PART TWO~~~T h e D I S C O V E R Y~~~~ The GILFOIL COPPER is In Hand!

ambro51

Yes I had posted the coin a few weeks some may have noticed...but really jumped the gun since it hadn't been sent and it was mentioned to me to be careful since maybe a C4 guy or someone would get to the seller and somehow wrangle it from me. So thank you Sportmod for the favor and proofing that thread••••••••••But Hey Now we are good to go. The coin arrived from Quebec, and after strong examination I'd like to show it to you. Hopefully you have read Part 1, which outlines in detail the parameters we must work within and take as literal fact. This being the court testimony and artifacts that have been found. Common sense must be used, the parts of the puzzle that we know for fact must be used to assemble the picture. Speculation without clear replacement theory will not work in this analysts. Saying "no it isn't" will carry no weight unless an alternative is supplied which fits the puzzle better and outweighs the initial item in historical fact. That all said, are you ready to see a Unique Coin and one which shortly will cause hundreds of old C4 men not to need a blue pill? Revealing for the First Time Ever, the GILFOIL COPPER. . (photo prepared by Gary Trudgen).

ambro51

The composition is Copper. Diameter irregular at 28.9 mm. Weight 71.8 grains (4.65 grams). Struck medal turn exergues align. Has wavy hammered feel with evenly rounded edges. Is more dark than images and has a layer of old olive green grunge that ancient copper gets. It was found in a bag of 75 tokens obtained by a French Canadian dealer which included a Gdnuine Bar Cent. The bag was an estate sale buy from an old man in Canada. The side with the weaker arrow has five dents struck in on an angle across the field. As the dents are angled it shows the tool or hammer was held at a carefully placed angle for each strike, making them look much like hills or mountaIns. This angular shot shows how the entire coin appears hammered.

STONE

I hate to say this, but I am still skeptical...at least until further, more definitive evidence is provided (and yes I read your other post which was well presented)

My biggest question is: Was the "British Broad Arrow" only used on materials from Ft. Crown Point where Gilfoil is said to have made these?
If no, and if this really is a "British Broad Arrow" punch, can you directly match it to any other period punches?
Seeing this exact punch on other period materials could convince me that this artifact is period and not some more recent home-made thing.

I'm not trying to discredit your conclusions, I'm just trying to be more convinced with your reasoning.

It would be great if we had some size, shape, weight data to go along with previous descriptions.
(Edited to add - thanks for the dimensions; does it seem to be as thin as it is said to have been?)

ricko

Very interesting... I will follow this thread since I know nothing about the 'copper'....Cheers, RickO

nags

Great research and interesting, but without some indication of what a Gilfoil looked like I don't think it's possible to say this is one. The burden of proof is on the party making the claim. This looks to be a case where there simply isn't enough evidence to support the conclusion. Still a cool story and thanks for sharing it!

ambro51

The Broad Arrow mark is a Royal "trademark" of sorts of long standing. It was on all ordenance including barrels of gunpowder. It was stamped on at one of Britians many royal gunpowder mills. One year during this period 22,000 barrels of gunpowder were produced in many locations. Each barrel was stamped, so you can see an exact match of something would do no good. The mark is the official mark and it's on a copper hoop, which had a coin cut from it. Very important here is the size. During that era the worn regal halfpence in circulation were between 28 and 30 mm in diameter. At 28.8 this piece fits well with that eras coinage but is 2 to 3 mm too large to pass with later Canadian Blacksmith tokens. Yes it is thin but feel curiously stronger and thicker than you'd imagine. It would in no way circulate with US coinage. To get a good sampling of the various looks of the British broad aerow search that term with Google images.~~~~~~ I welcome replies but without anything more substantial in fact or theory to present, really dosent count much. I've come up here with a piece with great age, exactly the right size, from the correct geographic location out of an unsearched bag containing a bar cent, a coin with an absolutely correct marking to monetize it, along with the fact that segmented 2real coins exist fro fort crown point ALSO bearing broad arrow stamps. What part of the picture here dosent line up?

