| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 34,016 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1139 Posts |
Hi all, Swamperbob and others have commented on the kinds of problems that counterfeit 8 Reales coins will have on their edge designs. I had the opportunity to examine and return a 1788 Mo FF 8 Reales that had very good obverse and reverse details, normal toning, a weight of 26.53 g and specific gravity of 10.28. However, I could not find the two sections of edge pattern overlaps on opposite sides. Furthermore, the edge showed evidence of a series of parallel diagonal slashes, as mentioned in #5 of swamperbob's list of key facts posted here: http://goccf.com/t/60051#470205I took a picture of the edge to share with everyone (and to double check that this is what swamperbob was describing).  I encourage others to post pictures illustrating edge detail problems to this thread so we can compile a visual complement to the written descriptions. |
|
|
|
Moderator
Australia
15158 Posts |
Here's my fake Spanish dollar. It's got what I call the "Look, Ma, I made it myself" edge effect.  I bought it as genuine over a decade ago from a dealer that didn't know any more about them than I did at the time.  Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1769 Posts |
jgenn, I'm not sure I would call your coin a fake. Looks more like some kind of damage to the edge/rim at that point. Hard to tell "depth perception" from a photo, does the damage extend into the edge and denticles on the reverse side as well or is it limited to the "corner" (for lack of better description) of the obverse and edge design. As for the overlaps, did you find a single overlap? or no overlaps at all?
"Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."
-Mark Twain
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3497 Posts |
jgenn- I agree with jfransch in that I am not quite certain that that is fake. It just may be damaged. Diagonal marks are also seen on real coins that were tested for metal content while in circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
585 Posts |
jgenn- Couldn't that be so called "adjustment mark"
where the assayer has reduced the weight of the planchet by filing it?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5322 Posts |
Since I originally commented on the diagonal grip marks - I can say with 100% certainty - what you have here is NOT the grip marking that I was referring to. The grip marks are usually cross the entire edge side to side. They are also usually single lines with a physical separation that is approximately the same length. To me that looks like post strike damage of some sort. It would not be classical "adjustment" because the filing would have most likely have been on the face of the blank. As far as I have been able to determine the weighing and adjustment step happened BEFORE the strike. I have created a quick sketch to show what I mean. I have none of the "late" forgeries with the diagonals at home so I have no pictures.  The diagonals are shown on top. They occur on top of the edge on half the edge. The other half typically has no trace of the diagonals. I also included a possible reason why at times some people miss the overlap. The easiest overlap to spot is the type that is NOT aligned. But there are aligned laps as well which are harder to spot. There is usually some trace but they can be overlooked or easily eliminated by edge damage. They are virtually impossible to spot on a worn edge. However if one side is aligned so is the other. The only exceptions to this rule are some of the Revolutionalr issues that were made with slightly IRREGULAR segments. What this all points to is the necessity of being very familiar with the edges of MANY different coins. I have look at literally 100's of thousands of these coins over the 50 years I have been collecting. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1139 Posts |
Thanks all, for the responses on the first edge picture. I clearly misinterpreted swamperbob's description of the grip markings. The overlap on this coin is clearly visible on the opposite side and about the same length as the damaged section. (Sorry I didn't take a picture) At the peak of its wobble, the overlap was fully offset instead of superimposed. Here's the obverse, the bad section starts at 10 O'clock and runs to 1 O'clock.  |
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
I have the attached edge pictures of what is alleged to be an 8 Reales Charles III Madrid bust type. My concerns about the coin are its weight 24.4gms diameter 38mm. I would normally expect a weight of 27+/-0.2gms and a diameter of 40mm. I have others mostly Spanish Colonial that all have the correct weight As you can see the beading at the edge of the coin is absent it would appear 1mm around the edge has been removed, but the edge markings have remained? Any views would be useful     |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1523 Posts |
That really is one homely lookin dude.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3497 Posts |
Roncoin- Is that the edge pic of the 1782 Madrid 8?!?! If I am not mistaken, the 8's struck in Spain had a totally different edge type from their colonial counterparts. I have a feeling that that 8 is quite fake.
