A Suspicious Peru Portrait 8R 1797- Real, 2ndcc Or Forgery

Thank you your comments, John. I would expect more challenge after reading Bob and your's book. I have ordered on by still not come.

Yes, the word brittleness is just right to describe the sound come out from hitting the coin. I will do a S.G. within a few days to confirm the silver content of this coin.

BTW, would you tell the meaning of abbreviation <WBG>?

Things are not adding up here.

The diameter seems wide compared to the smaller dentils that actually show. This means the face diameter of the die is larger than standard. A quick look at the edge makes me think it may be too thick because of the way there is extra space past the circle and rectangle design. Lima and Potosi use larger edge segments than Mexico City which often shows space on one or both sides of the edge segments.

If the coin is increased in diameter and has been thickened a bad alloy could be the cause of the poor ring.

The coin is heavy therefore the idea of the ring being effected by porosity due to corrosive emersion makes no sense. Corrosion causes a loss of weight. Corrosion to the extent that the ring is totally wrong would mean a loss of significant weight.

The coin faces look cast to me - the date is ragged along the edges as are some of the letters and of course the concentration of pores at the high points of the portrait are all suspicious. The intersection between the face and the edge appears to show a possible seam along the reverse - this could be an optical illusion but it is worth a close look.

The edge is very poorly executed and irregular. Even though Lima is notorious for rather poor edges, I would still look for opposing laps of equal length to eliminate a post cast edge application.

If the coin is plated after it was struck and the plating is a thin film type (electro-plate) - not thick or paint like (silver amalgam gilding) - then it was made sometime after 1840. That is a simple fact that is not possible to change. How long after 1840 it was made is not possible to determine either so the range of possibility is 1840 to 2014.

Nickel will at times corrode producing a very dark gray to black color - so if the underlying metal is "black-ish" in tone it may be nickel corrosion. Nickel is also a metal that responds magnetically like iron. However, when alloyed with copper that magnetic property is not seen.

So yes, the facts would fit the observations here. The coin could be a silver electro-plate over copper.

The question of classification involves some "educated guesses" or reasonable but not absolutely certain conclusions about what the data says.

The Portrait 8 reales of Charles IV was still a circulating coin as late as 1885 based on comments in Spanish literature of that date (see my book). So I conclude that for at least 45 years after electroplate technology existed that this coin was still in circulation. When it left circulation is unknown but certainly it was no longer circulating in 1935. That leaves 50 years of uncertainty.

Next I look at when thin film electroplates were popular for forgery. This is a statistic based on my personal experience over the past 50 years. The VAST majority of these counterfeits were made in the 1870s-1890s and the target was circulating silver coins. The base metal tends to be copper or brass by a wide margin. The same method was used by numismatic forgers until the 1960s in large numbers as well but the core metal tends to be cheaper white metals. These are NOT exclusive. Both types do exist over the interval but there is a tendency for earlier electro-plates to have cores of copper while later forgeries tend to have white metal cores.

If the core is nickel you need to consider that higher pressures were needed for coining. This means higher power mechanical equipment. That is likely the reason why the switch over took place.

So my conclusion, based on the known facts, is that the coin is slightly more likely to be a Class 3 numismatic forgery made before 1970. It may be a LATE Class 1 coin made to circulate as bullion in the latter part of the 1890s also.

Interesting coin! Cool thread!