Considered counterfeit?

I know a few people who collect Seated coins. Not one that I know of considers any of the 1861-O halves to be counterfeit.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Whether they are technically or legally "counterfeits," they still are coins that were used in commerce during a historic period and are full of history.

Are they legitimate coins? I say yes, though the circumstances of their pedigree are less than ideal.

 

I am sure that they are not counterfeit either. But, in showing a coworker the coin and explaining why I thought this was a fascinating coin, she ask the question and I really had to give it some thought, so I posted the question here. Ask one of your friends the same question, I'm sure you get the same hesitant, maybe puzzled, look!!

 

Not to hijack the post, but I still wonder about the Japanese 100,000 yen gold coin that apparently was widely counterfeited. Anyone know anything?

 

Really? Not sure how you misread my post - it was intended to be informational.

 

@GDJSMP
Is there any evidence of a wrong weight or, a way to tell the difference between a Russian re-strike and a Ducat?

 

Having VERY recently toured the New Orleans Mint building, I can confidently report that the Mint employees continued to serve admirably under all three jurisdictions in 1861, almost as if nothing had changed. Locally and physically, nothing had yet changed. The blockade of New Orleans took some time to become effective. At the moment, nobody knew if the changes were going to be 5 years or 5 days. There was a sign describing the whole issue. The ground floor of the museum has a very nice display going right now.

They only stopped when they ran out of silver.

You can easily tell which 1861-O's are under Federal vs. Confederate authority. When you drop a federal one on a hard surface, it goes "CLINNNNGGG!" The confederate ones go "CLINNNNGGG, y'all."