Hello and welcome.

Unfortunately, it almost certainly was not actually made in 1702 - the plain, simple style of the numerals simply were not written like that back in the 1700s. They make it appear early 20th century, possibly later but not much earlier.
The stars around the edge are intended to be reminiscent of similarly star-spangled American coinage, yet is unlike actual US
coinage sufficiently so as not to fall afoul of anti-counterfeiting laws. The long-haired portrait vaguely reminds me more of the portrait of the child-queen Wilhelmina on Dutch gold coins from the late 1800s:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces37612.htmlIt looks very brassy now, but it probably looked a lot more gold-like when it was new. Given that it has a large hole in it, and was made with a design on only one side, I would assume this was made as a piece of "costume jewellery", intended to be worn as a necklace or similar. So, why would whoever made it put "1702" on it when it wasn't actually made in 1702? Why, to "make it look old", of course.
Don't say "infinitely" when you mean "very"; otherwise, you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite. - C. S. Lewis