I am guessing it is a counterfeit. It looks to good to be 200 years old.
Posted 11/15/2018 5:46 pm
moose59 My initial comment is that you have the top photo upside down. Otherwise it looks completely typical of the type. One question - what caused the dimple on the edge? Is it a test mark?
I have seen many of these cross through various shops in my 30 years authenticating and in my personal opinion the effort to sort them out is a bit of a waste of time beyond a cursory examination. I simply review the surfaces make sure they make sense for castings, etc.. Having seen a few, you get a feel for the average type. As far as scientific testing goes, there seems to be no published standard that would allow a weight check and certainly not a density check. The standard alloy being copper based gives little hope of finding an XRF signature that would be of value.
Anyone interested in starting a database for weight, density and XRF results has my wish for "good luck" with that.
I have seen many of these cross through various shops in my 30 years authenticating and in my personal opinion the effort to sort them out is a bit of a waste of time beyond a cursory examination. I simply review the surfaces make sure they make sense for castings, etc.. Having seen a few, you get a feel for the average type. As far as scientific testing goes, there seems to be no published standard that would allow a weight check and certainly not a density check. The standard alloy being copper based gives little hope of finding an XRF signature that would be of value.
Anyone interested in starting a database for weight, density and XRF results has my wish for "good luck" with that.
