| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 700 |
|
|
New Member
United States
43 Posts |
There's very little information on Numista for this coin, curious to hear what other people think about the authenticity. My first concern is the amount of space in between the portrait. It seems odd that the portrait is so small with so much white space, unlike the example shown on Numista: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces21573.htmlCould it also just be a variation?  |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Sweden
1323 Posts |
I am not an expert on these coins in particular, so I cannot vouch for its authenticity, but I wouldn't worry about the portrait. There was a large degree of manual work involved in minting at this time, and so room for considerable variation in execution of the design. I see the same amount of variation of portrait size and placement in contemporary French silver crowns (which I am better acquainted with). I would look more for for correct weight and size, and at the edge which should have some sort of decorative pattern.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5714 Posts |
I agree with the points made by erafjel. Check the weight, etc. I am seeing weight for this type consistently at 27 - 27.5 g. in auction listings except for one heavily worn example at 26.8. I am also not an expert, but nothing sticks out as fake to me from these images. This one has a similar appearance of bust vs open field as in yours: https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5822283From the comments in the Numista listing, it is clear there is a lot of variety in this type. Possibly the bust proportions changed a bit between 1787 (date on the Numista image) and 1790s. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
20733 Posts |
I agree with the OP: there is room for some doubt.
Since the question has been asked, some effort is required to provide an answer.
I do not know what the weight range for these coins should be for genuine, but that needs to be researched.
Investigation on die varieties also required. I feel reasonably certain that research has been done and published in book form. I have limited access to a very comprehensive specialist numismatic library that is maintained by a public auctioneer, but to provide the necessary information for this thread will require me to visit the auctioneer and read provide the book for me to read.
Numismata has provided a pic for one of possibly a few die varieties.
XRF investigation may also be helpful.
The texture of the surface leaves some doubts in my mind, but from these pics I cannot completely dismiss as fake.
|
|
New Member
United States
43 Posts |
Thanks for the feedback! The weight and diameter are correct at ~27 grams and 41mm. It looks as if the edge has been smoothed over time, with remnants of a security feature partially remaining on some parts of the coin. I have yet to find another example of this variety of the coin based on searching through CoinArchives, which looks to be a 1790 P/CC based on Numista. The "P" being on the obverse right below the portrait, the "CC" being on the reverse with, on either side of the coat of arms, and a faint "C" on the reverse, top left of the shield. There are some close examples that are from other years: https://www.coinarchives.com/w/lotv...4b82526c24cchttps://www.coinarchives.com/w/lotv...e159fd81a989 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1760 Posts |
The piece appears genuine regal. The patina is a bit strange, but overall everything looks reasonable. There WERE indeed a good amount of piastra contemporary counterfeits... which will generally present with the quality of execution similar to most CC 8 Reales of this time frame (that is, you can tell). https://numismatica-italiana.lamone...ta/W-FIV1/29 |
|
New Member
United States
43 Posts |
Thank you realeswatcher! The link is exactly what I needed, really helps with the identification of the varieties.
Quick clarification, what do you mean by "genuine regal"?
|
|
Valued Member
Romania
56 Posts |
Hello to all of you! Sorry, but I have a totally different opinion as that of you all(?)! For me, from photos,no matter the weight,the coin looks obviously as a contemporary fake, made of copper and then silverplated! No need to compare any portraits or other things... End of story for me!  Andi  Edited by Andi10
02/08/2023 5:00 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
43 Posts |
Thanks, could you provide some more information on why you think it's a contemporary fake?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
Not look like a 90%Ag coin.
Try sliding down from Neodymium, check speed.
Sound test also
Is it a thicker piece?
I would say it is more likely to be a contemporary counterfeit.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Hong Kong
1270 Posts |
Silver content is critical for this piece.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5714 Posts |
Quote:
Not look like a 90%Ag coin. It is 0.833.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1495 Posts |
I was interested in this topic because I have a documented contemporary counterfeit 120 Grana- it's just a different date.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5714 Posts |
I am curious if the weight is low, or other attributes that are "off" on your example?
|
|
New Member
United States
43 Posts |
I'm curious as well, if you can post a picture of your contemporary counterfeit, that might help. Would be nice to get to the bottom of it!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1495 Posts |
My coin is not the same, so pictures won't help.
I can say that mine is 2% smaller diameter, identical thickness, 13% light and specific gravity is also 13% low.
Ballpark SG should be in the area of 10.1 and mine is 8.8
In my case the coin does not ping as it should.
In my particular case the edge lettering is not correct.
The genuine coin is diamagnetic, but the bad coin is not.
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 700 |
|
Posted 02/07/2023 08:42 am
