Coin Community Family of Web Sites
Live Coin auctions starting as low as $1
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some coins?
Our coin forum is completely free! Register Now!

colonialjohn's Last 20 Posts

8 Reales Authentication Needed
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted Yesterday   8:05 pm
Its a contemporary circulating counterfeit probably during this period a Silver Sheffield type plate over a copper core and Pb added probably to bring it to 26.5 grams. JPL
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Contemporary Circulating Counterfeit Or Zacatecas Of 1811 Or 1812?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted Yesterday   7:38 pm
Need an ID on this a Zacatecas or more likely Durango and if genuine? No edge shots. Realeswatcher your opinion. See the reverse. Do early Zacatecas ever appear debased such as this reverse? I do not follow Durango 8's that closely.




Here is the original lot description: "Durango(?). Ferdinand VII "Royalist" 8 Reales ND About Fine, KM-Unl. 37.1mm. 27.43gm. Possibly an issue of Durango from the die style, though the portrait does not match any of the coins in Calico.
From the Maurice Storck Collection"
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Help With Identifying Coins Authenticity And Value Please (Id: 8 Reales, 1811, Zacatecas Mint Mark)
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/28/2023  3:44 pm
Looks genuine to me. Weights do vary but 7.X is acceptable for this regal weight window range for a 2 Reale. John Lorenzo, Numismatist
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives

Counterfeit Coins In Online Auction
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/24/2023  7:19 pm
Based on the fabric and coloration of these issues these appear to be Chinese counterfeits. Perhaps everyone here is already aware of this fact with the (sour?) grapes innuendo. In either case as I devoted a chapter in my book (Forgotten Coins of the North American Colonies) I did purposely spend ~$100 or so and XRF surface analyze these recent Chinese junk types - in most cases they were German silver (Cu/Zn/Ni) & Fe/Ni alloys. Rarely debased silver but occasionally we may see these but the weight is difficult to get approaching regal weight with debased silver as not enough Pb can be introduced in most cases to being it to regal and for the coin to look like real silver. Someone is out $500 on some cheap base metal modern replicas. PERIOD. John Lorenzo, Numismatist.
Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coins
 
Heritage Auctions Selling Contemporary Circulating Counterfeit 8 Reales
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/22/2023  09:18 am
HMMM ... as you know Bob Gurney's word was final and in 99.999% of the time he was correct. We never discussed this hidden contaminant or 1816 piece and only his high skill set and XRF analysis yielded its hand engraved status and German silver composition. In short this specimen appears to be an oddity. Bob was a purist and was very demanding in something being Class 1 (i.e., of the period since not everyone has read GNL) during the creation of GNL and rightfully so as this was his book having spent his entire life in this series and Cap and Rays CCCs. German silver as he indicated was manufactured consistently around the U.K. ~ 1835-1840 but was first introduced into the U.K. a decade earlier or more. This German silver or paktong as it was called was manufactured in China way long before this 1835-1840 period. We concluded any piece with German silver was post Class 1 due to its entrance into the U.K. from 1835-1840. Rather than get into some argument can a German silver GNL Class 1 exist by our definitions in GNL - NO. Can this be a period piece made in German silver - POSSIBLY from my viewpoint. Why bend the rules? For me I have more of an open mind - this hidden contaminant could be a false positive, the contaminant may be geologically ore related element or something else. German silver was always a grey area since German silver existed in the Far East for centuries and you can argue perhaps this piece was from a melted GS artifact. Kleebergs CCC2Rs most common metal alloy is GS and in this case I always keep an open mind that perhaps the series was not created so late (c. 1835-beyond) but possibly EARLIER due to the paktong Far East connection? So IMO the Bob Gurney Class 1 boundary may be QUESTIONABLE on this one - this is the first I read about this 1816 GS culprit but it makes sense how it slipped by A&C and Heritage as a period piece. Its a piece I would not mind owning. I am not the consignor <BG> but to me its not a slam dunk. As I type this from memory the first amazing thing I observed since I pretty much did every XRF analysis for the GNL book was the EXTREME SCARCITY of any specimens being GS. This then lead to the conclusion after analyzing several hundred different variety examples these GNL CCCs unlike Kleebergs were EARLY - OF THE PERIOD TIME WISE - and not later issues say strictly for U.S. and Canadian circulation like the Kleebergs if one can even use this argument - but its a good one. Warren Baker the Canadian numismatist believed these were Canadian Blacksmith linked and the British Museum does not have one at all in their inventory and ANS (NY) has around 90-100. In conclusion Realeswatcher and Robert Gurney leave this interesting hand-made GS alloy piece with this hidden contaminant alone - what did it ever do to you? <BG>. JPL

