First Page
Posted 06/22/2015 11:51 pm
wonghinghi I understand the English barrier - no problem.
Regarding your coin I think your coin is most likely early English (not officially produced) Class 2. Based on the SG I would assign it to the period right around 1830-35. It might be one of the Chinese copies made at the same time that was short on silver content. There are no records or copies of those coins to compare die work. Specific Gravity of 10.193 would result in an assay of 830 Ag if alloyed with copper. Even allowing for 2% Au would still produce a coin with 800+ Ag which is the fire assay result for the two examples that the UK consul to China got ca 1835 which were tested in the UK mint. This was the first written record (in UK records) of the existence of silver replicas of Class 2. It indicated there were Chinese copies as well as UK copies in circulation at that time.
The complaint by the consul was that local Chinese made replicas were made to a lower standard than their own (UK) copies and when they got them back in trade it meant an actual silver shortage of 10 percent. I suspect that for a short while (until ca 1835-40) some of the UK traders reduced silver content to match the Chinese copies.
My reasoning for believing the coin is UK instead of Chinese is that the Chinese coiners did not have the technology employed in Birmingham to mimic the dies until at least a decade later. If the coin was a Chinese product I would be surprised because of the high die quality.
Unfortunately there are no records or examples of the Chinese produced forgeries that have been located. So you could have either UK or Chinese. XRF confirming gold present would support either case. No gold would place the coin much later in time after 1870 and point to a possible US origin as well.
Regarding your coin I think your coin is most likely early English (not officially produced) Class 2. Based on the SG I would assign it to the period right around 1830-35. It might be one of the Chinese copies made at the same time that was short on silver content. There are no records or copies of those coins to compare die work. Specific Gravity of 10.193 would result in an assay of 830 Ag if alloyed with copper. Even allowing for 2% Au would still produce a coin with 800+ Ag which is the fire assay result for the two examples that the UK consul to China got ca 1835 which were tested in the UK mint. This was the first written record (in UK records) of the existence of silver replicas of Class 2. It indicated there were Chinese copies as well as UK copies in circulation at that time.
The complaint by the consul was that local Chinese made replicas were made to a lower standard than their own (UK) copies and when they got them back in trade it meant an actual silver shortage of 10 percent. I suspect that for a short while (until ca 1835-40) some of the UK traders reduced silver content to match the Chinese copies.
My reasoning for believing the coin is UK instead of Chinese is that the Chinese coiners did not have the technology employed in Birmingham to mimic the dies until at least a decade later. If the coin was a Chinese product I would be surprised because of the high die quality.
Unfortunately there are no records or examples of the Chinese produced forgeries that have been located. So you could have either UK or Chinese. XRF confirming gold present would support either case. No gold would place the coin much later in time after 1870 and point to a possible US origin as well.
