EDITED: California Gold educational post

DieClash · April 6, 2007 10:10AM

Looking for info. an an 1859 Cal gold Indian head token. Tiny little bugger. What's the history behind it? Is it worth anything?

TomB · April 6, 2007 10:12AM

It's a modern reproduction most likely made from the 1960s-1970s and almost certainly not gold. Perhaps it is worth a few dollars.

DieClash · April 6, 2007 10:33AM

<< It's a modern reproduction most likely made from the 1960s-1970s and almost certainly not gold. Perhaps it is worth a few dollars. >>

It actually looks like gold, and not solid brass! The original owner obviously thought perhaps "counterfiet". A couple of pix will put it into perspective. Looks to me like it's been in the old yellowed 2X2 for a number of decades. Plus I've never seen a cardboard 2x2 album page like this before. So perhaps 60s or 70s isn't too far off, but it "looks" like it's been stored much longer than that to me.

What are the diagnostics for determining if it's brass or gold? What other indicators make it a "modern reproduction"?

Thanks!

TomB · April 6, 2007 10:37AM

The replicas will not have a denomination on them whereas all original Cal gold fractionals will have the monetary value listed on them. Additionally, it just looks like it is too well made to have come from that time period. Perhaps it is older than the 1960s since it lacks the near-ubiquitous bear motif found of replicas, but I doubt very much it was made contemporary to the date.

Aegis3 · April 6, 2007 10:42AM

Mike Locke has characterized a lot of these token/copies/reproductions/&c. Look here.

DieClash · April 6, 2007 10:50AM

Thanks Aeigs!

I found the variety at Mike Locke's website. It is a Wreath4e I suspect my specimen is indeed gold, just from the look of it. And the images that I posted here, appear to me to show golden surfaces. That doesn't mean it isn't gold plated. How does one tell for sure? I definitely don't think that it's solid brass.

I've been looking around the webpages on Mike Locke's site and I cannot determine the exact date that these were produced. Does anyone else have an opinion.

Where's Mike Locke?

Edited: Tom, I suspect it is a replica as you've indicated. But it seems to me the replica is real gold. I'm just trying to confirm if that is so. Thanks.

Zoins · April 6, 2007 10:56AM

<< I suspect my specimen is indeed gold, just from the look of it. And the images that I posted here, appear to me to show golden surfaces. That doesn't mean it isn't gold plated. How does one tell for sure? I definitely don't think that it's solid brass. >>

I've been told that if there's no reliable documentation, you have to cut metal rounds apart to see if they are solid gold or just plated.

DieClash · April 6, 2007 11:14AM

<< 

<< I suspect my specimen is indeed gold, just from the look of it. And the images that I posted here, appear to me to show golden surfaces. That doesn't mean it isn't gold plated. How does one tell for sure? I definitely don't think that it's solid brass. >>

I've been told that if there's no reliable documentation, you have to cut metal rounds apart to see if they are solid gold or just plated. >>

OK! It so thin I could probably use child scissors to cut it apart. Any YN, paste-eating first-graders out there ready to volunteer?

oreville · April 6, 2007 1:47PM

You can have a EDX spectrum analysis of the token to determine the exact metallic content of the token.

This is not a free test but at least it does not destroy the token.

by the way, here is an authentic 1859 1/4 $1 Cal fractional pocket piece made out of gold.

1859 25C BG-701 MS63 PCGS # 10528 : 1859 1/4 dollar Liberty Octagonal BG-701. Rarity 6. Purchased at Bowers & Merena Auctions March 2006. Lee Collection. This scarce variety was discovered either by David Proskey or John W. Scott and first published in the March 1884 edition of The Coin Collector''''s Journal. A prooflike example, the surfaces alternate between tannish-gold color on the obverse and warmer, medium-gold and rose-gold shadings on the reverse. Free of outwardly distracting abrasions, and housed in an older PCGS holder with a light-green insert.

DieClash · April 7, 2007 4:04AM

Thanks for the advice Oreville. I don't think it's worth the effort/cost of an EDX analysis.

Very nice Cal fractional by the way!

If the metal is indeed solid brass, then it dates to the 60s & 70s as Tom has indicated. But does anyone know when the the gold replicas were coined and by whom? I haven't paid for it yet, so I am truly trying to find a value. Mike Locke's website indicates anywhere from $1-$100. I'd kind of like to narrow it down.

Thanks to all for posting.

Cheers

Zoins · April 7, 2007 4:07AM

<< I am truly trying to find a value. Mike Locke's website indicates anywhere from $1-$100. I'd kind of like to narrow it down. >>

The value is what someone is willing to pay for it. Many price guides are out of date and inaccurate. Is there a group of collectors that focus on these?