P.S. It seems people just bid ~$1000-1200 on CCC 8 Escudos with mercuric gold over platinum - less for mercuric gold over copper based on weight (i.e., ~90% of regal and ~50% of regal - respectively. The price of Pt also is less than Au so people buy them as high Pt pieces ~$1000.
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Heritage Auctions Selling Contemporary Circulating Counterfeit 8 Reales
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/21/2023  10:39 pm
This is interesting that Heritage is selling this Counterfeit 8 Reales. I can add this to this thread. When the GNL book came out I was curious if Heritage as the rumor went did not touch counterfeits with a ten foot pole as they were strictly a slab selling company. Sorry we don't John but we appreciate all the effort that went into the GNL book some VP replies. Perhaps this changed when Donald Partrick consigned his collection which by the way included Warren Baker's intact collection of Canadian Blacksmith Coppers - Canada's most important contemporary circulating counterfeits. In that group were two Latin American counterfeit 2 reales in off-metal and to my surprise after contacting them through Sarah Miller did include the two Kleeberg numbers into the listing from my inventory listings and keeper of this counterfeit family. These were in the collection since way back in 1987 Warren Baker believed these Kleebergs had some link by manufacturer to the Blacksmith's. They both went surprisingly well at near $1,000 each. Unusual so high for Kleebergs. We then see some mercuric gold over platinum escudos pieces from the so-called Long Island Collection. This still may be Partrick as he was a resident in eastern Long Island where he had his real estate/construction business? But with this singular 1816 CCC piece maybe they have seen the light? This piece is not in GNL, the A&C reference you supplied is curious and if you look in page 66 of GNL the A&C 1816 CCC8R has this silver edge ribbon seam of a Sheffield plate (i.e., a fine seam that runs through the dentils in a roughly circular fashion around the perimeter). Not seeing this Heritage piece as a Sheffield or the A&C piece as the Heritage piece with its low weight (24.81 grams) seems more of a debased silver appearance and I see no silver breaks over the base metal host after a magnification overview for either specimen.

U.S. Colonial Machins Mills pieces which are also contemporary circulating counterfeits have also been sold by Heritage and are the most well-known being in the U.S. Red Book - so perhaps they saw collector demand for these Academia pieces. There are GOOD counterfeits and BAD counterfeits. I remain pessimistic with Heritage and wonder since Stacks/Bowers is also pushing for pure slab sales what will happen to some very good collections of contemporary circulating counterfeit British/Irish counterfeits of 1/2d and 1/4ds and is their fate strictly EBAY for these types that are not plated Machins Mills 1/2ds? Back in 2008 Stacks Americana Sale a Ringo CCC 1/2d went for $18,000!

One last thought there was a big debate here awhile back with Gord Nichols CCC8Rs and some of his other counterfeits which were dated post-1840 and not allowed in any Canadian auction due to their policy of not allowing counterfeits of their Canadian Mint coinage to be sold. After this I was told his counterfeit 8's went privately. I agree BTW with the CCF Canadian's moderator SPP-Ottawa he should of went "south of the border" to Stacks/Bowers. I still own around 30 of the more rare types like the GIII English countermark (circular/hexagonal) types and other crude one's including the most rare alloy being of tin/lead/antimony. From a collection of around 140 I sold one a week on EBAY to many eager buyers. Mike Ringo's pieces went to Stacks and did well all being sold with GNL classifications.

Will HERITAGE break the barrier threefifty with the GOOD Latin American counterfeits? Who would not want to own a mercuric gold platinum host escudo contemporary circulating counterfeit? Thousands of people BLINDED by the massive Chinese Junk COUNTERFEIT base metal influx holding up their signs "MELT ALL THE COUNTERFEITS!"

Crazy times threefifty ...

John Lorenzo
Numismatist
United States
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Counterfeits Of Cast Silver Sud - Any Pictures?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/16/2023  6:18 pm
No problem but keep the NGC or PCGS ticket in the flip. I did this with this coin and published it at the E.P. Newman Portal:

