Got this coin a couple months back. I emailed these pics to someone experienced with Spanish, Central and South American coins from this era as well as counterfeits. He felt it was a cast forgery, largely based on the small "pimples" that riddle the surface of the coin. He felt these were casting bubbles. I felt it was a struck coin and that the pimples were die rust. After further research I found several examples of the same type in both known die pairings that had minor evidence of similar "pimples". Also found a slightly later, but similarly made type that had extensive "pimples" just like my coin one one side, and was slabbed by NGC: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ARGENTINA-1...666?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a14f75412 (enlarge photo of sun-face side to see what I mean). At this point I feel that it's struck from a very rusty die. If it was cast and there were casting bubbles I would expect them to be found with similar frequency in the fields and raised portions. On my coin they are nearly always found in the fields and lowest relief portions. The edge also has two reverse direction overlaps at directly opposing points, and these colonial type edges are most difficult to copy correctly. The coin is the correct size and weight is spot on. Electromagnetic test suggests very high purity silver content. Wear pattern is exactly as it should be compared to examples from major auctions. The wear pattern is actually one of the main reasons I believe it's authentic (along with faint cartwheel luster). The planchet also has a slight bend near the area of the assayer initials, but it appears to be original to the coin. Initially I wanted to send it out for slabbing. But, I plan on keeping the coin for myself and never slab coins I keep. Only if I planned to sell it would I send it to the TGPs. Would love to hear your thoughts on this one. I already informed the seller I'd be keeping it, so now it's a question of "rare coin" versus "study specimen". Thanks! =)
Judging from the pictures, and your statement that weight, size and silver content test are OK, I also concur that this coin appears to be genuine. The edge device is, as you say, most difficult to reproduce on casts. On you coin the edge design appears well detailed and not mushy as a cast would be. I seems also that no seam is present around the edge. Remains only the issue of the pimples of the surface. It is well possible that this is due to rusty dies - not inconceivable as this coin was minted in Potosi, where probably ideal condition for die storage did not always exist. The horrible, pebbly texture typical of casts coins is usually distributed throughout the coin and the edge. On your coin the pimples are isolated, and this would speak against a cast. Besides all of the above, your coin has a good appearance and matches well a few i saw on mcsearch. My opinion is that it is genuine and a desirable example of this interesting issue of the early years of the Argentine republic.
Good posts, I agree as well its not cast. What I do if I am wondering if its casting bubbles is look at the bubbles under 32x magnification using my stereo microscope. Casting bubbles are just that, bubbles. They are air comnig to the surface, and as such usually will not be perfectly round, with many or most having a hole where the air escaped out of the bubble. Look at a cast coin that has air bubbles sometime under high power and see what I mean. Look at one bubble, and turn it around and usually you can see a open spot where the air escaped. Sometimes not, so one bubble cannot prove this, but if you see at least a few like this on a coin its proving its not rust, but casting bubbles. Having said that, I believe yours is die rust. Like you said, the edges are the hard parts on these. Chris
Thank you guys, I was on the fence about this one after getting a long explanation of why it's cast and it just didn't feel right. This one was by no means a bargain buy, so I'd have been stuck with a very expensive study piece. I like your confidence! Guess I kind of made a bet by keeping it even not being sure of authenticity.
Little follow-up question: Anyone know how NGC or PCGS treats a coin with a defective, but original planchet? would it cause it to get a details grade or "genuine, non-gradable" designation? In this case one part of the coin has a slight wave. At least I believe it's original to the planchet.
Might be tough Dmitry, I am not sure. Usually a wavy planchet is indicative of PMD since the striking pressure usually smooths out such issues during the strike. I would defer to anyone who has more experience on thse particular issues as to if this is commonly found and accepted.
It depends on how badly the coin is bent. Like many things it's all a matter of degree. I've seen many bent coins in slabs. I've even seen coins that were bent/folded in half, twice, then straightened and flattened by somebody who knew what they doing, and then be slabbed. And I've seen others similar to yours body-bagged, and some slabbed. There really isn't any rhyme or reason to it. Of course in today's world they won't be bagged unless they have environmental contamination. Not with the Details and Genuine slabs they use now.
looks genuine to me i sent your photos to my friend in argentina and he says they look genuine as well. but please do not slab it coins like that are better raw.
Thanks again guys, I don't plan on slabbing it unless I ever get a better example and have to sell this one. But I seriously doubt I'll get a better example. I'm not that lucky. =) This wave seems to be confined to just one quarter of the coin. The rest of the coin is flat and lays normally on a surface. The rim on the concave side of the wavy area is a bit flatter. And the area from just inside of the PTS and J going out to the rim sort of dips to a slightly lower elevation. Kind of hard to word it to make sense. The rim has a small wave, but the obverse is unaffected and the reverse has a flat, non-wavy drop in surface elevation in that area. Who knows, maybe I'll run it through a TGP just to see what happens and then crack it back out.
Thanks Chris. I'm just relieved that the consensus is that it's genuine. The guy who told me it was cast really took me for an extended roller-coaster ride. Didn't want to name him since it seems he got this one wrong. =)
