This is Carlos III without doubt. But what is interesting about it, is now I can confirm that the legends do infact swap from obv to rev. on the C3 issues. Glad I found this. Wrong attribution, or photo not sure. Neat example of this series though.
CaptainMyCaptain
17. Dec. 2018, 08:24
As I stated in the other listing for this issue, this is a 1627, Spain (Madrid?) issue, with the date stamped BACKWARDS by the die sinker. Nothing more. Take a look at any Spain Half Real, from 1627, and you will find they are identical. This is a coin that needs to be reclassified, and placed correctly into the region it was produced.
I will say however, that this coin, has that "Bogota" style cut, almost as if it was done on purpose, or is to good to be true.
Until I see documents stating that, Bogota took possession of 100 year old dies from Spain to produce half reales, my theory I believe is the best explanation for this issue - that being again, that, the date was simply placed backwards by mistake of the die sinker for a 1627 issue. It makes perfect sense. And, ALL the die elements match those 1627 issues, where they do not match to any issue of Colombia what so ever. Please, just look at Spain, Half Real issues of 1627 and really look at the elements. Then look at a genuine Nuevo Reino. ½ real issue of 1726. They are very very different. Not so rare, but, a coin that is very cool and unique for, I do not know of any other coin like this, where the date was stamped backwards in such a way, that it was though to be a coin that was produced 99 years later. So it has a special place, but not in Colombian issues.
CaptainMyCaptain
17. Dec. 2018, 07:29
This issue is NOT Colombia. I have debated and talked about this coin now for a long time with others. And my theory is actually very simple. It is, a 1627 issue, of Spain, with the date rendered backwards. Thats it. Take a look at any 1627, Spain 1/2 Real issue. They are identical in every way. Same exact monogram, same flower ornaments left and right of the monogram, same lions, castles, crowns and very importantly, exact same numeral punches in the date. Now, if you look at an issue from Spain, dated 1627 https://www.acsearch.info/image.html?id=2124410
you'll note, some show the lions and castles transposed. Some do not. Is is that far fetched to say, that, this issue simply had its date rendered backwards? I do not think so at all. What is 1726 backwards? 1627.....
Also, the true NR issues of 1726 are VASTLY different. They show an F left of a typical Colombian Monogram for Philip IV-V. A large cross over head, and the assayer S right, with 627 below in very different style of numerals. The cross, flanked again by the mint and assayer, with small x ornaments above and below the cross. The two known die types for NR, showing typical Colombian style lions and castles, while this issue seen here, sold most often as Lima? or Potosi?, and twice now as Colombia, are very very different.
The monogram of this issue, the V stops short of the horizontal bar, the monogram is flanked by two roses, or flower ornaments. No assayers, no mint marks as the Colombian issues DO have.
Yes sir, I do believe that my theory for this issue, is 100% correct. That it is, actually a 1627 issue with the date stamped in backwards by the die sinker. It is rare enough and unique enough as is. But not as rare as the true Colombian issues.
Please do go search the 1627 Spain issues and compare. Same lions, same castles, etc.
Again, here is a link to get you started. Blow this one up, same with the Cayon listing of the same coin, and compare to this old Spain issue here https://www.acsearch.info/image.html?id=2124410
Then do a search for Colombia 1726 issues. You should only find two types. One with a solid line border around the monogram, one with dots / pellets. Very very different. You will not find one thing that matches on those issues to this issue.
Happy collecting. Study those elements! It is VERY important!
euainetos
7. Dec. 2018, 10:15
FORGERY - FAKE COIN. Not struck. Short flan, weight too low. Bad details.
errataprobi
25. Nov. 2018, 04:44
This is an unlisted variant of RIC 666, Alföldi 23.-, which occurs with CONCORDIA MILIT & CONCORDIA MILITVM, p. 89.
RIC 653 is listed exclusively with CONCORD MILIT, p. 87.
Alföldi only lists this bust from officinae T, and VII, so this coin's exact combination is not published.
Emilio
22. Nov. 2018, 22:27
Recte: Berend 10.27 (D4 bis/R4) - this coin
Because the die # D4 was reengraved by adding the small barley grain behind the young Anapos
Emilio
22. Nov. 2018, 22:12
Pedigree:
Berend 10.27 (D4/R4) - this coin
Ex Bank Leu 48, 1989, lot 69
Ex MuM 37, 1968, lot 125
Ex Hess-Leu, 1954, lot 70
Ex Ars Classica XVII, 1934, lot 232
Bacon
20. Nov. 2018, 22:56
Ex Auction 15 Palombo , lot 105, officially sold for 11,000 Swiss Francs in 2016 (https://www.acsearch.info/search.html?id=3417826 )
One further example of the reappearance of the same coin in different subsequent auctions over a relatively short period.
In this case, I cannot fully appreciate the value of re-selling the same item two years later with a loss of US $ 4,500 ( plus hammer premium, plus customs duties, plus VAT, plus shipping costs), save that it was a matter of need , or such kind of operations are closer to a theater play rather than real market.
The world changes rapidly, even in numismatics, who knows...
rorey36
18. Nov. 2018, 18:31
Fake
IBSCC - ID 2220
rorey36
18. Nov. 2018, 18:29
Fake.
IBSCC - ID 2220
rorey36
18. Nov. 2018, 18:28
Fake
IBSCC- ID 2220
CaptainMyCaptain
17. Nov. 2018, 22:31
I want to note two things. Out of Love and Respect for Aureo. Nothing more.
