Colonials: Used or rejected?

mojorizn

What series' of colonial coinage were actually used in infant American commerce and which were rejected by the public?

mojo

ziggy29

One thing you might want to do is look at a recent Red Book and see which colonials aren't MUCH more expensive in higher grades than lower grades. That would probably give you at least a decent indication.

mojorizn

Anyone else?

mojo

MrEureka

What series' of colonial coinage were actually used in infant American commerce and which were rejected by the public?

I'd be surprised if anything was rejected. Coin was scarce.

JadeRareCoin

Mojo,

You raise a very good question. Unfortunately, the correct answer cannot be a simple one due to the many variables involved. Variables would include the various time periods throughout Colonial America and the geographical location. Actually, pistareen (John Kraljevich of ANR) would be the perfect person to answer your question, but I will give it a shot until he, or others, respond to your question.

Andy's comment that "coin was scarce" is very accurate. There was a real shortage of circulating coins, even though some issues were minted in large quantities (i.e. Connecticut coppers, New Jersey coppers, Fugios, etc.). People hoarded hard money. It's also important to note that in Colonial America even non-coin items that were made of metal and looked like coins (i.e. buttons) could be accepted as money, depending on the time period and geographical location.

Most people, including coin collectors, are not aware that paper currency was the predominant form of money in circulation prior to the 1780's. In the mid-1770's, for example, one would have been far more likely to pay for provisions with a Continental Currency note, versus silver or copper coinage. The scary thing about that is the fact that most Colonial paper was backed only by promises and a strong National pride. The study of Colonial currency is a broad and complex area of numismatics that is often ignored by coin collectors. If you really want to learn about the financial intricacies of Colonial America, you should read Eric Newman's wonderful treatise on the subject. It's a masterpiece, in my opinion.

That being stated, I think that you are really just wondering which coins were favored by the Colonists. There were, of course, many foreign coin issues that circulated in Early America. Remember that many of the inhabitants of the Colonies were recent immigrants from various countries and they imported their native money. International commerce also allowed payment to be made in various forms, depending on the merchant, the quality of the intrinsic metal and the weight. Spanish silver was the preferred method of payment, but it was difficult to come by since people liked to hoard their "hard money". British Half Pennies were very popular and probably the most common copper coin of the time, prior to the State issued coppers.

If you eliminate the wide range of foreign coins that circulated, you are left with many local issues, including, but not limited to, coppers of New Jersey, Connecticut and Vermont. Of those three, Connecticut would have been the most common local issue in commerce, imho. You could also see Fugio coppers circulating. We know this by the fact that Fugios are often found heavily circulated, as well as NJ, CT and VT.

Regarding the less popular coinage, I would guess that some of the foreign tokens would fit this category. For example, most Virginia Half Pennies that I see range from EF to Unc, indicating that they did not see as much action as the local issues. Same thing for the Rosa Americana and Hibernia issues. Occassionally I will find G-VG examples, but the vast majority are higher grade. Kentucky Tokens and Talbot Tokens are somewhere in between.

SUMMARY: 1) Connecticut, New Jersey and Vermont coppers were probably the most popular coins in Colonial America. 2) Imported issues, such as Woods Hibernia, Rosa Americana and British tokens were not as popular, but not totally rejected by the Colonists.

There are other areas that should be discussed, such as Massachussetts Silver issues, St. Patrick's pieces and counterfeit coppers (both British made and American made), but it would be a big discussion. I hope that answers your question for now. Hopefully some of the experts will post to this thread.

Dennis

Pistareen

My colonial coin question batphone just rang. Thanks Dennis!

Asking which were accepted and which were rejected is an impossible question to answer; a better one might be which coins made it here and which didn't.

Gresham's Law dominated the circulation of all coins in colonial America: Bad money drives out good. This means that in 1787, when the Common Council of the City of New York legislated on which coppers could be used in commerce, they found that the vast majority of coppers then circulating were either fake or heavily worn -- most of them issued under William III and George II, and some nearly a century old!

Any silver or gold of recognizable origin would circulate according to its fineness and weight. Coins from the dominions of Spain were most numerous (as were their fraudulent imitations), but coins of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, and even more exotic locales also circulated. English coins circulated to a greater extent that earlier published studies suggest, but are still vastly outnumbered by Spanish pieces.

The concentration of what circulated depends upon when and where -- colonial American history spans 300 years and latitudes from subarctic to tropical. While coin may have been scarce during and after the Revolution, evidence suggests it was rather plentiful in the years before the Revolution when a healthy trade was being accomplished both legally and extralegally.

Regarding what "Redbook" colonials circulated, please tear out the pages with the Kentucky token, Franklin Press token, or Rhode Island Ship medals. None were meant to circulate in America and none were known here until coin collecting became popular in the 1850s-60s. The first two were struck in England for the English Conder collectors (asses chasing after half pence, as the saying goes), while the Rhode Island piece was (and is) a contemporary medal that was never intended (or, likely, used) as a circulating medium by anyone anywhere. They're interesting and collectible -- they just aren't early American money.

What DID circulate? All the state coppers. I have records on Nova Eboracs found as far south as Charleston, Connecticuts as far north as Nova Scotia, etc. Fugios circulated well into the 19th century. S.S. Crosby recalls seeing them in change as kid. Wood's Hibernias were here, but so were Irish halfpennies; ditto for Voce Populis but to a lesser extent. Mass silver circulated throughout the 18th century and was counterfeited at least as late as the 1780s!

Much more could be said (and will -- look for The Official Red Book of U.S. Colonial Coins next year). I'll check back if I can address something more specific. Look for my October column in the Numismatist, which addresses a similar question.

Dennis -- I love circ. VA halfpence. Most of them were still in the keg when the Revolution started, but the worn ones were out and about in Jefferson's Virginia while the fighting was going on. Good stuff!

dorkkarl

fantastic thread, thread of the week far as i'm concerned!

K S

mojorizn

Wow! Thanks guys! I know the subject is too large to be exhaustively studied here, but your answers give plenty of food for thought. I'll definitely look for the Newman book and anxiously await the Redbook of Colonial Coins.

Much appreciated!

mojo

flaminio

<< <i>Much more could be said (and will -- look for The Official Red Book of U.S. Colonial Coins next year). >>

Oooh. Can't wait for this book. Thanks for the info!

grip

Great thread, and so was the reading.
Al

Oldnewbie

This is the kind of info I "hang" here for. Great stuff.

Conder101

I'm going to have to trackdwn my copy of Fractional Currency and do some re-reading, but some struck me the first time I was reading it. We have always heard and talked about the great shortage of coins that existed in colonial America. But in severa places Carruthers (sp) relates documents of people that tell of people settling debts of large sums and that were settling them in specie. Now these amounts would have requires thousands or even tens of thousands of coins. If there was such a tremendous shortage of coins, how in the world could these people have acquired these tremendous numbers of coins? And naturally he wasn't relating everyones debt settlements, so there would have been the need for thousands more coins. Somehow these debts must have been settled, which makes me think there MUST have been more coins available back then than commonly believed. Now I know many of the debts were probably settled with god, but many of them required repayment in specie as well.

phut

Good artictle on pistareens and colonial currency. beware dial-uppers it's a good sized pdf
http://www.amnumsoc.org/cnl/Pistareens.pdf