| Contenido del artículo |
- From rg5turc@aol.com Sun Dec 22 17:51:32 2002
Return-Path: <Rg5turc@aol.com>
X-Sender: Rg5turc@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 23 Dec 2002 01:51:32 -0000
Received: (qmail 77773 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2002 01:51:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Dec 2002 01:51:32 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r04.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.100)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2002 01:51:32 -0000
Received: from Rg5turc@aol.com
by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.150.193764e7 (3842)
for <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:51:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <150.193764e7.2b37c621@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:51:29 EST
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] George Selgin
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_150.193764e7.2b37c621_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 230
From: rg5turc@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=78996157
X-Yahoo-Profile: maud_dib101
--part1_150.193764e7.2b37c621_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Jack,
Thanks for your reply and the "One" good and accurate reference you mentioned
is the COAC 95, Coinage of the American Confederation Period, edited by Phil
Mossman. I would suggest that if you have not read or have in your library:
Money of the American Colonies and Confederation by Phil Mossman plus all of
the COAC books on counterfeit coinage and a variety of articles that were
printed in CNL, that this would be essential reading to start with. I can
provide a complete list to you if you are interested, just email me
privately.
If you will note that the hoard that Dr. Smith has listed in COAC 95 that a
high number of those coins were G-III 1/2d and a good number of those dated
1775. With further study you will find that the majority of cast
counterfeits were of G-II while the majority of G-III counterfeits were
struck. This sampling was taken from a hoard in England but I had an
interesting conversation with a well known Colonial dealer in Boston, MA and
he mentioned that the majority of coins turned into him from excavation sites
have been cast G-II 1/2d in fact I purchased a good number of these coins
from him to further my studies on cast counterfeits. He has yet to see a
struck G-II or G-III counterfeit in any of these coins turned in from
excavated sites!
The vast majority of counterfeits produced in the mid 1700's were from cast
counterfeit operations and it wasn't until after the mid say 1750's that you
began to see technology and a more organized counterfeit operations spring up
producing struck G-III and occasional struck G-II counterfeit 1/2d. A
suggested reading would be Dr. Smith's article in CNL107. Also you may wish
to check out the Notre Dame site and the excellent work done by Lou Jordan.
I think you will find that Selgin is correct that casting was easy and cheap
but technology improvements gave rise to more sophisticated counterfeit ring
operations.
Ray T.
--part1_150.193764e7.2b37c621_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="FIXED" FACE="Courier New" LANG="0">Hi Jack,<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for your reply and the "One" good and accurate reference you mentioned is the COAC 95, Coinage of the American Confederation Period, edited by Phil Mossman. I would suggest that if you have not read or have in your library: Money of the American Colonies and Confederation by Phil Mossman plus all of the COAC books on counterfeit coinage and a variety of articles that were printed in CNL, that this would be essential reading to start with. I can provide a complete list to you if you are interested, just email me privately.<BR>
<BR>
If you will note that the hoard that Dr. Smith has listed in COAC 95 that a high number of those coins were G-III 1/2d and a good number of those dated 1775. With further study you will find that the majority of cast counterfeits were of G-II while the majority of G-III counterfeits were struck. This sampling was taken from a hoard in England but I had an interesting conversation with a well known Colonial dealer in Boston, MA and he mentioned that the majority of coins turned into him from excavation sites have been cast G-II 1/2d in fact I purchased a good number of these coins from him to further my studies on cast counterfeits. He has yet to see a struck G-II or G-III counterfeit in any of these coins turned in from excavated sites!<BR>
<BR>
The vast majority of counterfeits produced in the mid 1700's were from cast counterfeit operations and it wasn't until after the mid say 1750's that you began to see technology and a more organized counterfeit operations spring up producing struck G-III and occasional struck G-II counterfeit 1/2d. A suggested reading would be Dr. Smith's article in CNL107. Also you may wish to check out the Notre Dame site and the excellent work done by Lou Jordan. I think you will find that Selgin is correct that casting was easy and cheap but technology improvements gave rise to more sophisticated counterfeit ring operations.<BR>
<BR>
Ray T.</FONT></HTML>
--part1_150.193764e7.2b37c621_boundary--
|
|---|
| URL de origen |
|
|---|
| Fecha de publicación |
|
|---|
| Volumen |
|
|---|
