1792 CARLOS IIII 8R Silver w/ 100 chop marks

Hi there i received this coin as a gift and am really hopping to get some more infomation about it and what it may be worth. I Did some research on the marks and found that they are called chop marks made by the merchants that received it after they have weighed it and checked the right silver content of the coin. Any info would be grate.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The reverse when I look it up all show RFM and yours shows RII.
A highly counterfeited coin, perhaps the over abundance of chop marks is to hide that it is a fake.
First weigh it to see if it is close to the suggested weight. A tiny bit light would be
OK. Weight: 27.0674g

 

According to Numista, the correct specifications and lettering should be the following.

Weight 27.07 g
Diameter 39 MM
Orientation Medal alignment ↑↑

Obverse Lettering: CAROLUS·IIII·DEI·GRATIA
·YEAR·
Reverse Lettering:·HISPAN·ET IND·REX·Mo ·8R·T·H·

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces18852.html

 

All the coins I see from different sources of this year and type,
have 8R FM on the reverse. All the photos on Ebay, real and countefeit
show 8RFM.
Numista is good but so is NGC:
https://www.ngccoin.com/price-guide/world/mexico-spanish-colony-8-reales-km-109-1791-1808-7-cuid-1116249-duid-1417393

 

The coin was struck at the Lima mint, not Mexico city--that is why the reverse legend is a little different. I see no reason to suspect this coin is not authentic.

 

I was wondering about that.
I knew they were minted in Mexico City.
Lima. Cool. Thanks.
The 9 did look correct in the date, it just seemed that the excessive number
of chop marks may have been hiding something, and that the 8 reales silver is one of the most counterfeited coins.
To my uneducated eye it seemed fine, but I couldn't tell either way.

 

Also the RII is not RII. The R goes with the 8 to make 8R meaning 8 Reales and the II is not II. It is I J. Their Js always look very similar to Is. I J is the initials of the assayer/ moneyer/ mint master depending on where, and when, the coin was actually minted.
As stated by @David MacDonald, this coin was minted in Lima, Peru. Other Spanish colonial coins were minted in Bolivia, amongst other places.
Also as stated above, there's no reason to think it's fake, just by looking at it.
This is probably +/- a $50 coin if purchased on eBay.

I wish I had it in my collection.

From NGC :


peru-8-reales-km-97-1791-1808-cuid-1079856-duid-1510510

The letters IJ are correct as in the description, however the photo on NGC is of an 1805 which shows JP, but by looking at that JP you can see why the OPs coin appears to be II. That J for an I is a very common misread with these Spanish coins.
What appears on the OPs coin to be the Mexican mintmark of M with a tiny o over it is actually MAE pushed together, as a monogram, to represent Limae.

Considering how much traveling, and commerce, this coin has done, as evidenced by the chop marks, it is in remarkably good condition.

 

Not my area of expertise, but there seme to be a lot of duplicate marks...



Maybe @Eduard could assist?

 

That is a good point. If someone had already chopmarked a coin,
why would they need to do it again?
I do see the I J now.

 

The edge looks questionable and there is definitely something wrong with the mint mark. The mint mark is supposed to be a monogram combining LIMAE.

 

Given that when first seen and used, your own chop would be easy to spot, but after enough use and enough other chops, what busy merchant is going to take the time to search for his own chop, instead of just weighing it, and if it weighs right, just chopping it again and toss it in the till ?

Part of the explanation for the similar chops could be that there are so many different merchants in the Orient that who's to say some of them didn't just happen to choose similar chops. Even the ones that are circled are not, to my eye, exactly the same. Similar yes, exactly the same....debatable.
I see at least 2 Sauwastikas/Swastikas which leads me to believe this coin traveled through the Tibet/Nepal/Burma area at one time.

As we all know, none of us were there, and none of us can say anything for sure, but all of us can say "what if", and "maybe", and "could be", and that's really all I'm saying.

Isn't @Stork good with this stuff also?

and @Hiddendragon

I know there are others also, trying to remember everyones name is not fun.

I need to make a list of who's good with what.

 

Beg to differ, that mintmark does not combine all 5 letters. It is exactly as you see it , MAE pushed together. Spanish coins minted in Bolivia have a different monogram TSL , I believe (off hand) and the three are stacked together on top of one another.