Shamika

Ambro51 - This is great stuff. Adn for the benefit of others I'd suggest adding a link from "PART ONE" in the opening post of this thread. Likewise, I would include a link to this thread in the "PART ONE" thread.

Ahrensdad

I have nothing really to add to this discussion, other than to thank you for posting about it. It's been an interesting read and I hope your coin is the real deal.

coinlieutenant

Why do the above pics look so different? One looks like cleaned copper, the other very old and crusty...

mariner67

<< <i>I have nothing really to add to this discussion, other than to thank you for posting about it. It's been an interesting read and I hope your coin is the real deal. >>



Yeah, great read. Learn something new everyday.
Hoping it is the real deal for you.

magikbilly

Hi Ambro,

I will attempt to play devils advocate.

"Hopefully you have read Part 1, which outlines in detail the parameters we must work within and take as literal fact."

Why MUST we? What if it is incomplete, wrong, distorted...If the evidence presented in that article (self described as both "alleged" and a "story"), and your posts is literally all we know, and having no previous example - but an accusation or inquiry (what was the outcome?) - can you really KNOW these things as "literal fact" ("... Now, we know from the British Court transcripts that Private William Gilfoil, known as Gilfoil the Smith, we KNOW for a fact that he used copper barrel hoops and made several halfpence that freely circulated as money within Fort Crown Point at some time in the 1760-70s.")? From an accusation and kind of flimsy hearsay at that? Were he found guilty would that not be included in the article posted? I don't know. How did we get from "I heard from so-and so..." in 1774 to ""...we KNOW this..." in 1987 if all information is present?
The questions and answers are all from the same Regiment. No one actually says they saw one that he made, only like things, often just called "coppers". Not one person said they saw him do anything. Indeed, no one saw him with a single example; some state these items, called by more than one name (more than one item?) were not obtained from him. Miller never actually said where his 14 came from, but he did say "said to be". How can you determine without doubt this is not a rumor, or not the whole story? Is it not possible "Gilfoil's coppers" acquired their nickname for some other mundane reason? The article does establish these coppers went by more than one name though; the article mentions these coppers in question in such a way as to imply many similar coppers in the area at the time.
Could Gilfoil, who was a smith but never seen to be doing much from the transcripts, be the only one who could make these? You imply no shortage of barrel rings. Who else could do this? Many? Few? If I started making them I'd call them "Gilfoil's" too.

Best wishes,
Eric

ambro51

I really don't know why I even bothered posting. No one ever gives me any support whatsoever. None. Thanks.

JohnHarper

First, I would suggest that you do not describe the piece as being struck with medal turn. This is not a die struck piece. If this was cut from a copper barrel hoop that was marked with the British arrow stamp, the stamp was applied before the disk was cut from the copper band.

If thousands of barrels were produced with the arrow stamp, this piece could have been cut out at any time in any location.

At this point any connection with Gilfoil is speculative at best. However, It is still an intriguing story and worthy of additional study and discussion.

magikbilly

<<I really don't know why I even bothered posting. No one ever gives me any support whatsoever. None. Thanks.>>


Ambro51, I have stated many times I appreciated your threads, especially the one with the Mint Red and was there another Baby Head or some such? I thought you would heartily welcome such questions, no matter how stupid they may be to you, and educate too by revealing my mistakes. If not then what - we all just sit and say we agree or don't understand? You introduced this as "Revealing for the First Time Ever, the GILFOIL COPPER" and I am up to Part Two and trying to play along (I thought you wanted reasonable questions) and you think you are unsupported? Your posts often show coins in shall we say less than prime condition and you have all this data and everything. I read it because you wrote it and you know these coins. I daresay if some other member posted coins like these and postulated positions as you have (and correctly as far as I can understand FWIW) they'd not get anywhere near as many considered responses.

Best wishes,
Eric

MidLifeCrisis

<< <i>I really don't know why I even bothered posting. No one ever gives me any support whatsoever. None. Thanks. >>


I think it's clear that the overwhelming majority of people on this forum support you. Most responses you have received thanked you for posting. Even those responses that had a negative tone were done so in a polite and respectful manner and clearly were meant to help you in your efforts.

