1652 New England 3 Pence?

If the holder is legitimate to this piece in question, I don't know if that's likely:

A) Dedicated numismatic replicas of this type are a bit later than 1798... 1820 would be about as early as that happens (most are mid-1800s on)

B) You're talking about coinage (meaning English/Irish royal) that was a lot better catalogued/more familiar than any obscure American colonial pieces.

Who even HAD this type of coin to have the notion to replicate it? And where are others if someone went to the effort of fabricating a replica punch?

I have other thoughts I want to gather more before posting... but quickly:

-- You should contact Stack's, as was suggested. I know Heritage is easier with their presence in the Netherlands (bought MPO and made their European arm) but my impression has always been that Stack's is much more thorough and involved with Colonial/post-Colonial numismatics and related collectibles.

-- Another thing you should consider is contacting the "C4" club/society... the main Colonial coinage collectors club. Most people worth anything in Colonials are members. Their website is colonialcoins.org.

I agree that if the coin holder is original from that time and associated with this coin, it raises many questions if this coin were counterfeit.
- Indeed, if it were a forgery before 1800, the forger would have needed a real one as an example, after all, there were no exact examples or images to be found in any other way than that.
- In my opinion it was not at all interesting to counterfeit such a coin at the time and if it were done it would probably not be made in sterling silver like the original because really high collectible value had such a coin I still think not.
- If it were a counterfeit, you would expect that more of these copies would be known.
- Compared to the stamps of other sixpence coins and the one existing threepence coin, my stamp corresponds to the 100th millimeter in many points. It seems to me that at the time it was not possible to recreate something so accurately, even with a real coin as an example. Then you might have to cast it, but this is clearly not the case with this coin.

I have contacted Stack's and have yet to contact the c4 club and MA Historical Society.

I hope I still have pictures of the coin cabinet and the other coins and holders.
With a bit of luck they are still on my old laptop which unfortunately does not work anymore but it is probably still possible to fix it or maybe that the data can be taken off.
The other coin holders also had descriptions, I don't know if it was the same handwriting.

Do you have an instagram account? A specialist is going to want to examine it in hand , so you would have to be willing to send it to the US. Unfortunately during this time you every step forward is full of risk. If it were me. When this is all over plan a vacation and visit a coin show, seek out the specialist or bring it to the PCGS table directly.

I see that you've posted to C4. Let us know what they say over there.

I ran into this article this morning https://www.littletoncoin.com/webap...ixpence.html hope the link is allowed. I was intrigued by the final quote:

"Not shown here but worth noting: the most expensive collectable copies of the NE coinage are contemporary counterfeits made in the 1650s. A few do exist, and when sold today, they can bring tens of thousands of dollars at auction from knowledgeable collectors."

It does not say which "NE coinage" it refers to, and of course it would beg the question why bother making a contemporary counterfeit with the correct silver composition. These things were just silver slugs anyway. However, if yours is really a contemporary, it's still worth a lot. Also, if the circa-1850s fakes were taken from the plate in the 1839 book, there doesn't appear to be a three-pence, so if yours is one of these fakes, where did they get their design?

I've decided there's no connection to J.Q. Adams. In 1798 he was a famous son of a sitting president, ambassador to the Netherlands, and if it was his coin, it would say so on the holder and not "Quincy family". The "641." on the holder - this seems to be the collector's inventory number, which implies a fairly large collection. I wonder if that might help track down who acquired it circa 1798.

steviegetz
That looks like an Ashmore copy!

The Fanning article is interesting. "I have received the $8 for the N.E. Money, I send you the sixpence & twopence as you requested" - what is this two-pence? From the small sample of Wyatt's handwriting in the article, it does not appear to match the holder, but the quote from Colburn in Boston that "complete sets of this coinage poured into our city" again gives me the nagging thought that the holder might be elaborate subterfuge. Can't wait to see how this all turns out.

I bought a digital microscope and took some pictures of both stamps.
The quality is not great, but I still wonder what you think.
This is the 'NE' side.