4 Reales - the hard way

OriginalDan

Haven’t shared any new purchases in a while, in fact haven’t made a whole lot of new purchases in a while but wanted to share these two as I am especially fond of them. As you might expect from me both have Chinese chopmarks.

The first is a beautiful 1813 2 real from Santiago Chile. Most portrait reales from Chile are pretty scarce. This one has nice toning with some mirrored flash still present around the devices. Neat coin.

The 2nd is a non-colonial 1826 Spanish 2 reales in nice shape, with an obverse drill mark and a single reverse chop. Very wholesome look to it.

Both of these are really the epitome of what I like to find in a chopmarked coin. A little bit of wear to keep them honest, original surfaces and skin, somewhat scarce host coin, eye appealing and not too beat up by the Chinese Shroff who blessed the coin as legitimate.

I was able to purchase both of these out of European auctions a while back. They took their sweet time getting back to the states, but hey, they’ve been all over the world so what’s the rush? Thanks for taking a look!

TwoKopeiki

Dan, nice additions to your collection. I can see why these appealed to you.

Question - are you not worried that with the popularity of chopmarked coins with some examples bringing in sometimes more than what a non-chopped example would, more people would be tempted to apply their own home-made chops in order to drive the value up? Afterall, someone with an inexpensive 3d printer using hard plastics materials could effectively create a punch that would stand-up to a single use before being damaged.

OriginalDan

This question is becoming more common, unfortunately. I think a few years ago, my answer would have been "if you see enough of these, you get a feel for what's a 'real' Chinese chopmark vs. some other kind of mark or damage, or a 'fake' chopmark. But today I would give you a different answer, because I've now seen what I believe to be Alibaba style fake coins with fake chopmarks. It's kind of an odd position to take, but I like how Chopmark collecting has become popular, but don't want them to ever get too expensive because of the issue you posed here.

A few examples of what I've seen out there:

• Contemporary counterfeit coins with chopmarks (probably real chopmarks). I think these are neat historical artifacts and I collect them when I see them. There also exist contemporary counterfeits with fake chopmarks that were cast when the fake was made. Also collectible.

• Deceptively chopmarked coins that look legitimate at first but are not. Back in the mid 1900's there was a dealer by the name of Schulmann that applied fake chops to a bunch of coins, usually MT Talers and "Fat Man" chinese dollars. They are now easily detectible because he used the same 3 or 4 punches on all of the coins and chopped them in pretty much the same way each time. Even Frank Rose fell for these, he had one or two. Now with the Internet we know what they are. But even without the internet, the chops look off.

• Damaged coins that are labeled "Chopmarked". These are the usually damaged coins that with some eBay seller fishing for a sucker, trying to pass the coin off as something historical when it is not.

• Mentioned above, a new breed of fake coins with fake chops. They are fairly well done, but still fairly obvious to me an other experts in this area. Unfortunately it's only a matter of time before these get so good that they are virtually undetectable as a fake.

I still feel pretty confident that I know what something is if I see it, but that's certainly not a foolproof statement. Even the most expert error collectors are never really 'sure'. It's kind of like that. And keep in mind, a really high percentage of coins are still way more valuable without the chopmark, so this helps. It's the ones that are MORE valuable with chops that you really need to be suspect of, like an early US dollar for example. Cover up some existing damage with a 'chopmark' and you've taken a damaged coin and made it into something very sought after.

So, this is one reason that I keep the provenance with each coin I purchase. Even if I'm the first one to track where the came from, I hope that I can start a record that will stay with the coin as it moves from one future owner to the other. And likewise, I seek out coins with a good lineage attached to them. Coins purchased directly in China many decades ago and then tracked by owner(s) are my favorite.

bidask

Very interesting !

EVillageProwler

@OriginalDan,

For the "chopped" early US dollar that disguises a problem, one can always sell to our buddy in the Light Side forum.

Edited to add: congrats on these!!!

EVP

jgenn

Very nice Dan. I share Roman's concerns regarding fake chops on fake or genuine coins. I think you are safer with the minors, since these would not have been counterfeited for trade with China in the quantities that the 8 reales were.

OriginalDan

@jgenn said:
Very nice Dan. I share Roman's concerns regarding fake chops on fake or genuine coins. I think you are safer with the minors, since these would not have been counterfeited for trade with China in the quantities that the 8 reales were.

You'd think the minors would be safe, but apparently not! Here's a contemporary fake 2R with chop.