Take the constructive criticism for what it is; do the additional research that may be required; and use it to strengthen your argument.

You have posted about a very esoteric field of numismatics. Skepticism is warranted and should be welcomed by you.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>First, I would suggest that you do not describe the piece as being struck with medal turn. This is not a die struck piece. If this was cut from a copper barrel hoop that was marked with the British arrow stamp, the stamp was applied before the disk was cut from the copper band.

If thousands of barrels were produced with the arrow stamp, this piece could have been cut out at any time in any location.

At this point any connection with Gilfoil is speculative at best. However, It is still an intriguing story and worthy of additional study and discussion. >>




edges do not appear cut.

CaptHenway

<< <i>Yes I had posted the coin a few weeks some may have noticed...but really jumped the gun since it hadn't been sent and it was mentioned to me to be careful since maybe a C4 guy or someone would get to the seller and somehow wrangle it from me. So thank you Sportmod for the favor and proofing that thread••••••••••But Hey Now we are good to go. The coin arrived from Quebec, and after strong examination I'd like to show it to you. Hopefully you have read Part 1, which outlines in detail the parameters we must work within and take as literal fact. This being the court testimony and artifacts that have been found. Common sense must be used, the parts of the puzzle that we know for fact must be used to assemble the picture. Speculation without clear replacement theory will not work in this analysts. Saying "no it isn't" will carry no weight unless an alternative is supplied which fits the puzzle better and outweighs the initial item in historical fact. That all said, are you ready to see a Unique Coin and one which shortly will cause hundreds of old C4 men not to need a blue pill? Revealing for the First Time Ever, the GILFOIL COPPER. . (photo prepared by Gary Trudgen). >>



This is much better than the original picture, and I think that it solves one question. The "exergue" lines, which appear at different angles relative to the arrows, appear to be a fold or crease in the metal that was probably there before the arrow stamp was applied. I suggest that we ignore them as far as the design is concerned. We have arrows punched into a damaged planchet.

Now, if we assume for the sake of argument that this piece was cut out of a copper barrel strap at some time, what do we know about barrel straps of the 1700's? Was there a fold of some sort at the point where the two ends overlapped and joined? Would the barrel maker place a mark at the join for some reason?

If somebody took a barrel strap marked with an arrow and cut out a circle around the arrow mark, would he get this? He might have to beat it out flat to get rid of that crease or fold.

TD

Steve27

After reading part one, where no one actually witnessed Gilfoil making any of them, and then doing some research on-line, I'm inclined to believe he was more of a distributor than maker. Additionally, the "coins" would have to have some resemblance other than size to be accepted by the local population. From Blacksmith Coppers - Introduction:

"Blacksmith tokens are crude imitations of British and Irish halfpence that were traditionally thought to have been produced and circulated in the area of Lower Canada (centering in Montreal) and in neighboring areas, as upper state New York and northern New England. The main period for their circulation has been taken to be from about 1825 through 1840.

Recently, Anton and Kesse have suggested some revisions to this picture of Blacksmiths. First they stated, "...it is probably more realistic to hypothesize their geographic circulation to include most of North America." They then went on to suggest it is unrealistic to assume blacksmiths had the skills to intentionally cut shallow dies to, "...produce coppers with a well worn appearance (with little or no legends) in order to imply previous circulation and facilitate acceptance." Rather, they believed the source of the majority of the Blacksmith coppers were the token and button manufacturers in England, who may have fostered the concept of "Blacksmiths " to enhance local acceptance and cover up their own role in this illegal enterprise. At the same time Anton and Kesse suspected some of the crudest examples derived from Canadian locations, but they did not believe even these items were produced by blacksmiths."


Your piece might very well be someones attempt to produce a counterfeit halfpenny, but I doubt it was Gilfoil.

Weiss

If it's cut from known copper and roughly English halfpence size, it does seems likely it was used in trade. It also seems logical that it could have been used by anyone at any time over a 100 year +/- span. That's not saying it's not a gilfoil copper, but it could also be a bob smyth or tom jones copper.

