Spanish Colonial Coinage 8 Reales?

You have a much nicer version of this:

http://goccf.com/t/285954
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1777-Contem...252839145383
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthope...t-1864752934

ColonialJohn is of course familiar with that second example. John, By the way... in bringing these links/pics up, I came across this from the Nov. 2012 Stack's sale (Wnuck):

https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/l...view/3-2C6DT

I hadn't noticed before, but that piece is clearly related to this "4R size marked 8R". Same punches, etc.

paty99 What you have there is a genuine oddity - an undersized coin that looks like a Contemporary Circulating Counterfeit "8" Reales.

It is tempting to theorize the manufacturer was simply ignorant about the specific details of the coin and the results were unbelievable errors. As a counterfeit coin - this would have a very difficult time finding acceptance. It should have been a failure. So why does it exist?

However, this is not the only coin I have seen that has a denomination that does not match the size. At one time I owned a 2 reales sized coin that read 4R (I sold it a few years ago) and I have seen a few others made in rather odd sizes. Some of these were clearly made to be buttons. Some were even single sided. Others made with undersized designs were originally counters or spiel marks.

So what is it? I have theories but no solid answers. If I was forced to guess - I would say a button is most likely.

I find them very interesting but I do not view them as circulating as an 8R, nor would I classify them as Counterfeits. The category of "Coin Like Objects" used by Calbetto seems to fit best.

Bob, I don't have your pic CDs in front of me, just working off of my desktop files... but I think I had this piece's photo saved from Gord Nichols' site several years back, so you must have it.

It is another related piece. The reverse (looking at the spacing of "ET IND") looks to match the correctly 4R-denominated Stack's 2012 Wnuck piece. The obverse? Not sure... doesn't look to match EXACTLY? Clearly all siblings, though.

Looking carefully at these compared... the centers are flat, but I still don't see signs of a shank. What (3) out of the (5) total DO have going on is some activity at 12 o'clock above the bust. So, perhaps this DID have some medallic non-coin use?

Hello everyone and thank you for the replies and education. Realeswatcher that is some great info. thank you.
I got this coin back in the 80s and at that time I did a specific gravity test on it and I felt it showed it was silver. I have not done anything since then but it sure sounds like silver when you drop it. I should probably do another test on it as my means and scrutiny have definitely improved since the 80s. When I get a chance I'll let you know. One thing I find very interesting is that of the 5 coins that realeswatcher shows, they all show different stages of wear, meaning, in my opinion, they were used for something?
Pat

Yes, I think it is safe to assume that these were, in fact, used for something...............

Your example is the most unquestionably struck of the (5). Obviously a cast would be more prone to a planchet crack, but that could certainly happen with a less-than-perfectly made struck piece, also.

Just a reminder...

Buy/Sell/Trade Rules

By the way, on the idea of (usually somewhat later) imitative buttons vs. pieces intended as counterfeit coinage -- John, I think you dodged one with that recent 1771 2R out of Spain. That is the 2nd example of that type I've seen, and both had removed button shanks. I think it was indeed a boton type...

Again, here's that site out of Argentina from that other thread that shows many of the button types. I've never gone through all of these... would be a worthwhile exercise:
http://www.botonistica.es/catalogo/catalogo.html

This is the recent 1771 "2R" I mentioned along with the one I've seen before... and then another ex-button 1771 I've seen. Though beat up, the date digits on that latter piece are clear and don't appear to match up with either the former piece or any of the (3) Kleeberg 1771 obverses.

Pat, what kind of edge design/pattern does your piece have? Any chance you could take a decent photo of a segment or three? And John, do you recall whether your piece had anything to the edge? Looked back at your ebay description of it and you didn't note anything about it...

The related Stacks piece marked with correct denomination 4R (linked above) was noted as having a "decorated circles and squares edge". Might be a point in the column for it being intended as a coin... though maybe if it was a button or pendant, they were just sticklers for detail?

FYI, specific gravity/XRF would obviously be interesting for this piece, but whether it has actual silver content or not has zero bearing on its collectibility.