https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/book/579875

SEM/EDS looks at the coins microstructure and is able to pick up the lighter elements such as S & Cl as it works in a vacuum whereas most XRF devices can analyze only metals as oxygen interferes with the detection of lighter elements in the Periodic Table. In this study I needed to detect sulfur. It showed that sometimes a non-homogenous surface can be mint made under the proper mint conditions. We can expect DIFFERENT microstructures between a silver issue from 1812, 1900 & 1950 and even from the same era and from different manufacturing operations. The microstructure and gold & silver assay values all together would give us a good picture. Since these devices to use or rent if you will are $350/hour it still prohibitive as it takes about an hour/coin to get the full picture - so to speak. I felt it an important enough study so I dropped the money into the analysis for this one coin. JPL
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Counterfeits Of Cast Silver Sud - Any Pictures?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/15/2023  12:00 pm
I think what I can add to this post is the tell-tale fakes realeswatcher has shown for the 1813 examples and it clearly appears in his link where we see weights DOWN to ~23 grams. I only have one in my collection but not sure of its diagnostics but its slabbed. Bought it a decade ago. Nevertheless I think we should be aware of this 1813 fake IMO, perhaps avoid plain edge pieces, buy only good weight pieces (26-27 grams - if weight is given), buy only in slabs (i.e., to be truthful so the piece can be sold even if a fake since it can't be weighed or argued with by the majority). These are DANGEROUS. I bought one in a slab - IMO that is enough. I think the silver value may be higher than Riddell's 88% value as this was a 19thC type analysis and the gold content has yet to be ascertained in the probable 0.1 - 1.0% range. I never analyzed mine as XRF assays or an SEM/EDS type analyses looking at its microstructure can't be achieved or done through the TPG plastic encasement. John Lorenzo.
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Whew! Its Only An 1816 & Not 1815! Nyitl Is Still A Go .
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/14/2023  8:01 pm
You are right! ... with your reworked and sharpened photo its an 1815!!! Great piece! Luckily I have one already. I was told the 1815 Restrike is slightly more rare than the 1822 Restrike. Your thoughts? JPL
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
1812 Mexico 8 Real Cast Silver Coin
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/12/2023  2:52 pm
Its a good one only from Chihuahua. Probably $500-up today. This series has SKYROCKETED IN VALUE over the last five years. Congratulations. In the normal series of 1812-1814 this year 1812 is the most common. Some are earlier 1810 or 1811 but are extremely rare and questionable. Sometimes their edges are PLAIN but as explained to me this was just a mint error but they do exist as I have one in my collection. Aureo & Calico once showed one to me with TWO T's (Treasury) mint stamps as Max Keech currently has classified these markings (i.e., mint stamps not countermarks) as they were part of the mint process and not a later countermark revalue marking of a third party. John Lorenzo.
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Whew! Its Only An 1816 & Not 1815! Nyitl Is Still A Go .
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/12/2023  2:41 pm
<BG> No need to snipe and wipe out my NYITL funds.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/204211797861

Its a mistake realeswatcher I have seen before confusing the "6" with a "5" - still a good coin. $1,000-up. As you know realeswatcher the 1816 WOI restrike is the MOST COMMON date.

John Lorenzo
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
Is This A Cast Contemporary Counterfeit Half Penny?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/10/2023  4:46 pm
Its a cast George II 1/2d. What is your next question.

John Lorenzo
Forum: United Kingdom (Great Britain) Coins
 
The Bonk Coinage Of The Netherland East Indies & John Lorenzo Collection - Observations
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/09/2023  3:34 pm






The top 3 images are my flip ticket with metrology information on the attempted cut down 1S on a 2S sized bonk. The last image is one of the 1810 2S fragment pieces - this piece measures 19mm horizontally, 5.8 grams!!! weight and is only 4.6 mm thick. See its size comparison to the 1802 2S sized piece attempted to be cut down to a 1S. It metrology: 23mm, 25.1 grams! JPL
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives

The Bonk Coinage Of The Netherland East Indies & John Lorenzo Collection - Observations
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/09/2023  3:12 pm
The Bonk Coinage of the Netherland East Indies

Introduction

A rather interesting type of coinage was issued by the Dutch from their East Indies colony in the late 18th and early 19th centuries was the so called 'bonk' coinage. Cut from oval or rectangular copper bars known as 'bonks' (meaning 'large piece' in Dutch) the irregular lozenge shaped bonk coinage was usually stamped with a year and denomination. It was an emergency or stopgap issue designed to quickly and cheaply supply coinage to a colony that was rich with trade yet short on coinage. The reasons for the shortage of coinage in the East Indies were strongly linked to the political upheavals in the parent Netherlands from 1795 through to 1815. Political turmoil in the Netherlands during the period of mintage of Bonks included the end of the Dutch Republic in 1795, the formation and collapse of the French Batavian Republic from 1795 to 1806, and the founding of the French puppet Kingdom of Holland from 1806-1813. This Kingdom ended with the defeat of Napoleon at Leipzig in 1813 and was succeeded by the independent Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1815 which only ceased to exist in 1949.

