1804 Bank Of England Dollars - Contemporary Counterfeits

I have a really nice "cancelled" example. Cut in half and shows the Sheffield plate perfectly.

Will you be at the Jersey Shore on Sept 12?

I address these briefly in my new upcoming book via XRF analysis. Forgotten Coins.

John Lorenzo
Numismatist
United States

Thank you JerseyBen, Swamper Bob and John for your responses. I apologize, but I was out of town for bit, now getting back to it. I will not be at the Jersey Shore.

I started looking for these contemporary counterfeits as a result of the book Swamper and John published, which I purchased about a year ago. I need another area to collect like I need a hole in the head, but it is a really interesting area, and your book does a great job of laying out so many of the issues.

Even before I found your book, I had been collecting BOE countermarks on 8Rs, and the overlay of those stamps and contemporary counterfeits is fascinating, if not somewhat mind boogling. If I get a chance later today (allegedly I am back at work at the moment!) I will post a couple of contemporary counterfeits 8R with BOE countermarks that I have.

In terms of BOE countermarks, I have been working from H.E. Manville's, The Bank of England Countermarked Dollars, 1797-1804, a copy of which should be accessible here: Manville link

Do either of you, or anyone, know of a more recent public paper on BOE countermarks? Other than the Manville piece?

I also recently purchased a 1794 Madrid 4R with a BOE countermark, which I thought was weird because the BOE countermarks on 8Rs almost all are from Mexico. Lo and behold, on page 112 of the Manville article, he explains the existence of regal 4Rs with BOE countermarks, created in 1799.

Thanks again!

Peter

eastrockcoins You have the identification correct and yours is now the best example I am aware of. With your permission I will add the picture to my files for future use.

The oval stamp on your coin is one of three stamps we were aware of at the time the book was published since that time we have confirmed a 4th and a damage example which presents the possibility of a 5th.

Given the number of stamps employed by the counterfeiters it is reasonable to propose a rather large mintage for this particular piece. Given the date of 1792 (which is mentioned by Bordeaux: "...in the year, 1792, one single factory had a weekly output of 100,000 Reales {25,000 French Livres} in value."). This coin may be one of the types produced by the Birmingham factory mentioned by Bordeaux. The weekly output would be 12,500 coins per week.

Since you have my book you know that I personally believe that Bordeaux was incorrect about the date of the commencement of the counterfeit operation. I see 1792 as too early and 1796 as just right for the beginning of a War effort. It is also a better fit since forgers typically do not make brand new coins.

The 1792 dies were likely used in the War effort without the BofE stamps. The output leaves open the possibility that "leftover" coins may have been stamped as well.

I also noticed one very interesting element NOT noted on any of the other examples. On the reverse in the area flattened by the punch there appears to be a grid visible. Fine copper lines appear in a grid with silver plate in between.

I would postulate that coin may have been stamped on a surface that had very fine engraved lines on an otherwise flat surface. The metal from the coin would flow into the grooves creating a high point design the reverse of the surface. This high area would wear off first leaving a copper colored grid.

Could you do a micro-photograph of the area involved?

The grid reminds me of the grided watermarks seen on early papers made in England about this time. I have not studied that process so I do not know what apparatus made those marks.

Interesting area for speculation and further study.

Interesting photo looks like an oval is present as well as a grid. It could simply be damage to a metal surface by some form of cutting tool - perhaps an engravers's bench.

Thanks.