FWIW, and for comparison, the British W10 "broadarrow", standard military issue watch of the British military around the Vietnam war era. Note the broad arrow on obverse and reverse:

MsMorrisine

<< <i>

<< <i>Yes I had posted the coin a few weeks some may have noticed...but really jumped the gun since it hadn't been sent and it was mentioned to me to be careful since maybe a C4 guy or someone would get to the seller and somehow wrangle it from me. So thank you Sportmod for the favor and proofing that thread••••••••••But Hey Now we are good to go. The coin arrived from Quebec, and after strong examination I'd like to show it to you. Hopefully you have read Part 1, which outlines in detail the parameters we must work within and take as literal fact. This being the court testimony and artifacts that have been found. Common sense must be used, the parts of the puzzle that we know for fact must be used to assemble the picture. Speculation without clear replacement theory will not work in this analysts. Saying "no it isn't" will carry no weight unless an alternative is supplied which fits the puzzle better and outweighs the initial item in historical fact. That all said, are you ready to see a Unique Coin and one which shortly will cause hundreds of old C4 men not to need a blue pill? Revealing for the First Time Ever, the GILFOIL COPPER. . (photo prepared by Gary Trudgen). >>



This is much better than the original picture, and I think that it solves one question. The "exergue" lines, which appear at different angles relative to the arrows, appear to be a fold or crease in the metal that was probably there before the arrow stamp was applied. I suggest that we ignore them as far as the design is concerned. We have arrows punched into a damaged planchet.

Now, if we assume for the sake of argument that this piece was cut out of a copper barrel strap at some time, what do we know about barrel straps of the 1700's? Was there a fold of some sort at the point where the two ends overlapped and joined? Would the barrel maker place a mark at the join for some reason?

If somebody took a barrel strap marked with an arrow and cut out a circle around the arrow mark, would he get this? He might have to beat it out flat to get rid of that crease or fold.

TD

TD >>




sounds like it's time to join a (historical) blacksmithing discussion board.

MidLifeCrisis

Ambro - I strongly suggest you contact the folks at The Colonial Coin Collectors Club about this.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>I really don't know why I even bothered posting. No one ever gives me any support whatsoever. None. Thanks. >>





if that was happening, you be hearing about how that was "just another slug of copper"



people are asking questions and exploring the what abouts just like in the "was the 1794 the first struck" thread.

ambro51

I have XRF analysis set for the end of march. I'm trying to get lend of a stamped barrel hoop. Gary Trudgen who wrote the paper told me he'd accept that as a Gilgoil if it came from the grounds. I frankly think these were actually recalled and redeemed at the fort possibly in 1771 when strict anticounterfeiting laws went into effect. Perhaps private coins didn't bode well in the fort and were redeemed and melted. None gave recovered so maybe they were gone prior to the blast in 1773. But to me logically it is just Sooo much easier to take the explanation offered and run with it. <~<~~~the testimony makes no mention of design just simply it was hammered to halfpence size. This piece is hammered and is full French and Indian war. Circulating halfpence size at 28.8 mm. Blacksmiths were 27mm and smaller. Gilfoil used copper hoops and the hoops have British Broad Arrows on them. Existing silver coin segments also marked with a smaller broad arrow have been found at the fort ........What kind of coin would Gilfoil the Smith hammer out? It would be something crude, like this. I dunno it all falls together for me but yet all these facts are completely dismissed by so many so quickly it's as if the words and facts I present just don't count.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

<< <i>I really don't know why I even bothered posting. No one ever gives me any support whatsoever. None. Thanks. >>



I don't know much about the gilfoil copper. That being said, I think skeptics have good reason to be skeptical here. You have what appears to be a hammered copper disc with an arrow punched into it, from a geographic region that is within the commercial radius of where these pieces were produced. The arrow, if you are correct, indicates that it was produced under some sort of royal auspice.

