Fake 8 Reales 1813 Silver Sud ? (Or Not ...)

I realize this thread is many years old but it is the only one I have found.

I have a silver 1813 Eight-Reale that I have had for about 40 years.

It looks very similar to the coin that colonialjohn posted several years back.

As I am a new user, I am not allowed to email colonialjohn so I will post my pictures here and wonder if I can stir up the debate about its authenticity.







Any help or advice on how to go about appraising this coin would be greatly appreciated.

Here we are again three years later ... say you cut one in half and even from the central core to the edge you perform SEVERAL core to edge microstructure & metal alloy analyses to possibly see how this cast silver was created ... HOWEVER - what is your standard. I own two in PCGS slabs. I will admit ... these are beyond me ... since no one has EVER said here is your standard legitimate example as a starting point.
Consider for example the U.S. Colonial New Hampshire Copper with no records confirming a Mint was ever established but a cast was made and was in the 19thC John Work Garett Collection. Consider also those Texas Jollas. So based on Realeswatcher we could (if possible) trace one back to a 19thC Collection and then use that as a standard to judge all others. Interestingly although probably impossible when silver is rememlted lead is lost in the process but we have no way to know what are some good starting point lead levels. Possibly with time ... its been written that almost all production processes leave a signature microstructure (i.e., how the metals in a alloy shape themselves around each other) may be a possible signature method. Also lead isotopic analysis has shown to be somewhat effective to be used to isolate this analysis to signature ore samples.
In short - this confirmation is probably a generation away from us at this time and these cast silver issues. XRF analysis by itself will tell you nothing ... other than if modern metals appear in the assay. You could always argue real 8 Reales were used in the casting molds.Its here when the lead levels drop BUT what were the values originally. We need more tools like Lead Isotopic Analysis, Microstructure Microgrpahs and a good number of legitimate 19thC? examples from confirmed pedigrees.

BTW - no one has proven to me that the New Hampshire Colonial from JWG or the Texas Jollas are real.

John The silver issues of Morelos first off must have a high gold trace. The raw silver would carry the same or higher gold level than any silver refined in a producing mint at that time. Parting of gold from silver was possible on a macro-scale, but was just not good enough to remove all of the gold leaving at bare minimum the 0.2% trace marker in the mint issues. Laboratory conditions could do better than that but were too costly for industrial scale production. It cost more to remove the last of the gold than the gold was worth. So there simply must be gold present.

Lead presence in these casts would indicate the presence in the melt of silver not native to Mexico (or at least not being refined in 1813). Argentiferous lead was not being refined at that time (at least no record exists that I can find) and an entirely different system of refining would be needed. Lead in silver is very normal for European or English silver but not for Mexican. Lead could also indicate the silver was melted in old crucibles used for lead - perhaps lead shot. So I think lead as a marker is unreliable for the period as proof of originality.

Regarding the "molds" themselves what really bothers me about the majority of castings including the one I got from the collection of V. Hancock are the raised fields. Why would the same issuing authority (Morelos) make copper SUDs by striking with crude dies made more or less correctly and then turn to casting silver with what are in reality childish molds that seem to misunderstand how most coins are produced?

Since I was a child these silver issues were treated as very early fantasy issues - like contemporary counterfeits but which were not made to circulate but were made to commemorate Morelos and the War for Independence. These coins could very well have been made as early as the 1820s. There is one example listed in Riddell's book indicating that they were known in the US before 1845. The Riddell example # 31 appears to have lowered fields because Riddell's tintype copy made by casting does not show fields that are as high as the design tops. It also needs to be noted that the Morelos coin Riddell had was from the U.S. mint cabinet not found in circulation in New Orleans. The coin itself contained 880 fine silver.

The distinction between genuine silver coins issued by Morleos which were likely presentation copies rather than circulating coins and very early unauthorized copies made by followers of Morelos may never be able to be resolved because the metals available were likely identical.

I think in this case it would be far better to study die making techniques for the US mint example and comparing that as standard with the others that have claims to being early via pedigree.

I agree that the subject will not be finally settled for years. In fact it may never be resolved.

Will read through this more thoroughly later, but I still think the key to these is to study the lesser denominations...

gymmeebee Pure silver would definitely be odd. How was the test done 30 years ago that resulted in the conclusion of pure silver? The acid on a scratch method is the only one commonly performed back then. Typically the etst was for coin or sterling levels not 999 fine silver.

I bet he was actually indicating that you had coin silver rather than pure silver.

A handheld XRF test would tell you to 1/10th of one percent what it contained.

swamperbob : there are (supposedly) two types of Morellos silver - a cast type (with the design above), and a struck type.

The one you posted is similar to the struck type, but doesn't match the design (it looks more like a mix of the design used on cast copper issues - didn't checked if it was matching).
Here is the proper struck design :
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2106245
http://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=2407594

To me, you posted a numismatic forgery .