1822 Go 8 Reales Is It Royalist Or A Cast Copy?

I have examined the photos in detail and I have some suspicions about the coin. First Riddell lists a rather close copy of this coin as # 78 which he refers to as "Low Standard" indicating that it was his belief that the coin was a debased mint product. Both examples appear to use the same punch set for die manufacture. His example which was assayed by Hort (from New Orleans) as 677/1000 silver SG = 9.93. The weight given $0.94 equates to 25.41 grams. So his example is well below yours in both weight and assay. In several cases, in my book we proved that Riddell thought other Portrait coins were Low Standard which we now know conclusively are counterfeit (for example see the Riddell # 51 on pages 91-93 of my book).

So I personally do not rely on Riddell's belief in all cases. This case however, at first look appears to possibly be a low standard mint coin.

Now that data does not square well with other data from the Philadelphia mint which did not record deviations from standard as large as yours for Royalist issues. This is of course not accompanied by ant data that identifies specific coin varieties.

I did check the overlaps. One near the top (second edge) is 4-5 segments in length and extends roughly from the center of the T in ET to the right edge of the N in IND. This is a very long overlap. Longer than typical. The second overlap shown in the 6th edge picture is at minimum 5 and possibly as long as 6 segments. The 5 segment lap would start between the assayer initial M and the stop (period following). This does not align exactly with the opposite side. Even if I were to accept a 6 segment lap that only moves the start to the middle of the M. To be correct the start of the lap should be near the stop BEFORE the M not after it. I do not see the edge as correctly lapped.

Then I noticed that the reverse die shows significant doubling. These coining dies were not hubbed from master dies but forged dies often are.

I think the edge needs to be studied closely to be certain about where the actual overlap starts and stops.

Definitely get the coin tested with XRF if possible because the branch mint in Guanajuato used silver that was heavily tainted with gold. The earliest Republican strikes from Guanajuato show the highest gold contents of any of the Cap and Ray coins. I have an 1838 that contains 3% gold by weight. Since you point out that the coins were made quickly and under great pressure to produce large numbers - there is no time for the gold to have been removed. It was not worth it. Therefore expect to see more than 1% gold. If the trace of gold can not be measured it is a modern forgery.




Yes the die/mold had to have the two impressions, in my opinion. However, it is extremely unlikely that such a die could be made in a typical Mexican die shop in 1822. The doubling is too uniform for each letter to have been punched into the die one at a time with nearly the identical error. That is actually very hard to do - harder than getting it right.

Your conclusion:



This conclusion is not correct since the die could not have been created in an 1822 Mexican die shop. A struck coin would have to have been hubbed. That is a more modern operation and would make the coin a numismatic forgery - likely a centrifugal casting. A mold with two impressions is far easier to believe than a die punched twice on each letter.

So I think the XRF test will be determinative and may prove that a strike double was in fact POSSIBLE in 1822 using a screw press. If the coin has gold over 1% it is most likely genuine and that would prove the reverse was a strike double and that a debased example was actually made in 1822 by Royalist forces.

I would also want to know exactly when the mint operations changed hands from Royalist to Revolutionary. A debased issue made using old royalist dies might be more acceptable if the mint changed hands.

The options come down to three:

1. High gold - a genuine Royalist issue with low silver
2. High gold - an unauthorized Rebel or counterfeit issue
3. Low gold - a modern Numismatic Forgery

All other options seem to rule themselves out.

Did you test the equipment on a genuine coin from Mexico to see if the device could detect any trace amount of gold? I would hesitate to come to any conclusions without establishing its sensitivity.

jgenn I did not have any other coins with me to test. Guess I should have thought about establishing some base line for the type of coin being tested, but I just figured that since they use this device for testing the gold and silver they buy in from customers, that they would make sure that it could differentiate metals to a very fine degree. Seems to me that their bottom line would be seriously affected if the device did not give an accurate reading when it came to gold filled metals and lower gold content coins purchased for scrap.

Even with a known test coin, how could anyone be sure that the device was functioning properly?

With handheld XRF units - the gun must be recalibrated to detect gold. Most set to test for copper and silver will not simultaneously detect gold. Also the qualities of the XRF guns vary - some are accurate only to the nearest whole percent. That is fine for a scrap buyer or most coin shops because they are not interested in trace tests. They are interested in buying raw metals and rounding to 1% makes sense.

All of the genuine Do, Go, Mo and Zs coins including the Cap and Ray coins made up to 1842 (latest date coin I have tested so far) have proven to contain gold in variable amounts. The highest gold contents measured in my tests appeared in the 1830s for examples from Guanajuato.

Earlier examples in the portrait series might run even higher since the need to coin raw silver was even more urgent during the war. The majority of tests of portrait coins were performed on Mo and Zs types because they are more common and relatively few War time coins were tested.

realeswatcher I just re-read this thread and you said:

This piece is old/circulated - either genuine (regal), or contemporary counterfeit. And with that high a level of silver, and the very correct looking detail... has to be regal.

Your first statement that it has to be either a genuine regal issue or a contemporary counterfeit is about correct as I see it. I would sate it as most likely. I would not rule out artificial aging however. Your conclusion that 94 % silver means it has to be regal and genuine is simply not correct because there is no detectable gold.

That is why I suggested using a higher level (better) XRF or making sure the apparatus was properly calibrated.

By 1830 there was a buy order issued by the US mint to purchase Regal War time issues of Mexico precisely because of the GOLD and extra silver content that was typical. The US mint knew that on average each coin could be refined and result in about a 4 cent profit for the mint.

So I can not accept the premise of a genuine regal 8R that contains no gold - not if it is made with Mexican silver. If it is made with European silver you just change the trace contaminant to lead which could not be fully removed before 1850. If it was from South America there should be arsenic. A pure alloy of silver and copper was IMPOSSIBLE to create (except in small amounts in a laboratory setting where the expense of doing so was not critical).

Refining techniques had to be invented before silver could be purified on the scale required by a mint. So in the 1820's it was just NOT possible to make pure silver on an industrial scale. Not if it came from Mexican ore, South American ore or European ore. The contaminant varies but pure silver did not exist.

What is it? At this point I do not know with any certainty. I expect it is likely a debased genuine issue a fraud possibly made by the rebels. I also expect that an accurate XRF test will detect the trace contaminants that prove age.

"I expect it is likely a debased genuine issue a fraud possibly made by the rebels."

The XRF showed 94%... Even for the most simplistic device, just how far off could it possibly be? Clearly this coin is very close to or actually in excess of regal-level silver content.