So yes, there is a chance that this is a gilfoil copper; but to state that it is a gilfoil copper, as boldly as you do, is jumping the gun. As you say, common sense must be used. Meeting the potential parameters for a gilfoil copper (since we have no prior knowledge of what they actually look like) does not, in my opinion of common sense, indicate you have a gilfoil copper. IMO, the opposite would be common sense. To me, common sense says that the corroded disc with an arrow on it is not the first known example of a 200+ year old private issue of coppers, produced in small batches by a single man. It's certainly possible that it is, but I wouldn't say it is likely.

Saying that an item must be something because it fits a series of rough parameters is too bold. It does not require an alternative theory to be openly skeptical. I don't know exactly the method by which the pyramids were built, but that doesn't mean I can't be openly skeptical of those who say they were built by aliens.

shorecoll

I think you need to check US and Canadian libraries, I'm shocked there wouldn't be at least line drawings of what the trial was about...the counterfeit coins.

If there's any chance it is a Gilfoil I would be careful who you hand it to...you could end up as a low-budget Langbord. I would guess that Canadian and British governments might have a claim. I think the US has been signing treaties on antiquities with several countries, and you could fall right in a loophole.

In terms of people criticizing...I think they're just asking honest questions, and the questions will get a lot tougher before the world accepts this as legit. I would reach out to QDB, Eric Newman and RWB for help.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

<< <i>I think you need to check US and Canadian libraries, I'm shocked there wouldn't be at least line drawings of what the trial was about...the counterfeit coins.

If there's any chance it is a Gilfoil I would be careful who you hand it to...you could end up as a low-budget Langbord. I would guess that Canadian and British governments might have a claim. I think the US has been signing treaties on antiquities with several countries, and you could fall right in a loophole.

In terms of people criticizing...I think they're just asking honest questions, and the questions will get a lot tougher before the world accepts this as legit. I would reach out to QDB, Eric Newman and RWB for help. >>



Go to John Kraljevich...... I think people would trust his word on this piece more than anyone else.

ambro51

ambro51

ambro51

Does anyone want to actually discuss this coin? I don't think out of all these replies any had to do with the coin.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

ambro51

We are thinking alike in many ways. The ducks WILL all line up. It's not going to happen overnight on a message board. This is an amazingly important piece to own when verified. BTW I made a good macro in hand video and sent that and a descriptive email to Mr Bowers and also offered to send him the coin for his inspection. I'll let you know his reply, it may take a while but he answers email. ~~~using the testimony that says he hammered these and then seeing clear hammer face imprints is important. The reverse, weaker arrow imprint is interesting. Gary Trudgen examined the images and thought the imprint on the reverse was collateral damage from the heavy front strike (no doubt firmly backed up by an oak barrel) and on examining the reverse arrow it appears, as do both exergues, to be hand tooled, or worked, with a tool that left fine small scratches. Not looking like file marks but more random like an abrasive of small stone. So the coin had been carefully crafted especially the line of dented in mountains. He took time to make these but heck a halfpence was hard money and worth a few bucks in today's buying power. A British Private was paid three pence per day! ~~~~ When you look at this piece and how different it is from contemporary counterfeits without and bust and Britannia however crudely done...it's obvious the maker had no intent to copy or counterfeit any design. By common consent this issue was permitted in this far off Fort no doubt starved for coin of any sort. Left to their own devices Gilfoil created these...the Broad Arrow was known to one and all and a perfectly logical feature for their money. They were a token circulated in a small community by common consent.

magikbilly

"...on examining the reverse arrow it appears, as do both exergues, to be hand tooled, or worked, with a tool that left fine small scratches. Not looking like file marks but more random like an abrasive of small stone. So the coin had been carefully crafted especially the line of dented in mountains. He took time to make these..."

"...What kind of coin would Gilfoil the Smith hammer out? It would be something crude, like this."



What was the outcome of the proceedings with Gilfoil in 1774 regarding these "coppers"?

How would you determine a period counterfeit? Those witnesses refer to a lot of coppers.

"...They (coppers, not particularly Gilfoils in this answer) usually went by the name Gilfoil coppers..." - could this not be a generic statement? Mrs. Dalton said hers did not come from Gilfoil.

