A Couple Of New 8 Reales Additions (Neat Error)

Won this one the other day, as well.

1. The 1821 Zacatecas pieces are interesting... such deeply/intricately engraved detail. How familiar are you with this date/mint? I've wondered what's going on with the weird two-tone appearance on the cheeks/high points on many 1821 Zs pieces you see (incl. one I own, which made me start noticing this)? It seems to be particular to this date/mint...

2. Nice crusty armored bust 1810... amazingly, that constitutes a decently even strike for these.

3. Nice 1803... solidly struck central detail. Just a bit of planchet stress on the periphery, which is fairly common and not really distracting on this piece. They called it UNC-, which theoretically equates to a low-end UNC on this side of the Atlantic... It's at least high AU (AU58) detail. I don't know if I can say either way if there's any actual wear. The look of the reverse makes a case for UNC.

I hope the surfaces are OK on it. I've discovered that Aureo's photo lighting can veil things... which is slightly bothersome since they seem to reserve use of the word "limpiada" for when there's an palpable aroma of steel wool... It does look to have at least some frosty contrast.

I'd say you went for pretty strong money on it (unless you're certain it's UNC)... but considering where the market seems to be now for XF and up portrait 8R, it's not really. Did you see this ending today? Nothing special date, NGC "AU det. cleaned". From seller's pics, it's barely scratching AU and the cleaning looks pretty harsh/uneven. Still brought almost 2 bills:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1792-MO-FM-PILL...380351142383

FWIW, I've also gotten a few pieces from them that I feared were brighter-looking than they turned out to be... so who knows.

Just noticed that I made an error when describing the error on the 1821 - the superscript would normally be after "Z", not "R". and legend should read "Zs 8R RG".

realeswatcher, thank you for your comments.

I've never noticed the tone difference before and will pay more attention to these in the future. 1821 in Zacatecas is an interesting year, as you mention. Due to the amount of coins produced in 1821 (over 2.4 million pesos), as well as the assumption that mint continued production using the same dies well into 1822, there are quite a few varieties to be found. Calbeto alone documents 12.

I've been disappointed with Aureo coins in the past, especially when it comes to hairlines, to a point where I'm considering not bidding on their coins again. We'll see if this one makes me change my mind.

Mexico AU-MS has been bringing in very strong prices recently and that wouldn't change any time soon. With both PCGS and NGC creating competitive registry sets the prices should remain strong. Have you seen the recent madness on ebay with MS63 and up slabbed common cap and rays?

Hmm... I see what you mean about the cheek. Looking at a single coin, I would just attribute it to normal wear, but seeing multiple examples it looks systematic. Interesting puzzle.

Nice cameo effect happening on the bust, but the fields are heavily scuffed. I really wish Aureo would improve their photography.

Catalog image:



My images to show surfaces:

Well, the piece could be worse... It does have decent frost/some contrast, pops the prices on these - did you see that PCGS63, PL but not noted, go for $2100 a while back on ebay? Yeah, shows mishandling and definitely a lot of wipe marks... but it doesn't look like systematic, uniform whizzing across the whole surface, at least from the pics. Any luster left, or overdipped?

Mishandling aside, do you think it's full UNC detail? I would lean towards that over AU58, though not 100% certain. If there's some luster left, "maybe" you have an outside shot at squeezing that into an NGC60? The focal but area seems quite decent-looking, so possibly? If not, hopefully UNC details rather than AU details... Def. not a PCGS candidate. Genny works as cheap beer, NOT as a coin description.

Just to jump in on the subject of the 1821 Zs issues.

I have found that date and mint to be the MOST commonly forged date of the "Boston" type coins. I have 14 die varieties in my collection. I attribute that to the fact that so many real coins were produced of this date. It would be the obvious target if you were just trying ot fit in.

The "Boston" types are the coins made to mimic real Portrait 8R coins and were initially made using the correct amount of silver. The existence of this class has been very difficult to document but the bare fact that it was in fact done is now beyond doubt. Where these coins were made is still conjectural but the obvious candidates are Mexico City, Birmingham, England and the Boston, Mass. area. Just as obvious as the existence of this class of coins, is the implication that "sharp" operators also made copies with too little silver in their alloy. A recent article in Coin World about the abortive attempt to establish a US mint in California expressly to coin Portrait Mexican 8Rs - clearly implies that not only were silver forgeries made but that debased copies promptly followed once the die duplicating technology was created.

So what I am implying is that in some cases especially with 1821 Zs coins you may be dealing with coins that were struck far later than 1822 and were perhaps not made in Mexico. The change in color can in some cases point to a debased silver core being used. That is not the only reason but needs to be looked at closely.

Regarding the 1803 coin in high grade with the surface cracking caused by stress in the rolling step - I have one additional caution. High grade copies of Portrait 8Rs are well known among the Boston types and they are notoriously hard to identify. I have a superb near MS example of a triple struck 1784 that I attribute as a "Boston" type. But one thing I have learned over the years is that Boston types often exhibit this same cracked texture. In fact the very first coin of this class that I bought PERSONALLY from the man who made the coin exhibits this texture.

I have told the story on the forum before but back in 1957 when I first became interested in coin collecting my Uncle introduced me to a friend of his who in years past was a forger and counterfeiter. That meeting and follow up visits led in large measure to my interest in counterfeit coins - specifically Mexican. This old man was part of a group of men who made Portrait 8R coins in silver for use in the orient. He worked in a foundry that had a "third shift operation". The operation was located in New Bedford, Mass and supplied the coins to a Boston Merchant who dealt with China. The old man still had several copies he said were made BEFORE 1930 and he finally sold me one in 1960 just before his death. It is an unremarkable 1805 Mo TH 8R. But it contains in one coin all of the clues I have over the years used to diagnose similar "Boston" type forgeries. It has the cracked surface on the planchet caused by low temperature rolling. It has soft die cracks and breaks caused by poor grade die steel. It has the odd smile that the old man said they could never get quite right. It has small excess metal around many of the details caused by the duplicating lathe used to make the die. It has incomplete dentils in an area where the strike exceeded the die impression. And of course it has a VERY BAD edge application done with one die applied twice.

I have never before shown pictures of this coin before but here it is. I paid $3 for it in 1960. It is one of my most cherished counterfeits and perhaps the coin I have studied most for clues in the past 51 years.








I am not saying your coin is a counterfeit of the Boston type - but it is one I would closely examine if I saw it in person to see if perchance it was not an original.

The 21 Zs with "no mouth" is aways a suspect coin. Do you have the abilty to do a specific gravity test on it or at least weigh it?