Bought it online the other day. Looks to have been cleaned a long time ago, but still a great coin. What are your thoughts guys? Good buy?
Nice coin. If you are new to collecting this series, I suggest that you purchase from an experienced, reliable dealer. There are lots of fakes out there, most of them quite obvious, but they can be tricky, especially for a new collector. Karl Stephens, CNG, and the Mexican Coin Company (they sell other Latin American coins) of Carefree, AZ are three that come to mind. You'll pay more with these dealers, but at the same time you'll have someone who will back up the purchase. Next, you need to get examples from the other colonial mints! Mexico is by far the easiest, followed by Lima (scarce to rare, depending on date), Potosi (again scarce to rare), Guatemala (very scarce to rare). The two other mints that produced pillar "two worlds" 8 reales, Santiago and Bogota are extremely rare and seldom appear on the market. As with your Mexican pillar, the Lima 8 reales of the late 1760s and 1770-72 are generally available. As with coins in general the high grades command the highest prices, but if you are will to settle for a nice mid-grade coin, the field will open up for you. Potosi pillars can be pricey, especially in high grade. Some collectors regard the 1770 Potosi pillar dollar to be among the most beautiful of the series. Again, mid-grade (VF-EF) coins are generally more affordable. Potosi had a much more limited run producing these coins, from 1767 to 1770, when the milled coins were discontinued until the portrait coins of Charles III started in 1773. The dates 1769 and 1770 are generally the most available, especially the latter. Guatemala milled pillars are crude, idiosyncratic and are the odd-balls of the series, which are the main reasons why I love them! That said, they are expensive, often holed (a practice of the indigenous population, whose clothing lacked pockets, hence the hole to accommodate a string or rope), and the strike can vary from acceptable to downright awful. The date 1768 is the most common, followed by the smaller flan issues of 1770 and 1771. If you can land a nice VF that hasn't been holed or repaired, you're ahead of the game. I need to photograph more of my pillars, but here's what I have so far: Guatemala, 1770 P ex Ponterio Potosi, Bolivia, 1770 JR Looks like I need to get on my horse and take some more pics!
Thanks for this information. I love pillars, but only have a couple that are not the later portraits. I agree, lots of counterfeits. I have one that I acquired about 40 years ago that I submitted and was bodybagged. Still don’t know what they identified. Given today’s prices, it’s an expensive lesson.
I know the feeling. I got burned on a transaction over 20 years ago, when I bought a 1767 Potosi pillar from a guy in Singapore. The coin was a fake, so I sent the coin back for a refund. The seller simply vanished, a real crook. I should have known better and really only have myself to blame, but those are the lessons we go through, hopefully a little more the wiser next time. One thing that you should have, if you don't have one, is a digital scale, with at least a two decimal point display. They're not expensive and very helpful in making an initial test on a coin's authenticity. Spanish 8 reales are suppose to weigh around 27 grams, with some variation depending on the period made and other factors, such as salvage, corrosion or clipping, to name a few.
I have scales. It wasn't the weight, but some other identifier that was (obviously) difficult to recognize. I'll try to find it and post.
I agree on weighing all silver coins that I buy. That is the first test I do and I record the weight on the card I make for the coin.
This beauty sold last night on Heritage....next bid would have been $1,500. I loved the detail, but I think it must have been dipped to be this white.
Not sure about the coin having been dipped. The 8 reales of Ferdinand VI from 1747 into the early 1750s have grainy surfaces due to rusted dies. Sometimes the graininess is so strong that it can make the coin look almost as it was cast! That hammer price is very healthy, perhaps too healthy, probably due, in part, to the coin in the NGC slab. The date 1752 is not a particularly scarce date, but the coin is very high grade and well struck.
These have really shot up in price the last few years. I really liked the coin, but just find it hard to believe that a 270 year old coin is not more darkly toned. Many of these from that vintage certainly seem to be and lot of older white US coins have been dipped, including many now in plastic.
