conscoins Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 (edited) PLEASE HELP!! I'm a huge nerd for colonial-era coinage. I've been collecting for years and selling for a couple. KGIII stuff is my niche but I'm having a hard time finding information about this 1811 bank token. For several years during KGIIIs reign, especially during his later years following the American and French revolutions, there was a significant silver shortage. As a result, in the early 1800s, before Great Britain's Recoinage Act of 1816, several bank tokens were minted in an attempt to fill this void. Among these are incredibly uncommon proof patterns. Could this be one of those patterns? I'd like to determine its authenticity and value. Any help in further identifying and offering information is greatly appreciated. Edited April 30 by conscoins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 (edited) IHi there ! Welcome back ! That's a fine coin you have there. While I am unable to help you with your specific concern, I wish to assure you it is still early yet and when you factor in time zones the wait may be a tad longer. Be patient. You have accessed what may arguably be one of the finest chat boards in existence. Someone well--versed in such matters should be along to assist you shortly... Edited April 30 by Henri Charriere Die polishing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zadok Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 On 4/30/2024 at 1:03 AM, conscoins said: PLEASE HELP!! I'm a huge nerd for colonial-era coinage. I've been collecting for years and selling for a couple. KGIII stuff is my niche but I'm having a hard time finding information about this 1811 bank token. For several years during KGIIIs reign, especially during his later years following the American and French revolutions, there was a significant silver shortage. As a result, in the early 1800s, before Great Britain's Recoinage Act of 1816, several bank tokens were minted in an attempt to fill this void. Among these are incredibly uncommon proof patterns. Could this be one of those patterns? I'd like to determine its authenticity and value. Any help in further identifying and offering information is greatly appreciated. ...see NGC cert number 4624961-005.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conscoins Posted April 30 Author Share Posted April 30 On 4/30/2024 at 8:10 AM, zadok said: ...see NGC cert number 4624961-005.... Hey there. I did find this online in my research although the coins are different. On the PF67 under that cert #, KGIII is facing right. On mine, he is facing left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coinsandmedals Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your piece is not genuine. A quick comparison of the obverse with any confirmed genuine example of Küchler’s work should be sufficient to establish that fact. Fenntucky Mike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conscoins Posted May 1 Author Share Posted May 1 On 4/30/2024 at 11:18 PM, coinsandmedals said: I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your piece is not genuine. A quick comparison of the obverse with any confirmed genuine example of Küchler’s work should be sufficient to establish that fact. What sort of information do you derive from that quick comparison that makes you believe it isn't genuine? This exact design is KM#PnC68 and ESC 1983 (R3 rarity index). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobymordet Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 There were many bank tokens issued in England during the early 1800's due to various war efforts. I cannot tell you that your "token" is authentic, but I can assume that NGC would not legitimize a counterfeit coin with a KM#. I would contact NGC. Hopefully, "Ask NGC" might be able to assist with this endeavor. conscoins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobymordet Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 Found this on Amazon. {The token money of the Bank of England, 1797 to 1816} Paperback – August 1, 2019 14 bucks to answer the $64,000 question. . . maybe?. . . hopefully! conscoins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coinsandmedals Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 On 4/30/2024 at 11:30 PM, conscoins said: What sort of information do you derive from that quick comparison that makes you believe it isn't genuine? This exact design is KM#PnC68 and ESC 1983 (R3 rarity index). The Soho Mint (i.e., where the dies would have been made for the genuine piece) is my sole numismatic focus. Your piece is a crude imitation of a genuine design. I can't seem to locate the images of the example in my collection; however, I did locate my notes. Check out lots 321 and 322 of September 27th (2011) St. James Auctions. https://cdn.sanity.io/files/f3pcy24e/production/66125b33c49d06a42d533010981e55f7bf2d6424.pdf Compare the fine details between the genuine examples linked above with the cartoonish execution of your piece. A self-described collector with years of experience should have no issues identifying