DieClash · April 7, 2007 3:04PM

Maybe there are some night owls out there who can respond?

theump · April 7, 2007 3:28PM

I don't know if anyone has noticed, but Cal fractionals have been shooting up in price very nicely.

mrearlygold · April 7, 2007 3:42PM

PerryHall · April 7, 2007 4:29PM

<< I don't know if anyone has noticed, but Cal fractionals have been shooting up in price very nicely.

>>

They started going up a couple of years age when the Breen-Gillio standard reference was updated and republished.

DieClash · April 7, 2007 4:55PM

<< 

<< I don't know if anyone has noticed, but Cal fractionals have been shooting up in price very nicely.

>>

They started going up a couple of years age when the Breen-Gillio standard reference was updated and republished. >>

Thanks Perry. This is what I love about numismatics. You come across something you've never encountered before and try to find out about it. That's why I posted this thread. Looks like I'll be buying another book.

The old 2x2 album page depicted in this thread was donated to a non-profit organization that my wife works for. Since I'm into coins and since they know it, I was asked to try and valuate it. I got stumped with the gold fractional Cal. token. I figure it's real gold, but beyond melt value I don't know if it has any numismatic value. Mike Locke's webpages helped me to identify it. Now I've learned about Breen-Gillio standard reference guide. So I will pursue it from there.

I will also continue to solicit posters here on CU for their opinions.

Thanks to all for your advice.

Gemini · April 7, 2007 5:36PM

To find if there is any gold content at all in this piece I'm sure most jewelers could do an edge rubbing of the coin/token and perform an aqua regia test which is normally done to ascertain gold content of jewelry. This is routinely done whenever they purchase gold. This is a simple test and takes a minute or two and can be done by any jeweler.

PerryHall · April 7, 2007 9:15PM

<< To find if there is any gold content at all in this piece I'm sure most jewelers could do an edge rubbing of the coin/token and perform an aqua regia test which is normally done to ascertain gold content of jewelry. This is routinely done whenever they purchase gold. This is a simple test and takes a minute or two and can be done by any jeweler. >>

Trouble is that this will damage the coin (rubbing the edge on a stone) and, if the coin isn't gold, the acid (they use nitic acid) will stain the coin.

thebeav · April 7, 2007 11:36PM

<< 

Trouble is that this will damage the coin (rubbing the edge on a stone) and, if the coin isn't gold, the acid (they use nitic acid) will stain the coin. >>

Hi Perry,
The gold is 'rubbed' on a touch stone. The acid is then applied to the rub marks on the stone. No need to put the acid on the piece.
This could put a marginally 'flat' spot on the coin though. They're so thin.
This charm appears to be gold. I've gone through hundreds of them over the years. A charm like this would fall into the range already spoken. A
dollar is too cheap though, and a hundred is too expensive. An eBay buyer would pay between 25 and 45 dollars for this piece.

Writersblock · April 8, 2007 1:56AM

But if the token is plated the touchstone test will fail (indicate gold even though it is plated) unless it is rubbed hard enough to make sure you wear all the way through any plating layer. That WILL result in damage. Also the normal way that a jeweler will test when there is a possibility of plating is to use a file to cut through the plating and apply acid to the piece. In either case this is not acceptable. A simple specific gravity test would answer the question though. If it is brass or plated brass it will have an SG around 8.7 If it is gold, even as low as 8 KT, will have an SG over 11.

DieClash · April 8, 2007 6:22AM

Thanks for all the great advice. I think I will do the specific gravity test for starters.

Any idea when this piece may have been struck?

PerryHall · April 8, 2007 6:58AM

Specific gravity test will be very difficult with such a small, thin coin.

razzle · April 8, 2007 7:04AM

Dieclash,

You made me think of my counterfeit CA gold... raz

DieClash · April 8, 2007 10:01AM

<< Specific gravity test will be very difficult with such a small, thin coin. >>

Yeah I just looked it up on the internet. Link

DieClash · April 8, 2007 10:04AM

<< Dieclash,

You made me think of my counterfeit CA gold... raz >>

Raz,

I think I read somwhere that certain counterfeits are actually more valuable than the genuine article. I don't recall the source off the top of my head; most definitely on the internet though.

Cool counterfeit you got there.

tincup · April 8, 2007 11:30AM

DieClash, I just went to Mike Locke's site.... really interesting!! I just happened to pick up a group of 12 tokens myself... and was able to identify 1 of them in only about 5 minutes or so. (and found out it's probably 14k gold

)

Looks like some of the counterfeit ones are quite valuable.

razzle · April 8, 2007 12:02PM

Dieclash,

I checked the Locke site. I think the #11 Eureka coins ( on the old list ) are probably like mine, but I didn't find a match in any of his pics.

Interesting stuff, though. Thanks,

raz

DieClash · April 8, 2007 12:17PM

tincup,

I've been spending all weekend searching the web for any info on Cal gold fractionals and private fractionals of the period. Mike Locke's website keeps coming up.