A. This coin is assayer B, and secondly...
that this is Potosi, not Lima. Rincon did not issue coinage of the shield type at Lima, only the Pillars type, thus the 1/4 Real should show an R one side and I the other (the R being a "K" for Karlos and the I for Johanna). The Lima Rincon coinage follows the same early pillar designs as the coinage of Mexico and Santo Domingo. And this Rincon, was no longer active at Lima when the decree to change the coinage to the Shield type began-but had moved to La Plata. That being Alonso de Rincon. (Lima, La Plata and Potosi - but NOT of Mexico. There are three Rincons. Two with the name Francisco, one Alonso. )
The shield type 1/4 Real Lima issues would be either, "X", "D" or "J" (rendered as an I, for 1592 only). Therefor, this coin is Potosi. Again. It can also be noted that this coin, is actually B not R....Either tooled to look like an R, or, just a strike that makes the B appear as an R. But it is without doubt, B. The overall design (Lion especially so) also confirms this.
npolackw
13. Nov. 2018, 14:57
This coin is a cast fake.
npolackw
13. Nov. 2018, 14:56
This coin is a cast fake.
npolackw
13. Nov. 2018, 14:56
This coin is a cast fake.
npolackw
13. Nov. 2018, 14:56
This coin is a cast fake.
npolackw
13. Nov. 2018, 14:55
This coin is a cast fake.
rorey36
12. Nov. 2018, 22:13
First fake Ducato sold at auction. These dangerous fakes, with broken nimbus on Christ, invaded the numismatic market after 2004. None appeared before.
La RIC 303 est en revers VOTIS/MVLTIS.
I will say however, that this coin, has that "Bogota" style cut, almost as if it was done on purpose, or is to good to be true.
Until I see documents stating that, Bogota took possession of 100 year old dies from Spain to produce half reales, my theory I believe is the best explanation for this issue - that being again, that, the date was simply placed backwards by mistake of the die sinker for a 1627 issue. It makes perfect sense. And, ALL the die elements match those 1627 issues, where they do not match to any issue of Colombia what so ever. Please, just look at Spain, Half Real issues of 1627 and really look at the elements. Then look at a genuine Nuevo Reino. ½ real issue of 1726. They are very very different. Not so rare, but, a coin that is very cool and unique for, I do not know of any other coin like this, where the date was stamped backwards in such a way, that it was though to be a coin that was produced 99 years later. So it has a special place, but not in Colombian issues.
https://www.acsearch.info/image.html?id=2124410
you'll note, some show the lions and castles transposed. Some do not. Is is that far fetched to say, that, this issue simply had its date rendered backwards? I do not think so at all. What is 1726 backwards? 1627.....
Also, the true NR issues of 1726 are VASTLY different. They show an F left of a typical Colombian Monogram for Philip IV-V. A large cross over head, and the assayer S right, with 627 below in very different style of numerals. The cross, flanked again by the mint and assayer, with small x ornaments above and below the cross. The two known die types for NR, showing typical Colombian style lions and castles, while this issue seen here, sold most often as Lima? or Potosi?, and twice now as Colombia, are very very different.
The monogram of this issue, the V stops short of the horizontal bar, the monogram is flanked by two roses, or flower ornaments. No assayers, no mint marks as the Colombian issues DO have.
Yes sir, I do believe that my theory for this issue, is 100% correct. That it is, actually a 1627 issue with the date stamped in backwards by the die sinker. It is rare enough and unique enough as is. But not as rare as the true Colombian issues.
Please do go search the 1627 Spain issues and compare. Same lions, same castles, etc.
Again, here is a link to get you started. Blow this one up, same with the Cayon listing of the same coin, and compare to this old Spain issue here https://www.acsearch.info/image.html?id=2124410
Then do a search for Colombia 1726 issues. You should only find two types. One with a solid line border around the monogram, one with dots / pellets. Very very different. You will not find one thing that matches on those issues to this issue.
Happy collecting. Study those elements! It is VERY important!
RIC 653 is listed exclusively with CONCORD MILIT, p. 87.
Alföldi only lists this bust from officinae T, and VII, so this coin's exact combination is not published.
Because the die # D4 was reengraved by adding the small barley grain behind the young Anapos
Berend 10.27 (D4/R4) - this coin
Ex Bank Leu 48, 1989, lot 69
Ex MuM 37, 1968, lot 125
Ex Hess-Leu, 1954, lot 70
Ex Ars Classica XVII, 1934, lot 232
One further example of the reappearance of the same coin in different subsequent auctions over a relatively short period.
In this case, I cannot fully appreciate the value of re-selling the same item two years later with a loss of US $ 4,500 ( plus hammer premium, plus customs duties, plus VAT, plus shipping costs), save that it was a matter of need , or such kind of operations are closer to a theater play rather than real market.
The world changes rapidly, even in numismatics, who knows...
IBSCC - ID 2220
IBSCC - ID 2220
IBSCC- ID 2220
A. This coin is assayer B, and secondly...
that this is Potosi, not Lima. Rincon did not issue coinage of the shield type at Lima, only the Pillars type, thus the 1/4 Real should show an R one side and I the other (the R being a "K" for Karlos and the I for Johanna). The Lima Rincon coinage follows the same early pillar designs as the coinage of Mexico and Santo Domingo. And this Rincon, was no longer active at Lima when the decree to change the coinage to the Shield type began-but had moved to La Plata. That being Alonso de Rincon. (Lima, La Plata and Potosi - but NOT of Mexico. There are three Rincons. Two with the name Francisco, one Alonso. )
The shield type 1/4 Real Lima issues would be either, "X", "D" or "J" (rendered as an I, for 1592 only). Therefor, this coin is Potosi. Again. It can also be noted that this coin, is actually B not R....Either tooled to look like an R, or, just a strike that makes the B appear as an R. But it is without doubt, B. The overall design (Lion especially so) also confirms this.