Help!

I have been searching for info on these coins for a couple of days now before commenting. I was intrigued by the coins for a couple of reasons - 1 they definitey have the design of the 4 maravedis, but they appear to be silver coins - no maravedis was ever struck in silver, they were copper. And 2 - Captnbob's comment that they were possibly purchased from "SUPERIOR STAMP & COIN CO.,INC on June 11-14 1973(still in their sleves)."

With a respectable company being the assumed source of the coins one would be inclined to think the coins were genuine - but the silver look would seem to contradict that.

Then we have the reference of Menzel provided by acanthite, this would also seem to help identify the coins as genuine. I don't have a copy of Menzel, but given the info provided and the reference of the dates provided I must question his accuracy for the following reasons.

1 - On Feb. 28, 1538 Charles issued a decree prohibiting the coinage of gold & copper in the colonies. No copper or gold coinage had yet been minted prior to that.

2 - The actual minutes of meetings held by the town council of Mexico City still exist, the minutes show that the council discussed the desirability of copper coinage several times. And the minutes of the meeting held on July 30, 1540 show that different opinons were current. The minutes of April 17, 1542 show that copper coinage would not be struck. Then 10 weeks later the Viceroy countermanded this order and he authorized the minting of copper coinage on June 28,1542. Thus no copper coinage was ever struck in Mexico prior to that date. This obviously obviates the date reference of Menzel for the early series design of the second coin pictured.

Now it is recognized that when the first copper coinage was struck the punches used to create the Early Series G, F and P of silver coinage were used to create the copper dies. And the design of the second coin clearly matches that of the Early Series. So it would certainly be possible and consistent with the records for such a coin to exist. But there is a bit of a problem.

First of all, as I have already mentioned, no 4 maravedis coins were ever minted in silver. Also, there are only 2 examples of the Early Series copper coins even known to exist. So the appearance of another, and in silver yet, makes the coin highly suspect.

The first coin that Captnbob pictured matches the design of the Late Series G coinage, it also could not have been minted until after 1542 and probably 1543, and that date, while it is within range of the dates referenced by Menzel, does seem to bring Menzel's range of 1539-44 into question.

Now there were several different legends used with the Late Series copper, but there is only 1 that matches the legend of the coin pictured with the rest of the coins design features. And for that particular design there are only 3 examples known to exist. That coupled with the fact that the coin pictured is obviously not copper - again makes the coin highly suspect.

Thus I can only conclude that the odds are highly in favor of both coins being fakes. Could I be wrong ? Certainly, but the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. Only an in hand examination by a recognized expert, I would suggest Rick Ponterio, could ever authenticate these coins.

 

Yes, that is what Pradeau says. And since Pradeau might be considered the father of Mexican numismatics it is expected that Menzel quotes him as a source. Just about all authors on the subject do.

However, Pradeau wrote his book in 1936 and since then there has been much information discovered that was previously unknown - like the recorded minutes of meetings of the town council. It is these minutes which refute previously believed information. The source for my reference is The Coinage of the First Mint of the Americas at Mexico City 1536-1572 by Robert I. Nesmith - 2001.

This is an excellent example of why it is necessary to stay current with publications. Long held beliefs can often be discovered to be in error as new information is found.

 

And that is an 800 pound gorilla that is hard to get around.

Yes the copper coins did circulate even though the time period previously believed is inaccurate. And yes the Indians hated the coins. They hated them so much in fact that when they received any of the copper coins they immediately threw the coins in Lake Texcoco "that they might never more be seen". An interesting side note of the history of the coins.

And that is precisely the source for the examples known today. For the existing examples have been found in the muddy lake bottom during drainage operations. That also explains why so few examples are known for with copper being so reactive and subject to corrosion most of the coins have corroded away to nothing.

It should also probably be noted, in the interst of accuracy, that when quoting Pradeau as source material to remember that Pradeau also claims that no 8 reales coins were ever minted in Mexico City prior to 1572. We now know that not to be true for examples of the 8 reale coinage have been found, authenticated and dated as early as 1538.

 

Fair enough, so the 800 pound gorilla has been beaten into the corner

However, that does not change the other evidence. What you need to do Bob is to get the coins into the hands of an expert like I suggested. For if they are genuine, they would be worth a good deal. But I would not hold out much hope.