Halfwitty- Yup, the royals were not that good looking. That is what generations of inbreeding will do to a bloodline.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5322 Posts |
Given the reduced diameter and weight loss. I would postulate that the coin was an original which was filed around the full perimeter to steal silver. I also wonder if it was subsequently re-edged with approxomately the RIGHT design. I have seen a re-edged orignal before but the edge is not as good looking as this one. Does the entire perimeter look this good? Are there 2 overlaps? Are there any irregularities?
If the edge type is incorrect (I simply don't know enough about how continental mints edged their 8R) it would tend to support a re-edging by someone who was fimiliar with colonial edges.
Edited by swamperbob
03/27/2010 11:15 pm
|
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
Thank you all for your comments. The edge is of the same coin as the pictures (1782). Here some additional pictures of the date region and especially of the number 8 in the date. As you can see the date appears to be a double strike. The 8 has been very much flattened and worn, but it does have the "curly" serif at the top that is common to colonial 8s. My density calculation based on measurements indicates 9.60gms/cm^2, I will try to do a more accurate density measurement later today. I will also try and post more edge pics later today. At the moment I cannot see an overlap. I agree that this may be an example of clipping.   |
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
As a followup to previous posts. I have now done careful water displacement density measurement. The density of the coin is 9.38gms/cc. If this coin were of an alloy 0.900 silver with say copper I would expect a higher density. Swamperbob here are some more pictures of the edge. I have taken these scans around the edge at four positions orthogonal to each other. I still cannot find an overlap point.Any further comments on the authenticity of the coin would be useful.     |
|
New Member
United Kingdom
8 Posts |
A little additional update on my coin,see my posts above. While earlier I agreed with Swamperbob that this might be an example of edge clipping (silver stealing), with a new edge pattern added after, in the light of new evidence there is now a problem with that conclusion.
While the weight difference from 27grms to 24.4grms and the reduced diameter could be accounted for by the removal of 1mm from the radius all around the periphery, this does not account for the measured density of 9.38grms/cc^3. If the coin was of the correct alloy (silver-copper) with a weight fraction of 0.9, then the density would be 10.3grms/cc^3 (cf silver 10.5grms/cc^3).
The precision density measurement of the coin would suggest the coin is made from an alloy with a weight fraction of 0.300silver-0.700copper. That alloy has a density of 9.32grms/cc^3
The main question-Is the coin a fake? Or how can the radial clipping explanation be reconciled with the density measurement?
Interested in any comments or a check on my calculations.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5322 Posts |
There are a couple possibilities of course. There were Debased copies made at branch mints which usually resulted in someone getting fired or hung. In that case the dies would be real, it would be mint made and issued so the coin would be considered REAL but debased. In that case, a second forger would have had to steal silver from the rim. That scenario is simply less likely than a simple start to finish forgery.
The new data you provided helps me to focus on the forgery alternative for a few reasons. First, the low specific gravity. This is a fairly common SG for an early forgery before the advent of German Silver. Second, the doubling I see on the detail of the date looks like what you often see on low pressure strikes like those made in rocker presses. The rocker press was small and compact but a forgery often required repeated strikes and as the coin enlarged because of the pressure the details started to go out of line. Third, now that I see more of the edge it is obvious that the edge of the coin was peaked. The blank was larger in diameter at the center than either edge - that points to a blank that was not made using a standard punch. The mints did not file the edges because they made the edge design difficult to transfer.
So, at this point I am leaning toward a well made early contemporary counterfeit. Coronado does not list a contemporary copy of the 1782 Madrid 8R so you could have a brand new type there. It might take an XRF to tell for sure.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3497 Posts |
If the coin was real and re-edged or if it is just an unknown type of counterfeit made in Spain then this does point to the fact that Colonial 8's were well known on the continent. Very interesting!
|
|
Replies: 19 / Views: 34,016 |
|
Posted 03/16/2010 10:51 am
