The Census of Surviving 1768-So 8 Reales
Boosibri
Posts: 11,877 ✭✭✭✭✭
After purchasing the 1768-So 8 Reales for my collection, I began to research the coins provenance history and at the same time decided to see how many of the issue I could document while scouring my library, the Newman portal, and the internet archives of many major firms. While I am not complete, I am pretty far along and thought I would "publish" the current findings here for all to follow along and perhaps add to.
Jara indicates perhaps 20 specimens known and thus far I have found 8 distinct coins. I have gone through the following:
1. All of the Medina books
2. The other major reference books and collections: Calbeto, Dasi, Guttag, Elizondo, Calico, Numismatica Espanola, VQR, Gilboy, Yonaka, etc
3. Auction firms including Heritage, Stacks, Kuenker, Aureo, Cayon, Freeman Craig, Henry Christensen, Almanzar, Schulman, Superior, Louis Collins, Elman, working through all of the Ponterios now, and then followed many leads to other firms and sales
4. Couldnt find a listing in the Banco de Chile, British Museum, or the ANS
Findings thus far...
2. There are 3 graded coins, all 45's with a completely incorrect set of provenances assigned almost interchangeably between the Boyd, Calbeto and Elizondo plate coins.
3. The balance of coins are damaged or in very low grade.
4. The Viceroy Amat coin has been badly messed with and is now anonymous.
5. The balance of Jaras estimated coins have perhaps never sold at public auction and reside in South America.
6. The frequency of the same coins selling seems to give a false impression of availability for what is a very rare issue.
7. My coin is the nicest 
The census:
Coin 1 PCGS EF45 (my coin). Elizondo Plate
Diagnostic for the coin is the rich toning pattern
- Spink-Taisai 1987 lot 477
- Superior 6/97 S. Carlos Hernandez lot 6399
- Ponterio sale 124 lot 1533
- Heritage ex. Tarapaca (Luis Ponte) 9/2011
Coin 2 NGC EF45 ex. Calbeto, Millennia
Diagnostic for the coin is a spot on the obverse at about 8 o'clock
- Plated in Calbeto, Yriate
- Goldberg 5/2008 Millennia lot 987 39,000 hammer
- Unsold in Goldberg 5/10, 5/11, 9/12
- Sold Heritage 2/2012
Coin 3 NGC EF45 ex. FCC Boyd
Diagnostic is a planchet void at 4 o'clock on obverse
- Imaged Coin Collectors Journal 1945 https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/book/535806?page=6
- FCC Boyd 1975 ANA lot 1781
- Aureo & Calico 3/1998 Euro 16227 hammer
- Aureo & Calico 11/2012 Euro 15800 hammer
- Cayon 2/2019 lot 1024 Euro 26,000 hammer
- Kunker 3/22 lot 2675 24,000 euro hammer
Coin 4 Viceroy Amat
Diasagnotic is a scratch in top obverse field
- Stacks 1/1991 sale 46 ex. Juan Suros (Amat)
- Cayon 2/2012
- Kuenker 5/2022, now without scratches, polished & tooled
Coin 5 Alexander Patterson
Diagnostic is a chopmark in upper obverse field
- Alexander Patterson Bonhams 1996 lot 295
- Heritage 5/2008
Coin 6 the Gilboy plate
Coin 7 Calico plate
Diagnostic are scratches in upper obverse field
- Ponterio 4/1994 lot 982
- Aureo 2/1996 Lot 601
**Coin 8 Dasi plate **
Comments
folded into post below
It looks like it was heavily tooled.
Charles III Album
Charles III Portrait Set
Charles IV Album
Charles IV Portrait Set
Love it thanks for sharing and congrats again on a spectacular coin!!!
Coin collecting interests: Latin America
Sports: NFL & NHL
Crazy that someone tried to remove the scratch on such a rare piece so bluntly (the Viceroy Amat coin).
I did document the Patterson example in my reference on chopmarked coins, though the mark is pretty questionable as a chop imo.