WorldCoinsDmitry

Modern fantasy chops are another issue. Usually on genuine common coins... here are a few examples I've seen floating around lately:

WorldCoinsDmitry

@OriginalDan said:

Back in the mid 1900's there was a dealer by the name of Schulmann that applied fake chops to a bunch of coins, usually MT Talers and "Fat Man" chinese dollars. They are now easily detectible because he used the same 3 or 4 punches on all of the coins and chopped them in pretty much the same way each time. Even Frank Rose fell for these, he had one or two. Now with the Internet we know what they are. But even without the internet, the chops look off.

Wasn't Shulmann just the auctioneer that spread these? I forgot the guy's name, but it was one particular collector that is purported to have traveled to the mid-east and had such fantasy pieces commissioned. I was fortunate enough to pick up a few of these on the cheap. The host coins are MTT of the 1930's-50's types. That last one used to sell in European auctions for $2-3K as a period piece (!!!).

jgenn

@OriginalDan said:

@jgenn said:
Very nice Dan. I share Roman's concerns regarding fake chops on fake or genuine coins. I think you are safer with the minors, since these would not have been counterfeited for trade with China in the quantities that the 8 reales were.

You'd think the minors would be safe, but apparently not! Here's a contemporary fake 2R with chop.

The importance of having a well stocked black cabinet cannot be understated.

OriginalDan

@jgenn and @TwoKopeiki I'd love your opinion on this one. It was purchased on eBay from a seller in China. The coin and chops look pretty good to me (unfortunately I don't have edge pics handy) but I'm not 100% convinced it's real. Sorry Roman I know it's not from Mexico.

You can right-click the pic for a larger view.

TLeverage

@WorldCoinsDmitry said:
Back in the mid 1900's there was a dealer by the name of Schulmann that applied fake chops to a bunch of coins, usually MT Talers and "Fat Man" chinese dollars. They are now easily detectible because he used the same 3 or 4 punches on all of the coins and chopped them in pretty much the same way each time. Even Frank Rose fell for these, he had one or two. Now with the Internet we know what they are. But even without the internet, the chops look off.

Wasn't Shulmann just the auctioneer that spread these? I forgot the guy's name, but it was one particular collector that is purported to have traveled to the mid-east and had such fantasy pieces commissioned. I was fortunate enough to pick up a few of these on the cheap. The host coins are MTT of the 1930's-50's types. That last one used to sell in European auctions for $2-3K as a period piece (!!!).

To my knowledge, Schulmann himself was responsible for the application of these fake chops. He only used two marks, both of the same merchant (Yon Kim Hong), one in Malay, one in Chinese, and applied them to a vast range of coins. There is an example of the Chinese chop on a Straits Settlements Dollar being sold through Dix Noonan Webb as a genuine coin this week:

And an example of the same type, using the Malay variant:

@OriginalDan said:
@jgenn and @TwoKopeiki I'd love your opinion on this one. It was purchased on eBay from a seller in China. The coin and chops look pretty good to me (unfortunately I don't have edge pics handy) but I'm not 100% convinced it's real. Sorry Roman I know it's not from Mexico.

You can right-click the pic for a larger view.

Dan, nothing jumps out at me from the images as false with this coin, but seeing it in hand is always a different experience. Anything stand out as being suspicious to you?

jgenn

@OriginalDan said:
@jgenn and @TwoKopeiki I'd love your opinion on this one. It was purchased on eBay from a seller in China. The coin and chops look pretty good to me (unfortunately I don't have edge pics handy) but I'm not 100% convinced it's real.

The dentils are much too uneven. Look at the difference between the two lions' tails -- these would have been made from identical punches so they should match almost exactly.

WorldCoinsDmitry

@TLeverage said:

@WorldCoinsDmitry said:
Back in the mid 1900's there was a dealer by the name of Schulmann that applied fake chops to a bunch of coins, usually MT Talers and "Fat Man" chinese dollars. They are now easily detectible because he used the same 3 or 4 punches on all of the coins and chopped them in pretty much the same way each time. Even Frank Rose fell for these, he had one or two. Now with the Internet we know what they are. But even without the internet, the chops look off.

Wasn't Shulmann just the auctioneer that spread these? I forgot the guy's name, but it was one particular collector that is purported to have traveled to the mid-east and had such fantasy pieces commissioned. I was fortunate enough to pick up a few of these on the cheap. The host coins are MTT of the 1930's-50's types. That last one used to sell in European auctions for $2-3K as a period piece (!!!).