The surgeon's statements mentions "...many coppers...", "...said to be..." and an exchange rate - but for which coppers?

This whole court event took place and the use of the British Broad Arrow was not mentioned? Wouldn't that be paramount to these events?

From the article you posted, what is not hearsay that convinces you - how do you get to fact from those statements? I only see "...was accused..." - if he were convicted we would likely know from the article and your post as it contains all known information.

Why did the author refer to this history at the end as "alleged" and a "story"?


Best wishes,
Eric

ambro51

...on speaking with Gary about the article he feels probably accused was the wrong word and he should have said mentioned. Gilfoil was only a speck in the reams of testimony. The proceeding was not about Gilfoil but an investigation into the destruction of the fort. Gilfoil was never called to testify now were there any other mention if him. Gary feels the coppers circulated freely and Gilfoil was operating freely. Why a story? .....well this is one of those nuggets of history which came out of ancient court records. It was unrecognized by numismatists until 1987. This coin lay untouched for God knows how long. It's taken 25 years after his article for one to surface snd be identified. We KNEW the coins existed, we knew who made them snd we know what he used. We know he hammered them out to the size of a halfpence. This is the most esoteric adventure going! I love it!

magikbilly

<< <i>...on speaking with Gary about the article he feels probably accused was the wrong word and he should have said mentioned...Gary feels the coppers circulated freely and Gilfoil was operating freely. >>



Why? All evidence was in the threads posted, yes?



<< <i>We know he hammered them out to the size of a halfpence. This is the most esoteric adventure going! >>



Where is this factually stated in the old court records?



<< <i>I love it! >>



I KNOW!!! Me too! You have compelling evidence if somewhat anecdotal. I look forward to your taking this further.

Eric

CaptHenway

<< <i>Does anyone want to actually discuss this coin? I don't think out of all these replies any had to do with the coin. >>



Are you ignoring my 12:54 PM comment?

ambro51

ambro51

Cap'n Henway regarding the exergues they do exactly oppose each other and metal is deeply removed equally on both sides, showing a visible thinning when the coin is held on edge. It was either hand cut with a file or possibly crimped kn with a pincer type tool. It is an important part of this design and not a flattened crease. The coin feels flat but rocking on glass shows an indent from the strong side. The hammering feel is obvious in hand Oh I'll be pursuing this rest assured. Hopefully it will end up in the Redbook and the coin in a PCGS slab. Let that cook on high for a few months until C4 is frothy and let JK catalog the pizz out of this and let Stacks sell if.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>"...on examining the reverse arrow it appears, as do both exergues, to be hand tooled, or worked, with a tool that left fine small scratches. Not looking like file marks but more random like an abrasive of small stone. So the coin had been carefully crafted especially the line of dented in mountains. He took time to make these..."

"...What kind of coin would Gilfoil the Smith hammer out? It would be something crude, like this."



What was the outcome of the proceedings with Gilfoil in 1774 regarding these "coppers"?

How would you determine a period counterfeit? Those witnesses refer to a lot of coppers.

"...They (coppers, not particularly Gilfoils in this answer) usually went by the name Gilfoil coppers..." - could this not be a generic statement? Mrs. Dalton said hers did not come from Gilfoil.

The surgeon's statements mentions "...many coppers...", "...said to be..." and an exchange rate - but for which coppers? >>




Who in the area but a smith could counterfeit one?

OTOH, outside made ones could be brought in.

JohnHarper

Let me propose an alternate theory. Crowne Point was a closed society with a shortage of small change to support commerce. Somebody asked Gilfoil to make up some copper pieces in the proper size and weight as halfpennies. They were not counterfeit coins. They were tokens made from necessity. They would be similar to American Hard Times Tokens of Civil War Tokens.

Counterfeit coins are intended to pass as legal coinage. Tokens are intended to pass as a substitute for legal coinage.

nags

What is the standard to identify such a coin? The standard would have to be pretty high for PCGS to guarantee it. I don't see how the standard could possibliy be met when there is no apparent description of what this alleged copper looked like.