During the period of the puppet Kingdom of Holland the Netherlands actually lost control of the East Indies Colonies completely to the British (in 1810), but Dutch rule was re-established in 1814. One can imagine that during this 20 years of chaos that the supply of coinage to a colony several thousand miles away would have been far from the minds of government officials. Thus the East Indies had to rely on counter stamped coinage of other countries and colonies as well as locally minted currency.

The bonk coinage was made in preference to milled round coinage in times of immediate need because they were much cheaper and easier to make. Manufactured in Batavia (Java), they were cut from copper rods which varied greatly in size and were generally imported from Japan. Denominations issued included the 1/2 Stuiver, 1 Stuiver, 2 Stuiver, and 8 Stuivers. The weights of the coins varied considerably as quality control was poor and the stuiver was continually being de-valued, however the bonks made in the late 18th century massed about 20g of copper for a single stuiver and 45g for a 2 stuiver. Those bonks made later were lighter, down to 19g for a stuiver in 1805 and to 15g for one minted in 1818-9. This effectively devalued the stuiver against the Dutch Guilder (the normal rate was 20 Stuivers to the guilder and ended up being 24 Stuivers to the guilder in later years).

Copper bonk coins were minted in 3 distinct periods, 1796 to 1806 (under the Batavian Republic), 1807 to 1810 (under the Kingdom of Holland), and 1818-1819 (under the Kingdom of Netherlands). Many varieties existed but generally those minted prior to 1818 displayed the value in a pearled or dotted border on one side and the date in a similar border on the other. Those minted in 1818-1819 displayed the value on one side without a border and the date on the other in a lined rectangle. The coins minted earlier can be quite rare and valuable while the later dates are a little more common. Collectors should be aware that being pure copper these coins can attain a green patina (as distinct to harmful verdigris).

Some observations from the John Lorenzo Collection:

1. From a collection of 20 pieces now in my collection I found no errors to the above which is the best overview currently on the Internet. Specifically the earlier pieces are the rarest with 1797 being the most common year - then the 1818-1819 period - and finally the 1807-1810 period the most common with perhaps the year 1810 being the most common.

2. In terms of denominations the 1/2 Stuiver's seem to the rarest then followed by 2 stuiver and the 1 stuiver being the most common denomination.

3. The earliest group is the only period that followed a specific good weight standard protocol. All pieces in my collection for 1S or 2S we see near 20 grams for 1S: 1797 ~19g; 1803 ~19 & 19.6g; 1805 ~17g. The 1/2S we see 3.4-3.8 grams.

4. Once we progressed probably to the most common date during the next period 1807-1810 the 1810 we see no weight standard with high variability: the 1810 2S's in my collection are at even 8 grams, 16 grams - all over the place. My 1818 a Choice XF with a complete date weighs just 13g for a 1S.

5. FRAGMENTS - Not sure if this is an error coin or just part of the lower QC during the second period in my collection. I have two 2S's which I call fragments both obverse & reverse stamped and weigh ONLY 2.6 grams and 5.8 grams! Both dated 1810. Both KM#224.1. see the next post for its photo.

6. Miscut 1S on a 2S bonk piece. This piece in the next post shows an attempted cut on a 2S bonk but stamped nevertheless 1S. There are two cuts top & bottom. Not sure if this done or if anyone has information where & how these rods were cut it would be appreciated. This also begs the question from the standard reference lacking in my library - were they cut first and then stamped or vice-versa? Probably cut then stamped since many are off-center or the motifs are coming off the edges - so to speak. Not sure then what was going to be done with this piece of extra copper - I guess use it for 1/2S?

John Lorenzo (Numismatist)
Forum: World Coins and Commemoratives
 
A New Coin Cleaning Project. 1803 Large Cent
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/07/2023  8:28 pm
Excellent work! I developed my own copper cleaning process using ultrasonic cleaning and proprietary chemicals after 40 years of collecting high end copper. I doubt I could exceed this effort on this particular specimen. The difficulty here is to create somewhat a uniform brown color as the Cu-oxide areas removed creates surface color differences with the non-oxidized areas. John Lorenzo, Numismatist.
Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coins
 
Looking For Opinions- Is This A TPG Certified Cast Counterfeit Colonial?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/07/2023  8:08 pm
As you know the coins were made of an alloy called Bath metal composed of 75% brass, 20% zinc (mixed with tin and bismuth) and 5% silver and were to weigh slightly less than half the weight of English coins. With this much oxidative and environmentally Zn in the alloy overall we can expect many to have ROUGH surfaces as being a normal scenario and rightfully so - but this type of feature to the novice may SUGGEST the piece as questionable if not slabbed. A normal FIRST response. It will be interesting to see if future generations will take to variety collecting of Rosa's and Hibernia's other than major/minor type collecting as is the normal collecting route by most today even with Syd's books out there? JPL
Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coins
 