the discrepancies. Fenntucky Mike 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conscoins Posted May 1 Author Share Posted May 1 On 5/1/2024 at 12:16 AM, coinsandmedals said: The Soho Mint (i.e., where the dies would have been made for the genuine piece) is my sole numismatic focus. Your piece is a crude imitation of a genuine design. I can't seem to locate the images of the example in my collection; however, I did locate my notes. Check out lots 321 and 322 of September 27th (2011) St. James Auctions. https://cdn.sanity.io/files/f3pcy24e/production/66125b33c49d06a42d533010981e55f7bf2d6424.pdf Compare the fine details between the genuine examples linked above with the cartoonish execution of your piece. A self-described collector with years of experience should have no issues identifying the discrepancies. I appreciate your response to this post. I don't appreciate the passive-aggressive tone toward my collecting abilities. This is my hobby. I'm simply asking for assistance on what I had hoped would be a wholesome community rather than elitist collectors. You have not pointed out anything specific. Firstly, 321 and 322 on that pdf are struck in copper (this is important). While I can recognize the higher details in those examples, I believe my piece was cleaned at some point, which can obviously degrade the surface details. Compare the details of a straight grade trade dollar and a cleaned one--the surfaces of the cleaned one are closer to mine. Also, as anyone would, I, of course, want to advocate for the legitimacy of a particular piece in my possession. As I hope this is a genuine example, I've already submitted this to NGC in anticipating conflicting viewpoints from collectors on this forum. I suppose we'll wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coinsandmedals Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 On 5/1/2024 at 12:38 AM, conscoins said: I appreciate your response to this post. I don't appreciate the passive-aggressive tone toward my collecting abilities. This is my hobby. I'm simply asking for assistance on what I had hoped would be a wholesome community rather than elitist collectors. You have not pointed out anything specific. Firstly, 321 and 322 on that pdf are struck in copper (this is important). While I can recognize the higher details in those examples, I believe my piece was cleaned at some point, which can obviously degrade the surface details. Compare the details of a straight grade trade dollar and a cleaned one--the surfaces of the cleaned one are closer to mine. Also, as anyone would, I, of course, want to advocate for the legitimacy of a particular piece in my possession. As I hope this is a genuine example, I've already submitted this to NGC in anticipating conflicting viewpoints from collectors on this forum. I suppose we'll wait and see. Passive aggressive tone? That was not my intent. Nonetheless, thicker skin might prove useful. I am far from the most blunt on this forum. The metal the piece is struck in is irrelevant in this case. The main design details would not differ between silver and copper as they are imparted by the die when the piece is struck. Although cleaning would certainly degrade the surfaces, it will not alter the central design. I’m glad you’ve sent this piece to NGC. I hope I’m wrong, but I do not think it is genuine based on the images provided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 On 5/1/2024 at 2:12 AM, coinsandmedals said: Passive aggressive tone? That was not my intent. Nonetheless, thicker skin might prove useful. I am far from the most blunt on this forum. This member rarely weighs in on rendering opinions on other member's coins. I can vouch for the fact that when he does, he has always been exceedingly polite. If, as you've indicated, the coin has been submitted, any opinions or observations are moot. Let the experts do the necessary deliberations and I do hope you accept their verdict. (The results can then be forwarded to the person(s) who sold you the piece if that is possible, and you can state your claim as to whether they had honored the description of the coin you purchased, accurately and honestly.) We are all coin enthusiasts and sometimes the truth may require brutal honesty. No true coin collector here would revel in another's misfortune. Let's be patient, and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VKurtB Posted May 11 Share Posted May 11 Oh boy! Another poster who wants to complain about someone else’s “tone”. Trust me then; you don’t want me to opine. My “tone” ALWAYS stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Charriere Posted May 12 Share Posted May 12 On 5/1/2024 at 12:18 AM, coinsandmedals said: I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your piece is not genuine. A quick comparison of the obverse with any confirmed genuine example of Küchler’s work should be sufficient to establish that fact. I would have suggested there do appear to be anomalies, but your cultivated tongue sounds so much better than my default gutter lingo. zadok 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