I understand this is a sidenote to the point of this post, but as Coin 5 (or a copy/twin of it???) was discussed previously elsewhere AND the high bidder on the referenced May. 2008 Heritage auction is a member here:
@Eddi won the 2008 Heritage auction and noted about it:
"After I purchased the coin at an HA auction, I decided to send it off to NGC. It was NGC who determined it was a counterfeit. This opinion was backed-up by that of an well-known expert in Latin American coinage."
https://coins.ha.com/itm/chile/chile-carlos-iii-pillar-8-reales-1768-a-/a/3000-50890.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=164299
Now look at the 2018 offering:
https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=5175047
Obviously the matching chops/identical alignment is plainly visible, but those two offerings are in fact the SAME specimen. Though the 2018 offering appears to have acquired different overall toning, there are matching dark TONE spots (as opposed to chops, marks, digs) seen in the 2008 pics.
@Boosibri, do you happen to have decent pics of the Patterson example from the 1996 Bonhams auction?
great thread - excellent research and write up. Well done
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Latin American Collection
Note the spot in the Patterson image at the mint mark which is absent in the Heritage example. The Patterson color image seems to indicate a higher quality overall coin and no porosity which is mentioned in the description in the Heritage sale.
"XF details but with porous surfaces on both sides consistent with ground burial. Any oxidation has been removed long ago leaving a pleasant, lightly toned appearance. There are a couple of tiny chop marks on both sides, barely noticeable. An extremely rare type and one of the most sought after crowns in the entire Latin series."
Latin American Collection
Latin American Collection
Interesting that the Patterson listing doesn't mention the supposed chop marks. I hadn't heard about this example being a potential counterfeit.
The Patterson example is a horrid looking coin
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
Firstly,
1: Excellent pics, thanks!!
2: As is, yup... but you can tame horrible surfaces like that over time. If the price is right, it's worth the time/effort/exposing yourself to cancer in the state of California.
Boy, isn't it comforting to know that there ARE jobs for English majors out there somewhere? Wait, eBay AI descriptions do this for us now???! Oh... (sad emoji). Friend of mine was a pre-med washout turned English major (Bradley Cooper was his TA)... turned rather major finance/crypto player, so all hope isn't lost for that (ex-)auction house employee.
But seriously, Bonhams was cutely mentioning the exact surface shmegg noted by Heritage.
Gun to my head, I think these listings (1996, 2008, 2018) are all the same specimen. The chops/PMD/surface marks on the 1996 pics (excepting that giant pit by the So mintmark) all look about as deep on the 2008 offering. If the 2008 iteration was a cast from the Patterson coin... you "typically" (quote unquote) lose some depth on those marks, planchet cracks, etc.. And I (legitimately!) deign to even bring this up when @Boosibri shows such wonderful original skin pieces... but for those of us who know, doesn't it look like the surface as seen in the 2008 Heritage pics could absolutely be that baking soda job we see in the 1996 Patterson sale pics dulled down with bleach or old sulfided-up Jeweluster???? And then between 2008 and 2018, the surface changed more...
For me, the absolute clincher is that the dark SPOTS around M in VNUM on the 2008/2018 example are visible in the Patterson color photo... and again, those present much more like toning or crud spots rather than PMD/surface marks.
I think a repair was done on the mintmark divot or whatever that is between the Patterson sale and the 2008 HA offering. Why do a repair ONLY there and not on ALL the marks (chops and such, as is often done on pillars)?? I propose maybe because it's in such a prominent spot. The "So" mintmark is literally THE most important feature of the coin...
"All that being said", IDK for certain... fun to debate/investigate it, though.
@realeswatcher I always wonder why people live there…everything causes cancer in California. Luckily I live in Utah😂
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.
I think you're looking for the website called Reddit.com for such a discussion...
You don't even wanna know where I'm from!
California?
I'm BACK!!! Used to be Billet7 on the old forum.