1794 dollar, Jules Reiver & counterfeits

[delta]

While admiring the stunning 1796 dollar posted here recently by Rayman311, I consulted my dusty 1999 copy of Early Silver Dollars by Jules Reiver, and reread the information about how he, Reiver, and ANACS, were completely fooled by a fake 1794 dollar (pages 12, 13 & 111) made by casting, done in 1967 or earlier.

 

The genuine 1794 from which the fake was copied was sold by Heritage for 126.5K at the January 2007 FUN auction, where it was lot 4941. with a summary of the story in the description.

 

I think it's alarming that such nearly perfect fakes were being made almost 50 years ago. On page 12 of his book cited above, Reiver presented photos, obverse and reverse, of the real and the fake, without saying which was which, and now, comparing them with the Heritage auction plate it is only with great difficulty that I come to suppose the bottom plates of Reiver's show the fake. Even the dirt in the crevices of the VF25 was duplicated incredibly well.

 

Among the obvious questions are how prevalent was this level of counterfeiting? What other similar examples are known? How many of these may have escaped notice so we're still unaware of them? With advancing technology over the last half century, might these fakes be easier to manufacture, and/or easier to detect?

 

 

[nwcs]

It's a game of cat and mouse. I'm sure the fakes are much easier to manufacture and much closer to the real thing. At the same time detection technology has also gotten better and more information on these fakes is distributed to a wider audience. A great fake always has a chance of slipping through the cracks but I'd say the overall rate probably isn't all that different now. My personal belief is coin doctoring has gotten much better.

[RWB]

In the 19th century mint officials, including the Philadelphia Mint coiner and the Engraver, identified several coins as genuine when they were later shown to be fakes. A. Loudoun Snowden was one who favored special training for agents so they could detect high quality fakes. [The coins' I've seen mentioned were from different denominations; however, gold was less faked than shaved, sweated or even drilled.

[BillJones]

Some of the old counterfeits that were made to fool collectors are very scary. Within my realm of memory and research, here is the worst one.

 

This counterfeit 1796 half dollar was long thought to be a genuine coin. It was sold at auction by one of the major firms in the early 1960s. The piece was not flushed out until the 1980s when it was submitted to PCGS for authentication. There the piece was declared to be a counterfeit, which it was.

 

This piece was not used to perpetrate a penny ante crime. The coin had a Red Book listing of $2,600 in VF, and I think this piece sold for something like $10,000 at auction back then. Today you are looking at coin that would sell, if genuine in the $200,000 range. This is a darn good copy and a very dangerous item, AND it was made in "the old days."

 

[Rayman311]

While admiring the stunning 1796 dollar posted here recently by Rayman311, I consulted my dusty 1999 copy of Early Silver Dollars by Jules Reiver, and reread the information about how he, Reiver, and ANACS, were completely fooled by a fake 1794 dollar (pages 12, 13 & 111) made by casting, done in 1967 or earlier.

 

The genuine 1794 from which the fake was copied was sold by Heritage for 126.5K at the January 2007 FUN auction, where it was lot 4941. with a summary of the story in the description.

 

I think it's alarming that such nearly perfect fakes were being made almost 50 years ago. On page 12 of his book cited above, Reiver presented photos, obverse and reverse, of the real and the fake, without saying which was which, and now, comparing them with the Heritage auction plate it is only with great difficulty that I come to suppose the bottom plates of Reiver's show the fake. Even the dirt in the crevices of the VF25 was duplicated incredibly well.

 

Among the obvious questions are how prevalent was this level of counterfeiting? What other similar examples are known? How many of these may have escaped notice so we're still unaware of them? With advancing technology over the last half century, might these fakes be easier to manufacture, and/or easier to detect?

 

 

Interesting questions to consider.

A person with the knowledge, skill, desire and time is a scary thought... and threat.

[RWB]

19th century counterfeiting was focused on duplicating real money. There was little profit in imitating collector coins because the profits were small, most expensive pieces were well-known, and the collector base was tiny.

 

The crooks concentrated on making look-alike minor coins, silver dollars, etc. that would not get a close examination. But, some of the fakes were remarkably good - especially cents.

[delta]

Is there anything apparent in the photos you posted of that 1796 that would reveal it as bogus, or at least raise serious suspicion?

 

Some of the old counterfeits that were made to fool collectors are very scary. Within my realm of memory and research, here is the worst one.

 

This counterfeit 1796 half dollar was long thought to be a genuine coin. It was sold at auction by one of the major firms in the early 1960s. The piece was not flushed out until the 1980s when it was submitted to PCGS for authentication. There the piece was declared to be a counterfeit, which it was.

 

This piece was not used to perpetrate a penny ante crime. The coin had a Red Book listing of $2,600 in VF, and I think this piece sold for something like $10,000 at auction back then. Today you are looking at coin that would sell, if genuine in the $200,000 range. This is a darn good copy and a very dangerous item, AND it was made in "the old days."