To my knowledge, Schulmann himself was responsible for the application of these fake chops. He only used two marks, both of the same merchant (Yon Kim Hong), one in Malay, one in Chinese, and applied them to a vast range of coins. There is an example of the Chinese chop on a Straits Settlements Dollar being sold through Dix Noonan Webb as a genuine coin this week:

And an example of the same type, using the Malay variant:

I see, you guys mean the Asian chops. I was referring to the Maria Theresia thalers with fantasy counterstamps that first appeared at a Schulmann auction around 1960. I didn't know that he was personally responsible for creating these Chinese/Malay counterstamps, thanks for the info

@jgenn said:

@OriginalDan said:
@jgenn and @TwoKopeiki I'd love your opinion on this one. It was purchased on eBay from a seller in China. The coin and chops look pretty good to me (unfortunately I don't have edge pics handy) but I'm not 100% convinced it's real.

The dentils are much too uneven. Look at the difference between the two lions' tails -- these would have been made from identical punches so they should match almost exactly.

Is it possible that the inconsistency is due to distortion and flattening from the chopmarks being applied?

TLeverage

@jgenn said:

The dentils are much too uneven. Look at the difference between the two lions' tails -- these would have been made from identical punches so they should match almost exactly.

I can't speak with confidence on the authenticity of the host coins, as it isn't my specialty, but I do have a coin for comparison: a similar example of the same type and mint, separated by just a few years. There appears to be some damage to the die reflected in the crown on the reverse. Interested to hear opinions.

TwoKopeiki

Die elements are a bit different than Mexico City, but both look suspicious - especially the one that @TLeverage posted. Those lions on the reverse had mandibulectomy done on them, Carlos is yawning and the date seems off, as well.

TLeverage

@TwoKopeiki said:
Die elements are a bit different than Mexico City, but both look suspicious - especially the one that @TLeverage posted. Those lions on the reverse had mandibulectomy done on them, Carlos is yawning and the date seems off, as well.

The 'open mouth' is actually a chop, but I understand your concerns. Maybe a future candidate for our hosts?

WorldCoinsDmitry

Check this piece out... https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=lot&sid=1008&lot=3121

Lions have similar wide open mouths and it also has a die clash visible. Note the missing element in the center of the crown too. Some obvious differences, like the 6 in the date on the coin above having an odd flat bottom. Being from Potosi doesn't help clarify the matter though since they tend to be wonky compared to Mexico City

OriginalDan

Yeah, the Potosi creations seem to be more creatively put together than the Mo pieces I'm used to. A few examples:

The lion's tails and crown elements are certainly not perfect. The damage from chopmarks makes it even harder to critique the coins. For what it's worth (maybe not much in this case) PCGS put the 1783 in a genuine/chopmarked holder.

Speaking only to the 1783, when I bought it I was 100% convinced that it was real. The chopmarks look fine and if you look close there are even 'X' scratches present as commonly found alongside chopmarks. There are rim bumps and the chopmarks are randomly placed enough. I don't know enough about the Potosi portraits to speak to any specific elements of the coin, but with my experience with Mo portraits it looked good enough to me (edge, dentils, etc).

There are, however, 2 elements that one could question. First, the chopmarks are of both the large and small variety. Chopmarks of the specific period when this coin was issued were all small. What you see on this coin are a variety of large and small chops. This isn't unheard of, since many coins picked up some small chops and stuck around long enough (another 30-40 years) in China to pick up the next fashion wave of larger styled character chopmarks. It's just not as common to see both sizes on the same coin.

The 2nd element was brought up by a mutual friend of ours @TwoKopeiki, John S. He's looked at 100x more portraits than I have so my ears perked up. He pointed out that one almost never sees a coin with this many chopmarks, AND with this level of detail remaining. And he's right! I was thrilled to find a decently toned example that wasn't in the F-VF range like almost all of them out there, not even thinking about the mismatch. But if the coin did indeed hang around in China for 30-40 years (at least, most are there for MUCH longer), then why isn't there more wear?

These things are all mysteries, but that is part of the draw for me. I still lean towards the 1783 coin being genuine, but some good questions have been raised.

TwoKopeiki

@WoldCoinsDimitry that example seems to have a similar lion and crown punch, but definitely a different reverse die altogether. I'll check Calbeto to see if he has any examples matching this date and die.

TwoKopeiki

After going through Calbeto, it seems that there were quite a few sets of king punches use in Potosi. Looks like I need to do a portrait die study for that mint. Although if both 1786s posted here are authentic, that is some shoddy die work.

TLeverage

@TwoKopeiki said:
After going through Calbeto, it seems that there were quite a few sets of king punches use in Potosi. Looks like I need to do a portrait die study for that mint. Although if both 1786s posted here are authentic, that is some shoddy die work.

Look forward to seeing the results when you get to it!