let's start some buzz on the coin thread!

[ToddsPoint]

I'm simply going to say, the professional appraiser who made the offer disagrees with your assessment, and if they were made by the Chinese, they buried them in Vermont, prior to 1962. Thanks for playing.

I’d run as fast as I could and get that $8,000. 🤣

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[l.cutler]

It may not look like much but this is one of my better coins. It is a 1787 Connecticut 33.28-Z.20 of which there are currently 8 known. I love trying to ID low grade coins, it can be very challenging but also occasionally very rewarding. I got this one as a buy it now on ebay unidentified.

 

[ARC]

Here’s one you may not have seen before.

After the late 16th Century, the ‘Spanish dollar’ (aka ‘Mexican dollar’ and ‘silver peso’) increasingly became the de facto currency for trade in the Far East, trusted in China especially for its reliable weight and silver fineness. China ultimately produced its own version as the silver yuan (‘dragon dollar’) which circulated alongside Spanish/Mexican coins in trade with its neighbours.

Following its defeat in the Opium Wars of 1839–1842 and 1856–1860, China was forced to open its ports to foreign trade. A general shortage of Spanish/Mexican coins resulted in a number of Western nations trading with China and other Far Eastern countries (for commodities such as tea, silk and porcelain) ultimately producing their own versions in equivalent weight and fineness. The coins were known as ‘trade dollars’.

In 1895, lobbying by the Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce with support from the Straits Settlements (British territories in Asia) led to production of the ‘British Trade Dollar’ to alleviate the shortage. Like this one, from my collection (not dug).

View attachment 2183197
View attachment 2183198

The reverse has ‘One Dollar’ in Chinese script and ‘One Ringgit’ in Jawi Malay, with the Chinese symbol for longevity in the centre. Most were minted in India, but some in London, and mine has the ‘B’ mintmark for Bombay (now Mumbai) on the middle tine of Britannia’s trident:

View attachment 2183199

They were struck as 27.95g of .900 silver (a slightly lower standard than the silver peso, which circulated alongside it) and intended for wider circulation in British territories, but the adoption of the ‘Straits dollar’ in 1905 left Hong Kong as the only British colony using them and they ceased to be produced in 1935. The coin never circulated in Britain but had a fluctuating exchange value depending on the bullion price for silver.

Shame that it was cleaned at some point.

 

[Red-Coat]

Shame that it was cleaned at some point.

I'm sure it hasn't. It's virtually uncirculated apart from the bag marks and still has some original lustre. The lighting I used to reduce glare belies that.

 

[BigWaveDave]

Terry…. What the absolute fudge!
That 1795 dollar is giving me palpitations.
1803 not too shabby either….
You made my day posting those!
Thanks!!!

 

[BigWaveDave]

Red Coat….. your Hong Kong dollar is gorgeous. Never seen one of those.
Love your history lessons!

 

[Red-Coat]

Here are another couple you may not have seen before (my collection, not dug).

These 5 fen and 1 fen coins were issued as official currency (not tokens) by the Japanese-controlled puppet state of Manchukuo (Manchuria) in China in the Kangde era under Emperor Puyi. The 5 fen was issued in 1944 and 1945, and the 1 fen in 1945 only, circulating until the Soviets invaded in August 1945.

Towards the end of the war, metals were in desperately short supply for production of anything non-military and the coins were moulded from a red-brown rubberised fibre as an emergency measure. Many sources describe them as ‘fibre’ (some sources say compressed coconut fibre) and they certainly have a proportion of some kind of fibre, but mixed with vulcanised rubber. Magnesite (magnesium carbonate) was also added, and the resultant plasticised dough was pressed in moulds and then hardened.

The exact composition is not well documented and the material was experimental to the extent that there may have been more than one formulation used. Rubber was also in short supply and circumstantial evidence suggests that the rubber might have been obtained from locally-grown 'Russian Dandelions' (Taraxacum kok-saghyz) which yield a latex similar to that from the rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis). Several countries experimented with it as an alternative to rubber and the Russians in particular cultivated it on a large scale during WWII as an emergency source when supplies of rubber from Southeast Asia were cut off.

