The controversial Galapagos Islands countermark & one eBay seller

There has always been controversy surrounding the Galapagos Islands "RA" countermark on late 1800's/early 1900's Ecuadorian silver coins. One theory is that they were made by a wealthy merchant, another is that they were used to pay prisoners, and yet another is that it's a modern fantasy altogether.
Please note this item and seller: http://www.ebay.com/itm/ECUADOR-RARE-1897-1-SUCRE-CROWN-COUNTERMARK-GALAPAGOS-ISLAND-/150723149406?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2317ccbe5e

He has consistently been selling them for the past few years. I'm not proud of this, but about a year ago I ended up buying three of the smaller countermarked coins from this seller and reselling them. Recently I've been doing more research on this and have only seen 1 example sold in a major auction (http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=332&lotNo=11605). That one had significant differences in the countermark compared to this seller's coins. The ones they sell are very consistent and all the countermarks look perfect regardless of the condition of the coin.

In fact, I have yet to find any example where the countermark shows natural wear, which goes against the first two theories. Also, I've never seen one graded by any major TGP.

So, I just went and pulled a little stunt and asked the seller about buying a larger lot of these. He informed me he had a few on hand, but indicated he can get more if I was interested. This supposedly endless supply is a huge red flag IMO.
Also found it interesting that the story in his descriptions combines the first two theories. I've never seen that anywhere else in the research I've done.

This seems to be a case where someone fashioned a modern countermark punch and is putting it on regular and much cheaper Ecuadorian coins. The seller also sells the regular coins side by side with the countermarked ones. It's something that has lore, controversy, and no real facts attached and the seller has been able to take advantage for years without anyone challenging his coins or story.

As far as the question of the legitimacy of the Galapagos Islands countermark in general: There's no evidence from the time period they were supposedly circulated, but there are records of them from before this seller and countermark type first appeared.

The Heritage auction from 2003 shows that people were catching on to it even before this seller started out, but they have been successful with it.

Thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't know much about foreign counterstamps Numismat, as I generally collect only U.S. pieces plus a few English and Irish stamps. But fantasies and fakes are pretty much the same no matter what country you collect from. Everything about these raise a red flag, especially the lack of wear on any of them and the fact that the seller can get more if he needs to. It certainly is worth spending a small amount to have a stamp made if he can make a serious amount of money selling fakes. I've seen some nice looking counterstamps (too nice) on e-bay a few months ago from a seller in Spain that screamed FAKE to me. Too perfect a stamp, unlisted in references, and always sold BIN. BIN is another red flag to me especially when it's supposedly a rare and desireable issue and the price is set at 3 or 4 hundred bucks. Run as fast as you can!

Bruce

 

Yes I've seen that same seller, often having fake counterstamps on genuine coins, but sometimes both the stamp and coin are fakes. I think the seller id is like Lucranae or something. They started out with some genuine stuff, but transitioned into the stuff we see now. I guess the buyers became aware, which is why the BIN format. I agree that's a red flag. When it's up for bids and people bid low due to suspicions, it gives other people suspicions as well.

 

You're right Numismat, I'm always suspicious of the BIN offers with a high pricetag, at least for counterstamps. I've found that C/S collectors nearly always balk at BIN offers unless it's a low value piece, say 20 or $30. And even then, many of those are ignored as well.
I haven't seen the Spanish seller lately but there are a few English pieces listed right now that I wouldn't bid on...just don't look right to me.

Bruce

 

Would you happen to have the links to those? You've peaked my curiosity. =)

 

After our "conversation" yesterday Numismat I went back to take another look, but they're not listed any more. They were on there for awhile but have either been sold or were taken down for lack of interest.

Bruce

 

Got it, I'm sure they'll show back up eventually. Thanks for looking for them. =)

 

Found another example. http://www.ebay.com/itm/L-K-ECUADOR...428?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item519c79de44

This one also has a modern looking countermark, one that is different from both of the examples previously posted.

So that's at least 3 different modern stamps for this countermark.

 

I noticed that one too Numismat, but wasn't sure if it were bogus or not. Apparently, it is...or at least suspect. As you know I'm not familiar with these foreign C/S, but had my suspicions about this one. With counterstamps from any country or era that intangible quality of "fabric" or "look" is so important and applies to all no matter their origin.

Bruce

 

Very true Bruce. The sad thing is that, judging by the sale price, the buyer believes it to be a legitimate antique countermark.

 

Good thing we got you here 'Mat, to keep these devils honest.......

Not a collector of world coins but I abhor charlatans and snake oil salesmen. Thanks for spreading the word on this guy 'Mat.

 

Hey no thanks necessary. Just glad I can do my part to clean up the hobby.
PS: My name's Dmitry =)

 

I shall remember that, my friend.......

 

I would appreciate any comments or corrections to the following;
Not included in the listings above are the "RA" counterstamps from the Galapagos Islands. Some information is found in MANUEL J. COBOS - SU VIDA Y SU OBRA by Dr. Octavio Latorre. His work, and other research, leads me to believe that it is within the realm of possibility that some coins may have been counterstamped by or for Alvarado after 1909 although I believe none could have been done later than 1917-18. (Latorre makes no mention of an "R" counterstamp.) I must also mention that Melvin Hoyos Galarza in LME included an interview with the son of Rogelio Alvarado which seems to substantiate the possibility that some legitimate "RA" counterstamps exist.


Any references that show the governor of Guayas gave Alvarado permission to counterstamp coins in 1883 are bogus. Alvarado was eleven years old at that time and did not arrive in the Galapagos until 1909 or so. As another point of interest I have been informed that Dr. Gregory Brunk, probably the world's leading authority on counterstamps, considers all of the "R" and "RA" issues to be fake. A first-person report or a listing in any book, article, FPL or auction catalog dated prior to 1950 would go a long way toward proving that legitimate examples exist.


In NE Reyes describes a method that he says would allow a person to determine which are the originals and which are the artificial (hechiza) coins. That information was given to him by Sr. Carlos Iza Teran of the Museo Numismatico del Banco Central del Ecuador. I do not have enough knowledge or sufficient examples available to determine if that method has a high degree of validity.

 

Yes that is a major issue, that no examples or references are out there contemporary to when the coins were supposedly counterstamped and used.

The same thing is true about various Middle Easter/Asian counterstamps on Maria Theresia thalers, which also only appeared on the market in the 1960's and are widely regarded as modern fantasy pieces.