Hello All, Here are some photos of what I believe to be a 1652 "Pine Tree" Shilling (small planchet). It just kills me that someone drilled a hole in it - oh well, it wasn't me. Anyway, when I provided this to a local coin dealer for a casual, complimentary discussion, he looked a little startled, pulled out his loop, examined it and said..."This is real." I'd welcome thoughts on the value and condition. Worth slabbing? Thanks!
Somebody wore this piece proudly for a mighty long time. Yet another exceptional piece of early American history. I am certainly not an expert in colonial coinage but the period fascinates me. I can offer this link to the PCGS page on the piece that will offer up auction results. Though I don't know how to judge the hole on period pieces like this. https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1652-shilling-pine-tree-small-planchet/24 Edit - Yes I do believe truly historic pieces like this merit a slab. Holed or not.
I'm not saying it genuine or not but that hole looks a little too round to be old. Not sure what was used though. I know they often used a square nail to punch the hole. Correct me if I am wrong.
I believe that this is a Noe 29, Salmon 11-F which is a common variety. In addition to the hole, the piece has also been clipped, which is the reason it looks "too round." It was a common practice for dishonest people to cut off little pieces of these coins and pass them for their full weight. After a while, if you clipped enough coins, you could turn in the silver to have more shillings or other coins made. I imagine that merchants who handled a lot of coins were most often guilty of clipping. Placing a value on this piece is hard. Most collectors view a hole as the worst thing that can happen to a collectable coin. The Red Book says a Good-4 is worth $800. Don't expect much if you ever order a piece that is graded Good-4. I would say this piece might be worth $200 to the right collector who wanted an inexpensive example of Massachusetts silver. It wouldn't be the easiest sell. Certification is expensive these days, so I'm not sure if it is worth it. Here is the small planchet piece in my collection. This was the first Massachusetts piece that I acquired for my collection over 40 years ago. (Am I really that old?) This is probably the most common Pine Tree shilling. It's a Noe 16. It is now in a PCGS VF-35 holder. I first saw in this piece in an auction conducted by the late Catherine Bullowa. I bid on it, but didn't get it. Later I bought this piece at a Bay State Coin Show, which used to be held in Boston, a year and a half later. A couple years after that, I ran into the auction catalog from the Bullowa sale. Thumbing through it, I spotted this piece same piece among the auction plates. The first give away was the "bird's nest" die break on the left side of the tree.
One note on the hole. These coins were in circulation in the United States for a long time. I saw a page in on the anti-counterfeit books that banks used in the mid 19th century. It showed pictures of the coins banks might receive during the course of their business. Oddly enough, there was a Pine Tree shilling there. The book said that it was worth 12 cents. That would have been 200 years after the coin was minted!
I keep looking at the hole.... Darned if it doesn't appear that something was driven in that hole... Who knows what? Perhaps something to protect the hole from wear by the chain perhaps?
If determined not to be Counterfeit, It would receive encapsulation as "Genuine". That has been the practice for many years. I know stuff. Truth in editing: added an"fe" where appropriate.
Considering there were not round nails at that period.......you are NOT in need of correction at this time. I know, I know...I was flabbergasted also, but the question is can you keep that streak going.
Truth is.... Most of the top shelf coins in my collection are housed in "genuine" holders.... I figure that way my wife who knows nothing about coins except how to spend them won't have to argue authenticity in the event of my departure from this spinning rock.
Thank you all for the great comments and examples. Strong learning for me. Yes, that hole does look pretty round and modern to me
Not necessarily modern. The ring, the insert, may be modern, not necessarily the hole. One would have to have a hole in one's head to find one of these and put a hole in it.
I blew that first photo up on my phone last night. This one really has my curiosity up.... If you look at what appears to be remnants of the original hole just above the 6 & 5 in the date, darned if that hole doesn't appear to have once been square. I think this was a square hole initially and somebody at a later date recognized the piece was damaged anyway and decided to make a modern pendent out of it and added the ferrule and back-filled the square hole.
It does look like that, now, squared and back-filled. Or at least rough-cut, it wasn't a perfect hole. Good catch, Sherlock.
If you look at the holed 1652 shillings on Heritage, the large majority have round holes. This suggests that something other than a square nail was used most of the time, although for several it was clearly a square nail. It's fun to speculate.