 

[tamrock]

Coin collecting was pretty fun for a kid in the early 1960s. I lived in Kewanee, ILL and there was a coin shop uptown me and a friend would ride our stingray bikes up to see what we could afford with our allowance and lawn mowing money. Digging through your parents change to find spots to fill in the penny, buffalo & Jefferson nickels, Mercury & Roosevelt dimes, Liberty & Washington quarters and Liberty, Franklin and the new Kenedy half dollar books, which all those types were still in circulation was a great activity. Sadly I sold off most all the silver I had collected plus what was handed down to me from my grandma which was $87.00 face value of 1921 morgans and 1922 Peace dollars back in the early 1980s during the Hunt Bros silver manipulation era. When I cash in sterling silver at my local coin dealer, I always look over the ancient coins they have and think for a moment I should start buying a few of those, only because they're so interesting. I've held off, because I'm unsure if I'd be buying at the right price. I've never got around to the research of what you best spend your money on when it comes to ancient coins. They also have some old ship wreck gold and silver coins at times and those sell pretty quick at high prices. Most of what I collect today is what I find interesting and way under value in these hugh thrift stores we have around here. It's amazing what some folks toss out.

 

[pepperj]

While I never really looked into the value of these coins, I was offered over $8,000.00 for them last year (Not the quarter which is for size). Found by my father in the early 1960's using a modified WWII Mine detector.

Here's why your 1803 is a copy.

Here is the real deal.

So something isn't adding up.

 

[ToddsPoint]

The Chinese are getting better at making fakes. Most are easy to tell. A few are getting really close to looking original. I’d recommend to Terry to put his coins on a digital scale and take a pic and show us. An authentic silver dollar from that era should weigh exactly 26.96 grams.

 

[pepperj]

The 1795 is questionable also it seems.
In the Copy versions the mouth is a dead give away.
Now here is the posted closed mouth.
Also notice the nostril area.
(Looks like an indented C)
The V shaped upper lip making it puff out.
The hole of the nostril

Now here is a authentic 1795
Notice the open mouth
The distinctive laugh line (my term)
No C indented nose feature
Large nostril opening
Indented curve to the upper lip between lip and nostril.

The distinction between the posted and real version is another red flag of it being a copy.

 

[pepperj]

Shame that it was cleaned at some point.

I can see this where it looks buffed almost.
I also wonder about the greenish leaching that is occurring in different areas.

 

[Red-Coat]

I can see this where it looks buffed almost.
I also wonder about the greenish leaching that is occurring in different areas.

If you were able to examine it in hand, you would be convinced that it has neither been polished nor chemically cleaned. The green discolouration is from localised corrosion of the copper content. It's not unusual to see in coins produced to .900 fine rather than .925 fine, particularly if they have been in humid environments and/or stored long-term in the older vinyl coin envelopes (as this one was).

 

[pepperj]

If you were able to examine it in hand, you would be convinced that it has neither been polished nor chemically cleaned. The green discolouration is from localised corrosion of the copper content. It's not unusual to see in coins produced to .900 fine rather than .925 fine, particularly if they have been in humid environments and/or stored long-term in the older vinyl coin envelopes (as this one was).

The micro fine scratches all go in the same direction it seemed.
This is why I commented on the cleaning.

Buffed was a harsh term.

Thanks for the clarification on the color leaching.
So true regarding humidity and it having an effect on the coins.

Query: .900 is still higher purity than coin silver?
I understood coin silver was .800-850 range.

 

[Red-Coat]

The micro fine scratches all go in the same direction it seemed.
This is why I commented on the cleaning.

Buffed was a harsh term.

Thanks for the clarification on the color leaching.
So true regarding humidity and it having an effect on the coins.

Query: .900 is still higher purity than coin silver?
I understood coin silver was .800-850 range.

I suspect the 'scratches' are from die polishing rather than coin polishing.


Silver at .900 fine is essentially the same as coin silver, but with one difference. These coins were produced from silver which had been assayed at 90% minimum silver content. Coin silver was originally from melted-down coins, often of Mexican origin, but also with other defunct foreign coins thrown into the mix where it was assumed that the silver content approximated to 90% but without any assay to prove it. As such the fineness was regarded as nominal. Subsequently, 'coin silver' was also purpose-made for production of silver articles but, again, at a nominal .900 fine without any official assay to support it.

 

[pepperj]

I suspect the 'scratches' are from die polishing rather than coin polishing.