And after thoroughly cruising Mike's website, the name Jay Roe (significant collection of Cal. fractional gold and private fractionals) and the name Nathan Joseph also comes up. Jay Roe, collector attributes the Wreath4E depicted in this thread to Nathan Joseph (I'm assuming he is the jeweler responsible for minting the variety). The Mike Locke website seems to be the definitive authority site on Cal Gold fractionals and tokens. Unfortunately, it is incomplete. I couldn't find squat on Nathan Joseph via web searches. So now the next step in the research process is the library/bookstores. I will start with the Breen-Gillio standard,reference and perhaps an email to Mike. I'll continue from there.

This is pretty fascinating stuff! I found this website that asserts that Cal gold fractionals are the next frontier in coin collecting! Austin Coins

Ya' gotta love this hobby!

DieClash · April 8, 2007 12:21PM

<< Dieclash,

I checked the Locke site. I think the #11 Eureka coins ( on the old list ) are probably like mine, but I didn't find a match in any of his pics.

Interesting stuff, though. Thanks,

raz >>

Raz,

If you find any new information please let me know! Such a tiny piece of struck metal, yet such a fascinating history!

DieClash · April 10, 2007 9:46AM

I sent an e-mail to Mike Locke inquiring about the Cal. gold specimen in the OP. He responded with a wealth of information! The entire text of that e-mail thread is posted below for the benefit of anyone who is interested. Thanks Mike for your generous contribution!

Kirk,

My Collector's Universe login seems to have expired, so I won't add to the dialog. Feel free to add this as long as you insert the entire text.

Although some Wreath4e tokens are replicas made in brass or pink colored gold circa 1961 (see Kelly's coins and chatter 1961-2), the piece that you illustrated is not one of those. Your token is the type that Nathan Joseph struck in the 1906-1920 time frame. Joseph advertised 4K, 10K, and 12K purity at various prices. My current buy price for tokens of this type of varieties that I already know such as this is $25.

The subject token is $1/2 size.

Gold usually can be distinguished from brass based on specific gravity. Archemides (sp) water displacement method doesn't work for tokens of this size because the surface tension on the suspension wire exceeds the weight of the displaced water. However, a direct measurement of the dimensions of the piece and the weight combined with some rough estimate of the relief of the piece yields fairly consistent values for brass (measured sg of 6.5-7) or gold (measured sg of 9.0 to 15.0 depending on purity). This method isn't very precise because the thickness measurement generally has only 1 significant digit and can be thrown off by any kind of bend or bump on the piece.

There is a lot of misinformation relating to California gold pieces out there. The fact is that since late 1853, the legitimate pieces were all made as souvenir or jewelry tokens. Although adding a denomination was legal until 1864 and the law was enforced unevenly from 1871 (first time) to 1883 (big crack down on all then current mfgrs). The tokens made from late 1853->1883 with a denomination are no more valid than the later issues. Of course collectors want the pieces with a denomination and widely believe that all of the pieces with a denomination were made for and actually circulated.

It is common to call the tokens made after 1883, fake, replica, or restrike. Although a few fakes, replicas and restrikes exist (some of those being made in very large quantities), for the most part they are original designs intended as California Gold souvenir tokens.

Of course, that means that these tokens are for the most part exo-numia (related to money, but not actual money). Only perhaps 1-2 dozen of the so-called "period 1" varieties of California Small Denomination Gold (CSDG) actually qualify as monetary issues. Unfortunately, identifying the exact varieties that were made as money is a difficult task. BG401 early die states only, BG201, and BG202 are so far the only ones with convincing evidence (time of issue, weight)
--
Mike Locke California Gold
www.calgoldcoin.com
lockem@calgoldcoin.com

<< Mike,

I've been searching the web for info about the wreath-reverse star 1/4 fractional Indian Head obverse gold California coin/token. Obviously the 1/4 is not stamped on the reverse.

I possess what I believe to be a gold piece. I am looking for more information about it. Who produced it and when and what value has been associated with it? The names Jay Roe and Nathan Joseph keep cropping up on your web pages associated with this token. What can you tell me about these individuals? It seems that Roe had a siginificant collection of California gold fractionals and perhaps Joseph produced the Wreath4e variety that I own?

Your website is copyright 2001. I wonder if you are still into this particular niche of numismatics?

And oh! I am posting on PCGS Coin Universe website seeking any input about this particular specimen for my own education.

Link: http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=579386&STARTPAGE=1

Regards,

Kirk >>

Zoins · April 10, 2007 10:16AM

Thanks for posting Mike Locke's reply. Excellent info

thebeav · April 10, 2007 1:12PM

Here's a link to an excellent Cal-gold site. There are forums much like here. Of course, not quite as active....
A great sharing site on the subject. Cal gold forum

DieClash · April 11, 2007 2:11PM

DieClash · April 13, 2007 6:24AM

TTT

This deserves and early weekend bump.

EDITED: California Gold educational post

Comments

Leave a Comment