1672 Potosi 4 Reales - Fake (Twins) Out Of Spain

The first coin came with a tag from the Jesus Vico Auction #124, lot 786. It would be interesting to know if this coin actually came from that auction, or if the tag was added as part of a deception.

I do not see any suggestion of a seam on the edge, nor are there any filing marks.

However, the two coins share similarites that makes both of them highly suspect as fakes. The most obvious characteristic is the apparent double strike that both coins share in the same area, next to the right pillar on the reverse. The other feature shared by these examples is an apparent scratch or die break on the obverse next to the "2" in the date. Based on these observations, I am inclined to say the coins are fakes, but are they modern or contemporary fakes? Modern fakes, even cast ones, share constants in design, metal composition and shape. Shape is very important when it comes to fake 8 reales cobs and their minor divisions. Dan Sedwick's web site on fake 8 reales highlight a series of Mexican 8 reales, all mid-16th century. All of the examples share a common shape, with only the dates altered. This has been my experience with modern fake coins.

Without any supporting evidence indicating their true origin, however, the coins should stand a fakes, pure and simple -another contribution to my "black" collection!

robinjoe : Dan Sedwick is actually preparing a book with many more fakes - he posted some on the facebook group here -> https://www.facebook.com/groups/monedafalsa/
What I thought after seeing your mention of that Vico tag is that the coin could be the genuine one used to make copies.
If someone here has that particular Vico catalog ... (Dosmundos ?)

From the seller of the 2nd, also see:
350807591082
350807591453

Hi

I sent an email to Dan Sedwick last night, and attached images of the two coins. He agrees that they are fakes. They will be added to his web page on fake cobs.

The two coins are unusual in that, while being fake, they have unique characteristics that could confuse collectors. Both coin are made to appear salvaged. The surfaces of my coin are porous with just the right color to suggest burial or sea salvage. The weight, at 13.1 grams, would suggest some metal loss. The weak, blobby areas, could be surface erosion and corrosion. As I mentioned before, the edges do not have seams or signs of filing.

They do have stylistic differences compared to the one genuine example that I located in Sedwick's Treasure Auction #10, under Bolivia (sorry, I fogot the lot number). The waves on these coins are totally different and a main distinguishing feature. Additionally, the "4" is much larger compared to the genuine coin. The shape of the flan is different, but similar to a 1674 4 reales in the same Sedwick auction.

Well, I need to run to work, but I am interested in hearing your opinions, and any learning of any further developments with the Vico issue.

Thanks

The 1672 4R mentioned above:
http://www.icollector.com/Potosi-Bo...re_i11264960

Some styling differences, but nothing crazy... Castles are actually quite similar (middle turret looks broken on the Sedwick piece and the fake). I don't think there's any reason to think a genuine 1672 wasn't used to create a mold of some sort. Also, compare the shape to this 1672 2R from the Consolacion wreck. QUITE reminiscent:

http://www.icollector.com/Potos-Bol...are_i8644945

======================

As far as whether this fooled Vico... wouldn't be earth-shattering. I've seen most of the Spanish auctioneers get cob attributions wrong (even Sedwick a few times, though much less often)... they aren't always totally expert on these, and other times I think quite simply there are lapses in attention/diligence. Then in terms of fake vs. real... some months back, Aureo sold a 1770 Potosi 8R that was obviously a contemporary fake (crude styling) yet was offered as a normal, regal piece. Probably not malicious, just sloppy. I've observed a handful of known fakes offered by other major houses... including my favorite, a Potosi piece that had COPY stamped discretely on it.

As was mentioned, these fakes have decently deceptive looks that could pass as sea-salvage (the first version) or hoard find (the second) if someone isn't paying close attention.

robinjoe : as the sale was made recently, you still can fill a claim with paypal (unless you didn't used that).
I don't remember if I did a claim on ebay prior to this (tt was after a positive review on ebay - which I couldn't retract ...)
Prepare all the paperwork : take picture of the coin and lot tag, the reply from Vico, the mail from Sedwick, and references for those two (the paypal guys won't know who they are)
I did that once, it took time, but I had my money back in the end.

Re the greenish piece above. I like the edge cracks that don't go all the way through. It's obvious that the cob has undergone some kind of self healing...;)