Silver at .900 fine is essentially the same as coin silver, but with one difference. These coins were produced from silver which had been assayed at 90% minimum silver content. Coin silver was originally from melted-down coins, often of Mexican origin, but also with other defunct foreign coins thrown into the mix where it was assumed that the silver content approximated to 90% but without any assay to prove it. As such the fineness was regarded as nominal. Subsequently, 'coin silver' was also purpose-made for production of silver articles but, again, at a nominal .900 fine without any official assay to support it.

I first ran into this term actually in India 1993 while buying silver jewelry.
The silver venders were slightly confused on why I was more interested in the trade ins than the newly produced silver.
They were honest actually in stating the piece was coin silver and would adjust the pricing accordingly.

I assumed that coin silver would be different for certain countries as well.

A lot of the older pieces were produced in the British/India era.

 

[Red-Coat]

I first ran into this term actually in India 1993 while buying silver jewelry.
The silver venders were slightly confused on why I was more interested in the trade ins than the newly produced silver.
They were honest actually in stating the piece was coin silver and would adjust the pricing accordingly.

I assumed that coin silver would be different for certain countries as well.

A lot of the older pieces were produced in the British/India era.

Yes, it has different meanings in different countries. The term was popularised in America but silver coins minted after the Revolutionary War were only .892 fine, increasing to .900 in 1837, before the United States embraced the British sterling standard of .925 from around 1869 (but not for coinage). The .900 fine coinage standard was not officially designated until the National Stamping Act of 1906.

In earlier times, the term ‘coin silver’ for manufactured items generally referred to items that were approximately 900 parts silver and 100 parts copper, with no particular guarantee that they had been assayed as such. It was a much-abused term that was almost unregulated.

 

[Red-Coat]

Here’s another of our splendid coinage oddities from my collection… the ‘double-florin’ (valued at four shillings):

It was introduced in 1887 as part of a coinage redesign in 22.62g of .925 silver, with an updated portrait of Victoria whose ‘young head’ on coins no longer bore any resemblance to her features. The new portrait was publicly ridiculed for the tiny crown incongruously perched on top of her head.

The reverse depicts the shields of England (twice), Scotland and Ireland separated by sceptres, and earned the popular description of ‘tea trays and pokers’ after the author Gertrude Rawlings disparagingly referred to it as such.

There had been political pressure to issue a large denomination silver coin to reduce dependence on the gold half-sovereign (valued at 10 shillings) since it was expensive to produce. The silver crown valued at 5 shillings had proved unpopular as a circulating coin because of its size and weight.

The double-florin failed to meet the requirement and was abandoned after 1890. There had been public criticism that it was too close in size to the crown and easily mistaken for it since neither coin carried any indication of face value. In dimly lit pubs and taverns it was often passed off as a crown, earning it the nickname “Barmaid’s Ruin”.

Despite the UK moving to decimal currency in 1971 with 100 new pence to the pound, the double florin (48 old pence) was not demonetised and remains legal tender for 20 (new) pence.

 

[pepperj]

Here’s another of our splendid coinage oddities from my collection… the ‘double-florin’ (valued at four shillings):

View attachment 2183563
View attachment 2183564

It was introduced in 1887 as part of a coinage redesign in 22.62g of .925 silver, with an updated portrait of Victoria whose ‘young head’ on coins no longer bore any resemblance to her features. The new portrait was publicly ridiculed for the tiny crown incongruously perched on top of her head.

The reverse depicts the shields of England (twice), Scotland and Ireland separated by sceptres, and earned the popular description of ‘tea trays and pokers’ after the author Gertrude Rawlings disparagingly referred to it as such.

There had been political pressure to issue a large denomination silver coin to reduce dependence on the gold half-sovereign (valued at 10 shillings) since it was expensive to produce. The silver crown valued at 5 shillings had proved unpopular as a circulating coin because of its size and weight.

The double-florin failed to meet the requirement and was abandoned after 1890. There had been public criticism that it was too close in size to the crown and easily mistaken for it since neither coin carried any indication of face value. In dimly lit pubs and taverns it was often passed off as a crown, earning it the nickname “Barmaid’s Ruin”.

Despite the UK moving to decimal currency in 1971 with 100 new pence to the pound, the double florin (48 old pence) was not demonetised and remains legal tender for 20 (new) pence.

Thanks for sharing this one and different history behind the coin.

The poor Lass getting the Ruin.

 

[pepperj]

There's a general theme in this mitt of coins-copy that.