1776 And 1787 8 Reales Genuine Or Not?

jfransh - Thanks for the encouragement. I am working on a date set of portrait 8 reales. I decided that restricting myself to one mint would narrow my options and lengthen the time it would take to build the set. The historical periods during which the coins that I collect circulated is of such interest to me that in the beginning of the binders in which I display my collections I have at least one historical note for each year minted. In the case of my Spanish colonial collection it also includes a photocopy of a painting of each monarch along with an abbreviated life history. History gives the coins a context and makes them seem just a little bit alive. That's why I'm not a real fan of the plastic slab. Oh, I get the attraction and I do see some benefits, but to me it just removes the coin one step further from the collector. And... many of us want to see the edges of our coins.

As for the two coins I originally posted about, one of my questions concerns their numismatic market value. I'm not sure how to approach valuation in order to determine whether or not I paid too much. If they are genuine then I would assume that the World Coins catalog and others would be the pertinent reference. However if they turn out to be Class 2 counterfeits I would have no idea. Can you help on this one?

My source for these coins is in possession of many more 8 reales. He purchased a collection years ago an is now in the process of selling them off one by one. He has sent me high quality pics (no edge pics though) for the higher grade pieces and it looks to me that some of his other Charles III and IIII are similar to the two we've been talking about. I picked these two dates because they appeared mark free. However upon examination they do have hairlines from being rubbed with a cloth. Others he has are of the same grade as mine but with unusual distracting marks or weakness in the strike. Even his pillar pieces seem to be a bit unusual. I would have bought his 1739 with an XF obv. but turn it over and...well you get the idea. I suppose I could post some of the more interesting pics if there is any interest.

Swamperbob - A few posts north of here you will find my post for the other side of the 1787 edge showing the ATIA area. When you have time let me know what you think. I'm really enjoying the current conversation about residual gold. I was amazed to hear that there is so much information available about mines from that time period.

RockyRoad I tried to open the link for the edge at ATIA but it links me to an add for Google every time.

Regarding the prices. In my opinion the prices for Class 2 coins (in average to low grades - EF down) are effectively the prices seen in the major price guides. That is because the standard guides reflect total numbers of coins available on the matket. So until the relative rarity level between the two types is established there will or should be no change in prices of average grades whatsoever. If they are found in a 50-50 ratio ultimately little would change. If either type is relatively rare the price for that type should run higher but I personally do not expect that to be the case.

High grade coins of the type referred to by jfransch would likely be the ones most seriously effected by the label of counterfeit. That is precisely where I expect the pressure against my theory to come from. I would predict that the genuine coins would rise dramatically in price (driven by non-collecting investor interest) while a commensurate loss in value would be experienced by the coins that prove to be counterfeits made before 1930.

Regarding the collection you have the opportunity to buy into. The provenance of the coins is very critical when you buy. The Class 2 coins were made for the China trade so any coin that traces historically back to or through China or the far east could fall into that category and be treated with some suspicion. However, a hoard find in Mexico is far less likely to have been contaminated with Class 2 coins. Class 2 coins have no financial reason to be in Mexico. The Class 2 coins were made largely after the 8R was demonetized and not used in Mexico - they theoretically should have stayed in China until after 1940 and probably until after they became collectables in the 1950s or until after the dramatic rise of world silver prices in 1978 - 1981. When and where the owner got his coins is likely to be VERY critical. Mexican sources would be significantly safer than dealers known to have been importing coins from China (like the guy I worked for in Boston).

Finally you say:




The information about the mines comes from borings and tests that were recently made to trace the silver and gold deposits for possibly re-opening the veins for extraction. These come mostly to try to convince investors to invest in the mines. There are 226 corporate entities that are involved with Mexican mines. There are thousands of reports regarding these borings and tests that can be found on-line. If you correlate the bore sites with the locations of the old mines and their periods of operation you can effectively determine the nature of the deposits that were worked historically.

The mines worked historically in the Guanajuato area in general are hard rock intrusive vein deposits of silver and gold that were hydrolologically deposited from superheated liquid carrying gold, silver other metals in a solution of SiO4 siliconâ€"oxygen tetrahedral (quartz). The cause was intrusive magma which heated the crustal rocks allowing the trapped gold and silver to be leached upward through a myriad of small fissures (cracks) in the bed rock. When the liquid cooled and crystalized free gold and silver were crystalized along with the quartz. This type of deposit can be worked mechanically (by grinding to a dust level) and the gold and silver can them be removed with mercury in a simple process of amalgamation.

The result of this type of deposit is both silver and gold that are NOT combined with other elements - hence easily extracted. This is quite unlike other forms of silver deposits (like silver chlorides) which require chemical reduction not practical in the late 18th and early 19th century in Mexico.

So it is the composition of the Mexican Mother Lode (Veta Madre) which makes gold an essential part of the silver production. It is how the western Sierra Madre range was formed that resulted in these massive discoveries of easily extracted silver and gold.

I have now read in detail perhaps three dozen mining reports for the major historic mine areas. They all have in common the identical rock formations. Located in the vicinity of a porphoritic-skarn boundary they are all characteristic of hardrock quartz deposits and both fire assay and XRF results place the general gold content at 1/2 percent of the silver content. There are no bore holes that show No gold except those that also show NO silver.

I tried escape and there is no "No thanks" option on what I see when the Google page pops up.

.

Swamper,
I emailed you a copy of the picture that I saved off RockyRoads upload to Google.

Great thread!

First of all you are correct when you say that adjustment for weight was made BEFORE the strike and it was done across one face of the blank.

Adjustment marks often show clearly on older coins after they are struck. The strike pressure generated by the older open sided manual screw presses was not as high as modern presses and the pressure could not close many of the deeper marks.

Part of this was due to the relatively crude lamination apparatus used to create the coinage strips. The final weight of the cut blanks was often quite bad requiring significant silver removal.

I would really like to see pictures of what you are talking about. If they are really post strike they are damage - adjustment marks do not have the same effect on value as a collectable coin.