Hi, New Here And Have A Coin To Show !

Ok, no problem with pics loading, so here are a few more..

Thanks for the swift reply swamperbob, first off the icon was one on the list...I like it too !
What I do know about the 8 R, weight is 26.7 and a scratch test inside the cut reveals silver...the coin does seem to ring properly as well.
I don't know how to do a specific gravity test, nor have I checked the edge completely...what should I be looking for exactly on the overlap ?

Hopefully the Oh Oh comments dont turn out to be Uh Oh's

For Specific Gravity you need to weigh the object hanging in air on a thin wire. Then weigh it a second time with the item (coin) completely submerged in pure water at room temperature.

The difference in the two weights is the VOLUME of the coin expressed in Cubic centimeters.

If you divide the weight of the coin in grams (without the wire) by the volume in cubic centimeters the answer is the Specific Gravity of the object.

SG is the density of the object stated in term of how many times more it weighs than water.

That is very simple and all you need is a scale accurate to 1/100 th gram and you have all that you need. Just make sure that any scale you use is accurate (just because it might read to 0.001 does not mean that is an accurate weight - always read the paperwork.) I saw one digital scale from China that had a readout to 3 decimal places but the paperwork said accurate to +/-0.2% of the total weight. So if you weighed an object that weighs 27 grams the accuracy is +/- (0.002 x 27.0) or +/- 0.054 far too inaccurate. The actual readout was accurate to ONE decimal place not THREE.

The SG will tell you if the coin is regal silver or not. 10.31 is regal 903 fine silver. Under 10.2 or over 10.4 and you have a counterfeit of some sort.

Now to the privy stamp.

If you notice the damage done to the stamp is positioned PERFECTLY to do maximum damage to the parts of the stamp that are used in authentication. I can not be sure that was intentional but it could be placed much better.

The stamp is VERY close to known original stamps but is also close to one stamp from a known forgery.

Here are the two closest stamps to yours from my files - one REAL one Fake. Can you tell which is which? I will call them A and B.

First A



Then B.



Using the available geometry I have a closer match to B than A. But all the key features on your coin are really missing.

I compared three ratios:

a. Overall height (rear curl to forehead)
b. Ribbon point to Nose
c. Ribbon point to Jaw/neck intersection.

Compared to the Stamp A the deviations were 10%, 3% and 15% but compared to stamp B 0%, 7% and 8%.

Regarding a chopped up fake.

It absolutely did happen in two different cases.

Numismatic forgers do in fact add chops to cover their work because a pristine example would be worth so much that it gets a lot of unwanted attention. The best forgeries are the ones that are never detected. That would account for the destruction of the most critical elements.

There were also counterfeits made far earlier that were heavily chopped as they traveled through China. These are the Silver restrikes (counterfeits) made unofficially between 1830 and 1930 all over the world for the China trade. These coins were solid silver within a few % points of correct that could pass in China.

So the answer to chopping on a fake is of course yes.

Here I suspect something just a bit different.

1) The coin may in fact be real.
2) The chops are also likely - MOSTLY real.
3) It is the stamp that is most likely the forgery.

There were some slight variations in the privy stamp used to make the oval punch on the 8Rs. But the B stamp I show above is a Modern Copy of a privy stamp that is still being applied to junk 8 reales to make a melt coin something more. The punches that hit the stamp and the odd looking chop that follows the truncation of the base are likely new with artificial toning and dirt added. Baked on in all probability.

I do know that the B stamp is BEYOND any doubt a fake (modern) and that the A stamp is period from 1797 (at least a few identical to this have been encapsulated by PCGS and NGC). So A is real.

I reviewed your stamp by comparing the ratios with the same measurements taken from both the A & B coins.


a. Overall height (rear curl to forehead)
b. Ribbon point to Nose
c. Ribbon point to Jaw/neck intersection


The measurement from the tip of the ribbon to the jaw neck junction is taken as 1.00 on each coin and a ratio to the other two measurements is the comparison.

I made a large blow up of your coin and the three measurements were

a. = 115 units
b. = 107 units
c. = 74 units.

Therefore the ratios are a/c = 1.554
b/c = 1.446

I did the same for the A coin and got

a. = 127 units
b. = 110 units
c. = 85 units.

Therefore the ratios are a/c = 1.494
b/c = 1.294

Then I did the same for the B coin and got

a. = 115 units
b. = 115 units
c. = 80 units.

Therefore the ratios are a/c = 1.437
b/c = 1.437

Within the bounds of reason the ratios point to a close match with the B stamp than the A stamp.

This is just a simple mathematical way of saying that the height to width ratio of the original privy stamp was higher than either yours or the known forgery.

It might be real - but I would need to see examples of accepted originals with a much narrow deviation in height to width.

Sending it in for grading will unfortunately give an answer that is only a 50-50 crap shoot. The graders at most of the services know less about it than you think. You get the opinion of between 1-4 individuals who are unlikely to deal with the type on a day to day basis.

The only TPG I would give high grades to is PCGS and they will not grade this one because of the damage to the stamp which is the KEY feature. The reason they rarely encapsulate fakes is because if there is any uncertainty the body bag comes out as it should.

Authenticating this coin is like trying to authenticate a 1916 D Mercury dime where the mint mark has been squashed by post strike damage and most of the other die determining factors have been chopped, scratched or obliterated by wear. The host coin is of no determining value unless it can be XRF tested and proven modern. But even a proven original host is of NO VALUE to the authentication process for the stamp. Only the stamp itself is of value.

A SEM test of the patina might provide a clue to potential age of the patina or photo luminescence might provide a clue - but the tests cost more than this coin is worth as a REAL example.

The real answer in this case is - who knows?

Personally, I do not believe the stamp is real because of the design dimensions and I would never accept any grader's opinion over my own in this case unless he had a more scientific test result - but all that said - my opinion is only one person's opinion.

The square punch marks are seen on the 8 Reales but not very often. The fact that some were used in India is not at all surprising.

Of course the fact that there are only 4 square punches on the obverse - all positioned at the center is ODD.

On the reverse there are also 4 one at center one on each pillar and one at the top left corner of the shield. That too seems ODD.

Then there is the very convenient placement of the odd stamp right over the part of the stamp I would love to see - the part with all the fine details - also ODD.

The shape of that last punch is hard to determine. It also was set so shallow that it exposed no new metal - also ODD.

An ODD coin indeed!