I just received this coin and would appreciate any comments and input. The seller says that it is genuine, but obviously I would like independent confirmation. I plan to take it in to my local coin shop tomorrow but I don't know who good he is with older stuff. It certainly appears to be a "shipwreck" coin...either that or it is badly cast! But look closely at the few elements that do not have "shipwreck effect", such as the E and M on the date side (which I am calling obverse) and it looks like smooth, struck metal there. Clearly it has overall damage, but it is light enough that the entire coin is easily visible I think. On the later "bust" reales coins, the mint mark is fairly easy to find, but I don't know which element to look at on this coin. Not sure if it is a Spanish struck coin, or Colonial. Any other info would be greatly appreciated! I DID buy this out of Spain before I learned here that there were a lot of fakes coming out of there. However, the price was fairly low, seller offered a return policy and does have good feedback. Price was $25 delivered. Thanks! Rob
I think R/S is the Seville mintmark, J is the assayer's mark. I can't speak to its authenticity, but the damage doesn't bother me. The second pic is upside-down.
Thanks. I saw that the image was upside down, so I flipped it and re-uploaded it to my website with the same name. But I guess CT actually GRABBED the image as it was when I made the post. I have re-linked it with the right-side-up version. Rob
I've only lately become interested in coins that would have circulated in America during the colonial period, and this one certainly fits the bill. The forum does have some Spanish experts, and I hope one of them comes along and verifies its authenticity. Its an important piece of history.
That was my thinking, too. I don't have too much interest in Spanish coins AS Spanish coins. But as ones that did circulate in our young country, or could have, I'm all for 'em! I actually have a total of 3 18th C. coins in hand or on the way as representatives and once I have them all, I'll also post the collection. Rob
It's possible it is but that doesn't look like salt water damage to me. Looks more like a ground find - a coin dug up out of the ground. And yes it is from Spain, not Spanish colonial. And while it is possible that some Spanish coins did manage to circulate here in the colonies, the Spanish themselves did everything they could to prevent that from happening. And it wasn't just the Spanish who did that, most countries did. And they didn't just do it in North America, they did it in all colonies. Many countries took extraordinary measures to stop native currency from leaving their shores. They would even force the crews of their ships to cash in all the coins they had in their possession and replace those coins with the coins that were in use in the countries they were traveling to. This was often done because the other coins were often debased from what the native source country coinage was. Spain's wasn't debased, at least not intentionally by the Crown, but many other country's coins were.
Found a great article on Spanish coins circulating in the Colonies! Find it here: http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/Sp-Silver.intro.html Particularly interesting related to my coin are the last two paragraphs, which indicate that my coin was of the "debased" variety that was SUPPOSED to stay in Spain, but in fact ended up being exported and widely used in the New World (especially the 2R). It traded at about 5 bits (2R coins) to the dollar rather than 4! They called it "new plate", or a "pistareen". Quoting from the above article: Fortunately, the English colonists could readily identify the Spanish "new plate" silver like the pistareen from the Spanish colonial pillar silver. The "new plate" silver had the crowned heraldic Hapsburg shield on the obverse while on the reverse was a cross with the Castile and Leon shield, thus these coins were known as the "cross" reales (and cross pistareens). From the same scholarly work, see http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinText/Sp-milled.2.html The 1 Reale coin pictured at top is the same pattern as mine, but earlier. Appears to confirm the Seville mintage. Pretty cool, I think! BTW...are the pictures in my first post broken for anyone else? They are now just "x"s. Rob
That site is the best online source of information on Colonials I've ever found. I came across it a few years ago, and I think I've read every page twice over at this point. I still see your pics.
Incidentally, I recently viewed the collection of colonial coins at the John D. Rockefeller Library in Williamsburg, and it's chock full of non-British issues found in digs around the area. If the world trading powers were trying to keep their coins in their own countries, they were doing a lousy job of it. I saw trays full of Spanish, Bolivian, Peruvian, and Mexican Reales, with barely a farthing among them. It seemed obvious that the colonial economy, at least in the Williamsburg area, was powered by Latin American silver.
That's just it though, the coins from Latin America - Bolivia, Peru, Mexico - and several other mints, those are all Spanish colonial. And they were supposed to circulate in North America, Central America, and South America by design. It was only the coins actually minted in Spain that they tried to stop. And it's not that Spain was doing a bad job. Coins like the pistareen were usually delivered to the colonies by countries other than Spain because they didn't want the debased coins in their homelands. For example, if you read the article referenced above you'll see that those pistareens mentioned were delivered to the colonies on an English ship, not a Spanish one.
Well I got bad news...I took it in to my local coin shop and he thinks it is a replica. The weight is off: only 5.5 grams instead of the expected 6.77. An he thinks the surface damage is wrong and artificial. Also didn't like the color or that it is too round and too perfectly formed for 1761. I'll likely seek another professional opinion to be certainly, but I think the weight problem is pretty damning. I'll contact the seller to see what he has to say as well. Any thoughts to add? Rob
I'm actually wondering if the weight isn't really that far off for this type of coin. I'm not sure what entry my dealer looked at in his book (Krause, probably?), but it may have been for colonial coins that were not debased. Looking at the individual coin entries on the UND website I linked above, the weight of 2R coins in their collection seems to be all over the place. The 1R I linked to above is of the same type, though a little earlier, and they list its weight at 2.67 gr. That would indicate a 2R of that type should weight 5.34 grams! Other 2R coins in their collection weight 6.12, 6.19, 6.04, 6.65 & 5.89! Doesn't seem to be a lot of consistency. The seller has already replied to me and insists it is genuine and from his personal collection, but also offered to take it back if I'm not happy. Of course I'd be out shipping. I'm going to wait to decide until I've had another "in hand" opinion. Rob
There is significant metal loss from corrosion. While 5.5 grams is a stretch, it's not entirely unheard of. Based on appearance I do not think it's fake.