Look at the NGC coin I linked and you'll see that the Lima mark is MAE pushed together.

Edit : The Bolivian mint is Potosi and the mark is a monogram of PTSI (not TSL ) stacked on top of each other, which makes it look kind of like a dollar sign = $ .

 

Here is a link to what may be a good site for these coins.


cointypes.htm

However, after a very quick read of the first page, I would say that I disagree with their description of the last Lima, Peru mint mark. This site says the last mark used was a "slightly overlapped" ME. I differ in that I believe it's plain to see the crossbar of the A and the slanted left leg of the A, used as the slanted right leg of the M, the right leg of the A is the same as the vertical back of the E., Which all together makes an MAE pushed together.

As we all know, none of us are perfect. Neither am I and on this one point, I don't think this site is either.

Otherwise, this site has lots of information about Spanish colonial coins and lists all of the colonial mints, and describes their mint marks, and 5 different types of Spanish dollars.

 

After doing more research and seriously studying your enlargement of the mintmark, I feel I must concur with your assessment of the use of all 5 letters in this monogrammatic mintmark. I must correct myself and "pull back" my "differ".

When looking closely at the mark, you can see, starting at the left vertical bar and moving right, indications of two letters, an L and an I. Comparing the size of the bottom left serif to the bottom right one, you can see a very slight indentation that, to me, indicates where the I ends, with the body of the I actually being directly on top of the body of the L. As you follow that serif farther to the right, past the V of the M, you can see where it curves sharply upwards and ends, thus forming the bottom leg of the L. The M, starts with it's left leg on top of the L/I combo, then slants down and right to the bottom of the left leg of the A, which is most recognizable by it's crossbar, then up to the top of the vertical leg of the E, at which point the legs of all 3 letters become one, with the totality of the E being the most recognizable of any of the 5 letters.

Yes, absolutely, all 5 letters are in this mintmark.

I'm very thankful to jgenn for the most excellent enlargement of the mint mark that made the separation of the letters and the indicators thereof, so much easier to see.

Crow is a much tastier dish when served to one's self.

 

I do not like your Lima 8 reales (photos)
1. Anverse: Castles, columns, letters, dentils...
2- Reverse: letters, Carolus IV bust
¿Can you weight the coin with 2 decimals, please?

 

If your chopmark was already on the coin, your eye would immediately be drawn to it as you were about to chop it again, and then realize there is no need. (Since you would remember coins that you didn't accept.)
And, there are a few different chops that are duplicated. I don't recall that
on any trade dollar, etc.

 

I am of the same opinion.

 

Hey guys, since none of us were there, and none of us ever used these coins then, and none of us ever put a chop mark like this on anything, can we really make such suppositions as these? Can we really say now, what the people back then would have, or should have done? We can certainly suggest what they could have done, but that really means nothing.
There are several other members who are much, much better with these coins than any of us. I personally am looking forward to hearing from the guys with more expertise. Especially since I know they have more expertise than I do. I would be willing to say that one of the possible reasons this Spanish 8Reales coin has more chop marks on it than most other trade dollars is because the Spanish coins were used in commerce, the world over, far earlier than any other trade dollar and for much, much longer. In fact, the Spanish 8Reales coin was the preferred trade dollar in the Orient.

Let's ask again :

@Eduard
@Stork
@Hiddendragon
@PaddyB

Does anyone know anyone else who is good with Spanish milled dollars and/or with Oriental chop marks?


I'm ready to put this one to bed.

 

From Wiki :

"Chop marks on coins are Chinese characters stamped onto coins by merchants in order to validate the weight, authenticity and silver content of the coin.

Starting with the 18th century, a number of European, American and Japanese silver coins (generically known as the trade dollar) began circulating in the Far East. Each merchant's firm had its own mark and, after heavy circulation, the design of the coin became completely obliterated by the chop marks.[1] "


Key sentence from this Wiki entry : ".......and, after heavy circulation, the design of the coin became completely obliterated by the chop marks."

Gee, is that really possible ???

 

From Wiki : Trade Dollars

Trade_dollar

Very interesting information on these at this link. I always like improving my knowledge.