Spanish Netherlands 1689 Patagon Contemporary Counterfeit?

Thanks for the response. I am guessing these are not so common as Spanish colonials from the same era, and was hoping to hear from collectors who might have one, since I hadnt seen before.

I guessed that maybe this coin was originally silvered, but it looks like there is no longer any evidence of it.

One of the things that struck me (and attracted me) is that the details are much sharper than most authentic coins from that era that show up at auction. Which made me think a bit about whether it is contemporary.

tdziemia I believe I also saw this coin and nearly bid on it. I didn't because I feared that I would be overextended financially due to a couple large collections I was negotiating for.

To me it certainly looked like a "contemporaneous circulating counterfeit". At this time period (pre-Sheffield) it is most likely to be an unsilvered core (and hence uncirculated). Silvering would have been added to a struck copper fake using a paint (any number of pigments) or a silver amalgam application similar to gilding only using silver not gold. In silver amalgam the struck core is coated with a mercury-silver amalgam (a past like stuff) which is brushed on to form a uniform layer (artistically) and then it is heated in a furnace to several hundred degrees to cause the mercury to boil away leaving behind the silver residue. The process was not without problems and silver gilding was far less successful than gold gilding. It often cracked or flaked off.

The only other process of striking a coin with a core of copper and a surface of silver is the ancient fouree process. In that case a copper blank planchet is covered with a silver foil layer on both sides and it is then struck as a unit. The striking pressure, if adequate, bonds the three layers together. This process also had drawbacks - namely the edge was not covered (treated variously - sometimes with solder). Additionally the mechanical bond between the silver foil and the core was easily broken and the silver could peel away or expose the core to corrosion very quickly. These were usually single pass counterfeits.




That adage often attributed to counterfeiters seems to have originated outside the trade because following that advice makes for an unsuccessful counterfeiter. Once the first person notices the fraud - the counterfeiter would need to flee the area or stop passing that type.

A better adage would be the one I heard directly from an old forger who was never caught. He said it was better to make something so common that no one ever looks at it closely or immediately. That way by the time the fraud is finally noticed the forger's profit is secured and the mark no longer remembers the passer. He also advised making low value things so that the mark does not bother reporting the fraud.