In a court setting, there is insufficent evidence to so much as establish that a Gilfoil Copper ever existed in the first place. It's really too bad that the inquisitors from the partial transcript didn't ask the most basic of questions.

Cool research and an interesting story, but I just don't see enough documentation to prove anything.

MsMorrisine

<< <i>What is the standard to identify such a coin? The standard would have to be pretty high for PCGS to guarantee it. I don't see how the standard could possibliy be met when there is no apparent description of what this alleged copper looked like.

In a court setting, there is insufficent evidence to so much as establish that a Gilfoil Copper ever existed in the first place. It's really too bad that the inquisitors from the partial transcript didn't ask the most basic of questions.

Cool research and an interesting story, but I just don't see enough documentation to prove anything. >>



it's not iron clad, but the one guy says he got 14 for a shilling.

DeliaBug

Something about this was ringing a bell. Have you read "New York's Forts in the Revolution"? In it they discuss these but they state the "Gilfoil coppers" were stamped out of brass, from trunk straps, and also that they passed locally at 14 to a shilling. I may have missed it but where did the gunpowder cask strap reference come from?

MsMorrisine

stamped?


I think you just sold a book.

ambro51

We do have pieces of 2 Real coin found at Crown Point counterstamped with a small broad arrow, proving association with the mark and circulating money within the fort. I agree these were a token of expidency in an area with little coinage. This was an outpost on the frontier and had to rely on English supply ships and their own ingenuity. Apparently the place was really in disrepair and neglected, and was never actually completed. As to full authentication, it may take a bit longer than one day on a message board. The metal analysis of the coin and a sampling of barrel hoop fragments will be telling. Having one emerge either from the archive or a dig will be conclusive. Finding more info or a better description from the era would clinch. Let's see what QDB has to say. There's a bit of the romantic in that old man and he loves a good coin story.

magikbilly

This brass bit is interesting as it is outside what we "knew" in that it was not mentioned in the Trudgen article here or online at www.coins.nd.edu.

"Spilman suspects they were more than smooth copper disks hammered out to the size of a halfpenny, as one would not need training to make so simple an item. Newman has mentioned, if "beat out" referred to their appearance rather than their method of manufacture, it is possible the coins may have not have been hammered at all but may have been cast counterfeit halfpence. Admittedly the context of the phrase "beat out" appears to refer to a hammered item, but the individual making that statement is only inferring the method of manufacture based on the appearance of the copper." - www.coins.nd.edu

Can anyone corroborate this brass bit in the book mentioned above?

Best,
Eric

DeliaBug

<< <i>This brass bit is interesting as it is outside what we "knew" in that it was not mentioned in the Trudgen article here or online at www.coins.nd.edu.

"Spilman suspects they were more than smooth copper disks hammered out to the size of a halfpenny, as one would not need training to make so simple an item. Newman has mentioned, if "beat out" referred to their appearance rather than their method of manufacture, it is possible the coins may have not have been hammered at all but may have been cast counterfeit halfpence. Admittedly the context of the phrase "beat out" appears to refer to a hammered item, but the individual making that statement is only inferring the method of manufacture based on the appearance of the copper." - www.coins.nd.edu

Can anyone corroborate this brass bit in the book mentioned above?

Best,
Eric >>



The author cites and references many contemporary articles. This Gilfoil fella wasn't looked upon too highly:

After the evacuation of the civilian French, a new English settlement was established outside the towering walls of the fort and the land felt the teeth of the harrow again. The general store was run by one Hugh White, while the tavern was kept by a Mr. Lewis. The apothecary, Thomas Sparham, was married to the daughter of Adolph Benzel, resident engineer at the fort. The blacksmith, a man named Gilfoil, was an ingenious character who occasionally strayed on the wrong side of the law. His most lucrative practice was counterfeiting, stamping out from brass trunk straps round discs called "Gilfoil's coppers," fourteen of them equal to one shilling and accepted locally as legal tender.

