe something else. And maybe I'm wrong. Trying to pinpoint the cause of PMD can be challenging. It just looks like there is more going on than a worn die, IMO. Regardless, there is nothing that would be considered an error, so it really doesn't matter if my thoughts add anything to the discussion.

I will give your feedback all the consideration it deserves

Yinz guys got a nice accent. Sounds like a cat running through some jagger bushes. Go Stillers.

The weight tolerance is 3.11 grams +/- 0.13 gms. Your coin falls in the normal weight range. Color is not an accurate way to evaluate the composition of a coin. Copper is an active metal and can react with a lot of things in the environment. Your coin is a common wheat cent, worth 2-3 cents.

I was hoping the OP would respond in order to provide a little credibility to the story. Even though the the story sounds fabricated, I didn't want to call them out immediately. Sometimes strange things do happen. However, since there has been no follow up, I feel that the original post is a fake.

Having spent a lot of time in Quality Assurance labs working with incoming materials, I strongly believe they are destructive test samples from incoming lots, as @RWBhas said. Usually these are discarded/scrapped per company procedures. It's not surprising you didn't get anything from the mint because there is a good chance they weren't supposed to be removed. I feel you have what you claim, it just may be hard to get the documentation to confirm it.

I just pulled a pic off wild winds after a quick look. There might be a better match in the "other type" section. You might actually be able to get the mint. Third letter in the exergue may be an H or N for Heraclea or Nicomedia. See if you can find a match on wildwinds. It will be good practice and then one of us can confirm it for you

VRBS ROMA City commemorative. They are from the Constantinian period. Here is the wolf and twins type (I don't think this is yours). There are different reverse types but your coin is shot, so it will be be a huge challenge to ID the type, yet alone the mint. Use the wild winds link below if you want to give it a try. Worst case is that you look at a lot of coins and get a better feel for the VRBS ROMA series. Maybe try the GLORIA EXERCITVS reverse types http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/city_commemoratives/t.html

You can never have too many books Not sure if I've posted this here before, but here is my library. US shelf - A couple Redbooks on the left middle shelf. Got rid of the others because there was no room for them. Bottom shelf has what I consider important auction catalogs. Left about 2x that number at a coin club before a move Ancient, medieval, and world bookshelf

Redbooks are collectable, but like coins, condition and rarity are everything. 20 years ago, I had about about 25 diff editions The older ones were cheap book store, thrift store, and coin club buys, while purchased the 80s and 90s new. They were taking up to much shelf space so I sold most on eBay. Did ok, but that was a while ago. I still kept a few, including my Uncle's 1965 edition that gave me when I started as a young kid in the early 70s and the 1974 edition I got as a Christmas present and read cover to cover countless times. If you enjoy reading and collecting the old editions, there's nothing wrong with buying them on the cheap. I'm still tempted when I see one at the local library book sale

If I found this coin, I would do some research to find some sold prices for similar examples. My GUESS (notice the emphasis on guess) is that it may be $25-35 error. If the research confirmed that, I would send it to ANACS for cost effective authentication (you may need to send in a few coins to take advantage of their specials) If it has a higher market value, then I would consider NGC. I would also hope that it would be labeled "struck through die cap" or "partial indent" (or whatever they determine) instead of the generic "strike through". I think that would add some value. However, it's pretty easy for error dealers or collectors to see that this is a legit error, even without the slab. I think just putting it in a 2x2 would also be a good option. IMO, this comes down to your personal preference if it's not a high value coin. Hope my slightly vague and fuzzy explanation helps

They look completely different than circulating coinage. Which normal coins in the change were these substituted?

Plating blister Edit to add: Notice the "soft and rounded" shape. Looks like an elongated bubble. Die gouges usually (but not always) have sharp, distinct edges. Not a perfect description, but it may help. Since blisters are a defect related to the planchet plating process, they can be found anywhere on the coin. They may be easier to notice on the flat fields rather than the devices, so maybe that's why you haven't seen them in that location before.

I think it would be best to stick to numismatic related posts