1809 Lima Peru 2 Reales - Value Please

Somewhat subjectively, looking at the few auction examples of the 1808 and the 1809, I'm going to guess around $300-350 for this nicely toned, better end of mid-grade detail piece...

The problem with pricing this is that Krause lists it as rare, unpriced... which can get people's imaginations going. Presumably, that's why this question was asked in the first place. In general, what is shown for this Lima Indian bust 2R subtype across the main catalogues (Krause, Calico, Cayon) seems to be a bit messy and contradictory.

First, I'd say here that because of this messiness, you might have to throw out using PCGS/NGC pop reports for any indication of rarity... as they are working with incongruous reference info, PLUS they can often be sloppy with the attributions on such transitional types to begin with. Also, probably more importantly... people (non-Americans especially) generally don't slab 2R :->

Let it be noted for reference that there does of course exist an 1808-dated Charles IIII issue - Carolus in legend, proper Charles IIII bust. Fairly common date.

Now on to the Indian (aka imaginary) bust - Krause seems to indicate that there are two different varieties of the Indian bust, similar to what does exist for the 8 Reales denom. (earlier fatter head of 1808, not as fat style of 1810). However, the 2005 Cayon book and my older 1988 Calico don't note any difference in style for the 2R. Whether that means they didn't think two different Indian busts exist for the 2R as with the 8R, or they don't care... who knows. Krause, FWIW, shows the "two different" 1809 each as "RARE"... and actually makes the effort to price the "two different" 1808 Indian busts dissimilarly (1st type starting at $40 in mine, 2nd type starting at $100).

Anyhow, all three books are pretty much on board with the 1808 being rather scarce and pricey. The 1809 is the question, Krause showing what it shows ("RARE", moreso to them than the 1808, it seems). 1988 Calico actually prices the 1809 at the same level as the much more common (in reality) 1810 and 1811 at around 55 Euros (converted from pesetas), compared to around 100 Euros for the 1808... The 2005 Cayon shows 60 Euros for the 1809, compared to 120 for the 1808, 25 for the 1810, and 55 for the 1811. Note that the Cayon and Calico books have historically had different notions of the standard grade they are pricing...

On the back end of the series - the transition to the proper bust of Ferd VII - there is also varying info. An 1811 Indian bust 2R does indeed exist, and is somewhat scarce, but around in decent numbers (2nd most common after the 1810)... this is generally reflected in all three guides mentioned. That said, Krause shows an Indian bust AND a proper bust existing for 1811 (with proper bust "RARE", unpriced)... 1988 Calico shows only Indian bust in 1811, with proper bust starting in 1812... and 2005 Cayon actually has a proper bust for 1811 AND also 1810. They price the proper bust 1811 about the same as the Indian bust (50 and 55 Euros), while showing this mysterious proper bust 1810 at 90 Euros compared to 25 for the common Indian 1810.

-----------------------

SO, what does reality show? Well, first, I've never noticed (nor do I see in doing some searching now) any difference in the type of Indian bust used, like Krause indicates... I'm going to operate as if there IS no subtype for 1808 or 1809.

The 1810 is certainly the most frequently seen of the Indian bust 2R dates. It isn't particularly rare as a date - I'd say slightly less common than your typical Charles IIII or Ferd VII proper bust dates - but because the Indian bust bust is curious and desirable as a type coin, the 1810's value is magnified. Clearly, next most common (though a bit tougher than 1810, I'd say) is the 1811. Will note here that the 1811 proper bust 2R also does exist, though I'd say from observation that it IS scarcer than the Indian 1811 (though not what you'd call rare, as Krause puts it, and again, as a TYPE, proper bust is common, Indian bust is not, so that alters what most people would value it as).

Both the 1808 and 1809 dates of the Indian bust are certainly, I would say, each a good bit scarcer than either the 1810 or the 1811 Indian bust. All (3) main catalogues affirm this for the 1808, but differ on whether the 1809 is scarcer or more common than the 1808. I find (4) examples in auction archives (and this piece) of the 1809, to only (1) of the 1808... and I think it's telling that when auctioned right next to each other (Heritage, Jan. 2008), the 1808 far outpaced the 1809 (the 1808 was a nicer grade, but not but all that much). Also consider that all else being equal, we presume they were only striking the 1808 Ferdinand for part of that year (after they ceased making the Charles type), but had all of 1809 to make the Ferdinand. That doesn't could certainly be mitigated by other factors, but it's something to consider.

Would be nice if we had Aureo's last few years archived electronically - that would definitely give us a few more price points. I'm too lazy too flip through the ones I have manually...

All in all, I like the idea of the 1808 being a bit tougher than the 1809... but both of those are certainly much harder than the 1810 or 1811 Indian. Look at the few aucion archive price points for the 1808 and 1809, compare to what the 1810 and 1811 sell for, and price accordingly.

Sure, here are the pictures of : the last 2R for Carolus IIII, the Lima 8R for Ferdinand VII, and the Lima 2R.
The comment notices a variation on the 8R, but nothing really particular.

Realeswatcher - I am extremely pleased with your initial assessment covering the inequities of past information. I will have to re-read your comments yet another time to obtain proper digestion. These are the situations we all face within the confines of limited publication reference work and current auction Priced Realized, not to mention current market conditions.

MathieuMa - I really appreciate your contribution with copying the required information for all of us to view! Very informative.

Thank you very much "all" who contributed! This has been a learning process for myself as my expertise is in Bust Quarters.

One of my thoughts was to use this piece to trade for a rarer Mexico Mint Half Real (Portrait) for my collection. Still need scarce dates in high grade.

Am I making a mistake with this idea?

Rory

Excellent thread, and many interesting observation by realeswatcher and others. Well done!

As reales watcher mentions, one source of info are certainly the sales records kept by Aureo. I used to have all of their catalogues dating back to 1986, and I am certain I have seen all of the types of Lima indian head 1,2 and 4R listed (many times) over those years. Unfortunately, my better half recently insisted I dispose (throw away) my catalogues as they were using up too much space. I only kept those containing significant Santiago mint coins. Anyway, my suggestion, if you feel so inclined, is to given them or Calico a call. Chances are they will be glad to comment on the relative scarcity of the various indian head 2 reales.

"Unfortunately, my better half recently insisted I dispose (throw away) my catalogues as they were using up too much space."

OH! Would have loved to have those, though I share the no room problem... As none of the older ones are online, and Spanish Colonial has broad U.S.-based interest, those must be worth a good $10-15 a piece (more for ones like the "Caballero" gold catalogues).

Oh well... Que sera, sera.