Ambro - the book is ~$30 and there's a pile of them on Amazon. Best of luck.

magikbilly

It appears to be hearsay/anecdotal as the other evidence - but there is the tie in to 14 in exchange. Still just words. More information seems to be given in the above account than in the court papers. At least no one is saying "I heard" and so on. Brass was valued less than copper, but then I wonder what thickness these trunk straps were supposed to be. Why wasn't this brass bit mentioned in Part 1? I would assume Ambro has been there and done that re this book and its contents with regard to this coin.


Eric

stealer

<< <i>We do have pieces of 2 Real coin found at Crown Point counterstamped with a small broad arrow, proving association with the mark and circulating money within the fort. >>


I think even to make that assumption (not even to say your coin is a Gilfoil Copper) is premature and far-fetched. Finding a coin with a counterstamp at Crown Point doesn't prove any causation whatsoever. And as to not stir any nerves, I do respect your passion for this hobby and what you collect.

ambro51

Any information is good information. I just spoke with Gary on how he first learned of these and it was from the book mentioned. He did chech the source and that's what led to the court papers. I'd trust the wording of the court papers more than how a modern writer interpreted them. Copper hoops were available at the fort and these hoops were imprinted with the Broad Arrow. The book does make it clear though that what we are looking for are metal discs. ~~~~~~solving this puzzle will not take place on a message board. It may take months, years. It may await discovery of another. Of course now this coin has entered cybergoogleworld. Search Gilfoil copper and this thread and images are linked. This forum, with about 500 active participants, is a very small group. Once these images and this story is better knows, that second piece may come to light~~~try to look at this from a positive tilt. Discoveries ARE made. Sylvester Crosby knew of only three Sommer Island coins, now close to 100 are known. The New Hampshire 1776 is unique. There are many other colonials known by only a few examples•••••
The undeniable fact remains that Wiiam Gilfoil hammered out discs which passed as halfpence in a British Fort between 1764 and 1773. I own a very old coin hammered to the size of a halfpenny with the British Broad Arrow, which came in an unsearched old bag of coins from the area. in the absence of any other coin which fits the known facts.....this one seems to fit like a glove.

CoinRaritiesOnline

IMO you need to punch link the broad arrow design on this piece to the broad arrow stamp on any other object definitively known to have come from the fort.

ambro51

I don't think that's at all important, unless that is a piece of copper hoop with the arrow impressed. The hoops were marked at the mill (one of many) in England when they were made. Then, they were issued and sent at random within the British Empire. On the three hoop ends which I have seen online (no doubt a small portion of surviving artifacts). Each shows a slightly different broad arrow, so it must be thought of as only a trademark stamp, your style may vary. When that fort blew up in 1773 one hundred barrels of gunpowder, each bound with arrow stamped hoops..blew up and scattered debris everywhere. This obviously strong chance of a marked hoop end existing was put to Thomas Hughes, Site Manager at Crown Point. He had the archive record of 13,700 pieces and held in Albany searched. He tells me no coins matching thus piece were found. I asked about hoop ends and his reply was somewhat unconvincing that there were no hoop fragments either. BUT, those two pieces imaged on part 1 DO exist in Michigan and when John Lorenzo is ready for XRF testing we will see about getting lend of these pieces for testing. Not that this is of course going to determine much , other than just see how well or how poorly the copper is refined, or more, who knows. Even so, all these copper hoops came from commercial mills in the uk so something should click, if it does fit into the existing line up of ducks, that will be great. There have been multiple hand operations in creating this piece, I'd guess at least an hour. From the book description of Gilfoil you can certainly see this guy making these things from old hoops, his files, hammer, whetstone...one fact I haven't mentioned but is easily noted is ths variation of the devices. The arrow on the front is strongly and firmly struck with a very high quality stamp showing exceptional quality of manufacture especially how the inner shaft tapers and does not quite touch the arrow point inside. That mark was applied while this was still a barrel hoop in England. All the other work was done after it was trimmed out and hammered. Very slightly out of round, about 30 percent of the rim looks filed or ground in too far. ••••this isn't going to happen right away, but someday Part 3 the Verification will be written. All this someday be a great read! ***