Looking For Opinions- Is This A TPG Certified Cast Counterfeit Colonial?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/07/2023  6:41 pm
You must be Jack Young of the Dark Corner site. As there is a web link to this very same discussion on your analysis here with identical photos. In 2008 I had a standout Type Collection of Rosa Americana's sold at the Americana Sale in 2008 by SB so I know the series and that's my reference point of knowledge. It seems you already found your answer with the broken ER motifs being similar to the same die used by Peter Rosa so this is just further exploratory work on your part. Since PCGS does not have a strict WEIGHT STANDARD on these Rosa's and assuming your correct about Peter Rosa's alloy which is actually so-called white metal (an alloy usually containing Sb alloyed with Sn, Cu and/or Pb) then Cu plated) and since this should? vary from the typical bath metal in weight? Probably - but what is the correct weight standard? ... so a well made Peter Rosa copy could fool PCGS or NGC for that matter. XRF if a strong enough beam intensity is introduced that could go deeper into the surface rather than the typical 5-10 microns could pick up these unwanted elements of white metal you would have your answer. In retrospect you may have a possible Peter Rosa copy in a PCGS slab. The real story here IMO is that all the Pre-Patent Issues were not American Issued for U.S. Colonies IMO. There is NO EVIDENCE AT ALL THAT THESE ISSUED WERE MADE FOR THE COLONIES CONSIDERING THEIR FULL HANOVERIAN LEGENDS!!! There is no mention in the Newton papers these were issued for the Colonies and probably at this time in 1717 Wood was just illustrating his die making skills using this new alloy called bath metal to IMPRESS UPON THE ROYAL MINT his die making skills. PERIOD! But since American U.S. Coin catalogers since the early 20thC were cataloging these as U.S. Colonials since the Yanks loved them and the Brits could care less about them and since the same alloy was eventually used in the regular series it STUCK as U.S. Colonials! IMO.

Your up DARK CORNER .... John Lorenzo, Numismatist, United States.

P.S. That is unusual and interesting that a XRF can be taken thru TPG plastic as it was my experience the plastic constituents dilute or spoil the metal alloy results? Perhaps it can be done today I last attempted that on a typical benchtop XRF 10 years ago - so it does confirm the white metal alloy. CASE CLOSED.
Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coins
 
Wayte Raymond Coin Holder Of Complete Flying Eagle Indian Cent Collection
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 01/01/2023  6:16 pm
As previously discussed in a recent forum for Indian Cents here at CCF here is the web link for the set selling on EBAY with photo improvements of all semi- & key coins:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/125675599446

John Lorenzo
Numismatist
U.S.
Forum: Sales Promotion: CCF, eBay, eCrater, Heritage, Great Collections, etc
 
An Unabashed Cast Counterfeit 1787 68-W NJ Colonial Or Am I Nuts?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 12/31/2022  8:52 pm
Its possible if along with die breaks you add into this example die bulging and surface planchet occlusions due to an improper alloy mix and/or poor planchet annealing. JPL
Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coins
 
An Unabashed Cast Counterfeit 1787 68-W NJ Colonial Or Am I Nuts?
colonialjohn
Pillar of the Community
United States
1592 Posts
Old Post Posted 12/31/2022  7:52 pm
I seen the late Mike Ringo's cast NJ's and most appear like a GII CCC cast 1/2d's in their appearance. If a cast most would have filed edges to remove the rim burrs. These are all very rare (to answer realeswatcher inquiry in this thread) as with GIII CCC1/2d's since casting was replaced with striking prior to this period (i.e., c.1770's - beyond). Its a $200 coin - the sellers are legitimate dealers as already mentioned. If someone buys this I can do a free XRF scan for you within 1-2 months thru a bullion melter friend of mine who owns an XRF gun. We do see some grayish material unless its just the photo. Its struck IMO with these two diagnostics of being improperly annealed as the Stack struck coin and possibly with improper mix alloy. Cast coins particularly cast NJ's like GII CCC casts are lumpy in planchet diagnostics (narrow & thick) have filed edges most of the time and do not generally have say half the letters sharp as in this inquiry coin. As Mossman alluded to with his ANS paper on CCCs with Dr. Smith most are of a bronze (Cu/Sn) composition with ~4-6% tin which can be seen in a XRF surface scan if this coin (M.68-w) goes that far into a metallurgical analysis. JPL
Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coins
 


Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2023 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.59 seconds to rattle this change. Powered By: